Sitting here, catching WSOP Main Event updates while playing some Limit Hold'em tourneys online. Obviously, I'm looking for Phil Ivey to make the final table, then destroy the other eight players in November. In particular, I'd like to see Ivey bust Jeff Shulman, the editor of Card Player Magazine and crybaby of the year.
Speaking of the Main Event: They're going to play down to the final table (nine players) tonight. Then, in November, they're going to play the actual final, just like they did last year. I didn't know, until very recently, that the last nine players will be paid ninth-place money tomorrow. Then, in November, they'll get the balance depending (of course) on what place they finish.
So, tomorrow, nine folks are going back to their respective homes with more than one million dollars. Crazy.
The World Series of Poker Main Event starts tomorrow! I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m excited. This is the biggest event in all of poker, with this year’s first prize being…well…nobody knows yet, but it should be frockin’ huge! The poker boom is still going strong in Vegas, judging by the fact that more than one of this year’s WSOP events sold right out – including the $1,000 “stimulus special” tourney.
Sponsors are really getting into the Main Event, too, albeit in not-so-great ways. Jack Link’s Beef Jerky will give you $100 worth of product if you show four Jacks during the ME. Whether your hand wins or loses, you’re getting some beef jerky. This could be awesome in some situations, but, you know, not others.
I’m waiting to see a quad Jacks versus royal flush hand; the guy who loses with the awesome-looking Jacks is going to be so pissed if he isn’t in the money yet. Because nothing adds to the agony of a horrible beat quite like being handed a big bag full of beef jerky while you’re vacating the seat that you just lost because of some donkey. “Gee, thanks for coughing up ten thousand dollars, pal, and it really sucks that you’re going home with NOTHING! But here...have some meat snacks.”
On the other hand: if I were playing the ME and found myself losing my seat with quad Jacks, I could always call up Sasquatch and have him help me get some sweet, sweet revenge.
Yesterday was not a good day for Americans who play poker on the Internet. I'm unhappy, to say the very least, about this whole "Let's take their money - without a warrant, no less! Because we're the feds!" crap.
The Poker Players Alliance has released a statement explaining what in the world is going on:
I've been busy goofing off on my computer - playing online poker and keeping an eye on World Series of Poker updates. As I'm typing this, the $40K NLHE tourney is still going, and that one is, of course, extremely interesting. Then again, so's event #4 - the $1,000 "stimulus special" NLHE tourney. It sold out, folks, which is just crazy. People were talking, before the Series started, about the possibility of this year's events seeing low turnouts because of the swine flu, our sucky economy, et cetera, but it looks like Vegas, and the Rio in particular, are doing juuuuust fine.
I recently saw a YouTube clip from "The Celebrity Apprentice," in which you called poker players "trash." You were not, judging by what you said - and here comes the clip, just for the record - referring only to Annie Duke (who, admittedly, is annoying as snot - but still).
Yes, I realize that the Vegas of decades past was rife with corruption. Obviously, anyone who's capable of picking up any sort of book that recounts the fabled city's history will know about the mob, and the Binions, and all the other big-time things that have happened there over time.
I realize that poker has a sordid, nasty history. We don't call Aces and eights "the dead man's hand" just because it sounds cool, after all.
But things change, and group dynamics change. And even back when Doyle Brunson was a young'un, there were plenty of poker players who would stab themselves in the face before they'd renege on a deal, or backstab someone. Though not every poker player, then or now, is a wonderful person, there have always been good guys and gals in the game. You fail to see that, and that's your shortcoming, not ours.
What's saddest, though, is that you're nobody, Joan. The only thing that I knew about you before this fiasco was that you were on "Hollywood Squares," which my grandmother watched when I was a young'un. And that, frankly, was a very-dim memory until "The Celebrity Apprentice." How great is that - knowing that you're just a random, tiny recollection based on some grandmother's television-viewing habits?
