USA Today has a special section on the WSOP. Mainly fluff, of course with minimal acknowledgement of anything other than Hold'em, but they did at least include the whole schedule. The front page was a huge photo of Doyle Brunson, holding a couple of those awful, awful cards. (Pokerpages says: "Doyle Brunson took his seat next to Layne Flack, ready to play his first hand of the 2007 World Series of Poker. But when he checked his cards, he had to do a double take. 'What the hell are these?'" WTF?)
They had a table of "prop bet"-style odds from Danny Sheridan (the online site has a smaller selection) who put Phil Ivey at 500:1 to win the ME, and "any woman at the final table" at 1000:1. I think the latter is excessive; I'd certainly take those odds. (Odds you will find at Bodog or elsewhere are much, much worse.)
I am wondering whether I would find it easier to think about my Chinese Poker experiment if I only used one hand set, and iterated it via itself, instead of two sets. (I'm working on an improved inner loop that I hope to be much faster--- the current scoring code compiles into a mass of conditionals, and unpredicatble branches make superscalar pipelines sad. The new version does a parallel compile, some bit-shifting, and a table lookup. Still trying to get the bit-shifting to a minimum, but I figured a 64-entry table was likely to perform much better than a 4096-entry one.)
The poker-card "icons" (graphics, whatever) at pokernews are quite readable. I'm tempted to steal them for lowballgurus.