Norman Chad: Online and Live Bracelets Should Have the Same Value

Winning a World Series of Poker (WSOP) bracelet online should carry the same recognition as achieving it in a live event, asserts veteran commentator Norman Chad. The debate has gained momentum following the exponential increase in titles awarded in virtual format and the perception that these prizes are less prestigious. Both Chad and streamer Lex Veldhuis defend the difficulty and competitive level of online tournaments, although Chad emphasizes the need for greater integrity and transparency in these competitions.

Evolution of WSOP Online Bracelets

The first WSOP online bracelet was awarded in 2015 in a $1,000 NLH tournament, where Anthony Spinella claimed the title and $197,743 after the last six positions were contended live. Since then, the number of online bracelets has surged: from just nine in 2019 to 115 in 2024. Last year, 104 titles were awarded in online events, underscoring the consolidation of this format within the WSOP schedule, managed by Caesars Interactive Entertainment.

Why Winning an Online Bracelet Isn’t Any Easier

Lex Veldhuis, regarded as one of the best online players still without a bracelet, dismantles the notion that it's easy to win one online. "It's incredibly difficult; those fields are brutal," he stated, highlighting the current high level and the impact of analytics and GTO strategies brought by the new generation of digital players. Norman Chad supports this view: "If you think an online bracelet is easy, I invite you to compete and try to win one." For both, the difficulty and technical demands are comparable to or even greater than many live events.

Integrity and Challenges of Online Poker

Despite advocating for the equal value between online and live titles, Chad recognizes challenges in the integrity of virtual tournaments. He argues it is crucial to know who is genuinely behind each user: "Someone who isn't even playing could win a bracelet, or in the worst-case scenario, even their dog." Chad shares his experience during the pandemic, where he opted to compete online only in verified environments among friends via video, which helped mitigate the risk of impersonation.

Should Online Bracelets Be Treated Differently?

In analyzing the future of the WSOP, Chad mentions the proposal from some analysts like Eric Raskin and Michael Gagliano — who has won two of his three online bracelets — to distinguish prize categories: "Perhaps online winners should receive a watch, necklace, or bracelet instead of the traditional bracelet." However, the consensus among figures like Chad and Veldhuis is that if the industry fully embraces online poker, its titles must retain equivalence with live ones, as long as integrity issues or regulatory protection failures do not arise.

Lack of Variety: Limited Offer for Mixed Games

Chad laments that around 95% of online bracelets are awarded in No-Limit Hold'em (NLH), sidelining those who prefer mixed variants. He argues that the WSOP should expand its digital offering for games like Omaha, Seven Card Stud, or Razz, as current technology allows. "It's not fair for mixed game players that the accumulation of titles, statistics, and legacy is almost exclusively based on NLH online," he complains.

Final Reflection: Embrace Online, Demand Guarantees

Chad’s stance is clear: if the industry decides to equalize online and live prizes, it must do so with guarantees of integrity and effective penalties against cheating. He calls for the inclusion of mixed variants and strict supervision of player identity to ensure the legitimacy of online bracelets is beyond question.

"If we embrace online poker, online bracelets must count as much as live ones. It's that simple." — Norman Chad

"If you think an online title is easy, play and try to win one. Good luck." — Lex Veldhuis

The debate remains open: should online bracelets be considered equal, or do they deserve specific distinction? This dilemma will continue to be on the agenda of news and industry forums.