Even though you're fighting very hard to look like you're only twenty or so, Joan, you're going to die at some point. And when you go, who's going to remember you...and for what?
The poker community - millions of us, by the way, and that's just here in the United States - will remember you as the bitter old woman who called us all trash. People who are addicted to reality TV aren't going to remember much about you, because they have the attention spans of toddlers on meth. Folks who were around back when you were doing stand-up, or whatever you did when you were really as young as you're trying to look now, are going to be either dead or senile, and therefore won't recall anything about you.
Some dusty, old obit will be yanked out of some dusty, old filing cabinet in some newsroom. Some lackey will update the file to include the date of your death, as well as a couple of details about it, then publish it on the Internet and in the papers. But the odds are good that the kid doing that menial, thankless job isn't going to know much of anything about you. He probably won't really care, one way or another, that he's updating Joan Rivers' obit.
Now, you're best known as the woman who pitched a childish tantrum on a game show. This is what people in and near my generation will remember about you every time you make any sort of appearance on television or in the news. Unless you do something huge, and soon, this is what people are going to remember even after you're gone.
There's nothing wrong with being nobody. There's nothing wrong with being somebody. But there's nothing right about being known for being a rotten, nasty, bitter person. Even though I don't particularly care for Annie Duke's on-camera antics, and even though I wouldn't exactly be thrilled to be stuck playing at her poker table, the heat is on you, because you're the one who stereotyped a very-large group of people...many of whom are not even remotely close to being "trash," despite what you think.
So, Joan, the real reality here is that, among "my" kind of people - the trash, don't you know - you're basically a big donk. Congratulations - we very-rarely award the "donk" title to anyone who doesn't play poker, so you should bask in the glory of your awesome achievement.
Well, okay. This might not be *the* sickest poker bet ever, but it's pretty close.
A twenty-two year-old online player nicknamed spacegravy is currently working on winning a bet that he can rack up forty thousand dollars' worth of online tournament winnings in one month - by playing nothing but $60 sit-and-go tourneys on Stars.
Now...for those of you who don't play poker, don't know what I'm talking about, et cetera: this is a nearly-impossible feat. Gravy can buy into any $60 tourney he wants on Stars, but only the $60 games count.
So, it costs him $60 to enter each tourney, and his winnings depend on the number of players. Finishing out of first does earn him some money, but taking down the tourneys breaks down like this as far as winnings go:
Nine-man SnG: $247.50.
Forty-five-man SnG: $767.26.
He's going to have to cash in a buttload of tourneys to make forty grand in profit. He multi-tables like a dude on crack - which of course increases his hourly win rate.
Too bad I don't usually bet on other peoples' performances (sporting events, for example) or I would probably bet that the dude pulls it off. It seems insane, and impossible, but he's done something similar before. This bet is in the early stages, and he did have a massive downswing early on, but I really think that he can do it.
Even if he doesn't, well, it's been fascinating to watch the dude.
This year’s World Series of Poker dates are finally out. I notice that the powers that be are delaying the Main Event final table until November – just like they did last year. To be honest, I’m not entirely sure of how I feel about this move. Though I did enjoy watching the “November Nine” play out the last hands of that epic tourney last year, I do have some reservations about the idea.
The Pros:
The Main Event is as close to being a live event as possible with the delay. The WSOP starts in May. By waiting until November to play the FT, ESPN can quickly edit the footage and broadcast it within a day or two of the action. This beats the snot out of learning, in June, that X player won – then having to wait until November to see how he got there.
There was, admittedly, tons of hype around last year’s FT. We can reasonably expect even more excitement this time around because viewers now know what to expect. It’s easier to look forward to something when you already know, from last year’s experience, that it’s insanely exciting.
The final nine players get more money. Endorsements and other sources of income flowed last year. They should do the same this year, what with poker still being hot and all.
Speaking of money: more than a few people bet on the outcome last year. I imagine that there will be plenty of wagering among friends, coworkers, poker players, et cetera this year as well.
Exposure…can’t argue with that at all. Not everyone knew anything about last year’s November Nine, but there were plenty of casual poker/sports fans talking about the phenomenon. Perhaps this year’s following will be even bigger.
The Cons:
I didn’t genuinely care that much about any of the players last year. Yes, one pro was at the FT (David Rheem), but not many casual fans recognized him. Now…had Phil Hellmuth, Jr., Jennifer Harman, or Daniel Negreanu made the FT, the reaction would have been insane.
We’re going to have to wait to see the outcome on ESPN regardless of when the FT plays. I’m patient, and like the “close to live” advantage of delaying the FT. However, some fans are less patient than that, and really prefer to just get things over with.
FT players have months to review previous episodes of ME play and study each other. They can also consult with poker coaches to change and improve their own strategies. There’s plenty of time to adapt to the FT. This is a disadvantage because poker is about changing on the fly. Part of the sheer joy of these games is figuring out tells and other signs as you play the game. You just don’t get that with the delayed FT.
Overall, though, I’m down with this way of doing things. ESPN and the WSOP are doing a pretty-good job of bringing in new fans with this move. The results were entertaining and exciting last year, and I expect this year to be no different. Now, if only we could get some big-name pros at the FT. That would make the ME almost perfect as far as I’m concerned.
Until this year's World Series of Poker Main Event finally ended, Phil Hellmuth, Jr. was the youngest ME winner in history. Now, Peter Eastgate, age twenty-two, has that honor. (Hellmuth was twenty-four when he won the ME in the 1980s.)
Because you must be twenty-one years of age or older to even play in the WSOP, it's going to be very difficult to break Eastgate's newly-set record. However, it will happen...eventually. There are plenty of twenty-one year-old poker players entering the ME, so one of them will, someday, set a new record.
This is cool, because I can't stand Hellmuth. He might be the world's greatest tournament Hold'em player, but he's a colossal jerk. He might have the most cashes and WSOP bracelets, but that doesn't make me respect or like him.
So, because his precious ME record is now a thing of the past, I'm happy. Next year, I hope to see Doyle Brunson and Johnny Chan win three or four bracelets each. That's not a realistic idea, I know, but that would still be sweet.
The main reason I dislike watching Phil Hellmuth, Jr. play poker is the fact that he's a jerk. If you watch televised tournaments, you know exactly what I'm talking about. When he isn't verbally stroking his own ego to climax, he's insulting the other players.
This year's WSOP has been no different. And the people in charge of paring down ESPN's footage to episode length are certainly playing up his idiocy - as usual. Because goodness knows that some poker fans out there really do want to watch Hellmuth's classic meltdowns, complete with verbal abuse and whining.
Poker is just a game. Despite what Hellmuth might say when he's in the middle of berating another player (something about poker being his life - wah, wah, wah), these card games are not nearly as important as practicing medicine, or whipping up on terrorists, or any of the other truly-meaningful things that other people do every workday.
The truth is that, if all the poker players in the world suddenly went broke and had to find regular jobs, we fans wouldn't suffer. Oh, sure, we'd miss our favorite pros. We'd be sad at seeing them leave the card rooms to go do jobs that don't earn then millions or put them on television.
But we'd survive, because poker's just a game.
That's right: a game. I don't think that poker is a sport. To me, sports require physical exertion - and tossing chips into the pot doesn't count if you ask me.
So: because poker is a card game, the rules of conduct are similar to the ones that your parents probably taught you when you played any other game as a child. Don't be a sore loser. Don't be a nasty winner. Be polite to the other players. Wait your turn. That sort of thing.
Apparently, Hellmuth's mother either never bothered to teach him anything...or he's what the military calls "untrainable."
Either way, poker would be better off without him.
During last year's WSOP coverage, I greatly disliked Norman Chad's commentary. The idiot does not add many constructive things to the commentary. And even the "constructive" bits that he does offer are annoying. How many times will I hear "So-and-so needs a Queen and a Queen only to win this hand" before I go insane and throw my TV out the door? Not many more times, I'm sure, because Norman offers up this brilliant insight several times during each hour-long broadcast.
I've watched only one 2008 WSOP event so far this year, as that's the only one ESPN has aired to date. The first Pot-limit Hold'em event was full of Norman's stupid banter. Am I the only one who thinks that he's become worse since last year? Or am I suffering from overexposure?
One bad crack about Andy Bloch's cowboy hat is bad enough. But Norman had several comments about the player's choice of headgear. Bloch's cowboy hat is not new to the poker scene. He's been wearing that same hat for a while now. And even if this were new, Norm could certainly find something else to talk about.
(I don't particularly care for Bloch's hat either, by the way. I'm not annoyed because I'm in love with the thing, or with the player. I'm annoyed because Norman, in typical fashion, would not shut up about it.)
There was also plenty of "...needs this card and this card only" commentary. We can read the board for ourselves. And even if viewers can't figure out that X needs to catch an Ace to win the hand, Norm could find a less-annoying way to share this fact. Plenty of other poker commentators share the same information without making us want to reach through our TVs and slap them.
In fact: one of the very best poker commentators currently working in the booth - Mike Sexton - was there. He was playing the final table. Norm could learn about eight thousand things from Mike, but that's not going to happen.
I'm also sick of Norm's running commentary about his numerous ex-wives. If nothing else, Norm could come up with semi-original cracks about them.
Norm could also stand to shut up about players' schools of choice. His cracks about various schools aren't funny or entertaining. They're basically the same tired jokes he's been telling since he first started the ESPN/WSOP gig.
Other than Norm, the two-hour programming block was great. Now, if ESPN would just rid themselves of that clown, I'd be a lot happier.
The 2008 World Series of Poker coverage begins tomorrow evening. Yes, I already know who won most of the events, as I followed the Web-site updates. But watching the coverage is still going to be awesome.
I'll be isolating myself in my bedroom with my Dr Pepper, cigarettes and remote for a couple of hours tomorrow - as I'll be doing every Tuesday night until we finally get to see the Main Event final table.
Once school starts for me again, I'll have to go buy a DVD recorder. I'll be in class on Tuesday nights. Oh, well. I wanted DV-R capabilities anyway for other programs, but this is a perfect excuse to spend money.
I am in the middle of a long-term, wild love affair with poker. Long before Hold 'Em was popular, I was playing cards with anybody who wanted to win some chips off me. (It's a good thing, I think, that we members of the Borroum clan have never bought in for chips. We've always just divided up the chips and started playing. Nobody loses anything but a little dignity...or a lot of dignity, in my case.)
So I suck at poker. If I played for money, I'd be relegated to one-cent antes because it would take me all of two hands to lose everything. But I play a lot online, and "for real," and I read about the game as much as I can. I'm getting better but, more importantly, I love this game more and more with each hand. (Even the big ones that I lose.)
The only thing that I really, truly loathe about poker is not the fact that I can't afford to play for money. It's not the fact that I live in Texas, where there is no such thing as a casino (much less a legal card table). I'm not even too terribly bothered by the fact that I am never going to find a set of poker chips that makes me happy, but costs less than fifty bucks.
He's the sidekick on the World Series of Poker. Lon -the straight man to Chad's idiotic banter - is great. I like listening to what Lon has to say. I often learn something from the guy even though he's not really trying to teach viewers anything. He's just commenting on what's bloody obvious to more experienced poker players and fans - but I learn anyway, which is awesome in my book.
But listening to Norman Chad's pathetic jokes, insults directed at players and generally-rude remarks is a form of torture that should not be legal. When he's not ripping on how players are dressed, he's calling them names. When he's not whipping out fourth-grade insults, he's making endless references to his failed marriages. And when he's not doing that, he's making sad little jokes about the cards.
He's a big weenie - and many WSOP viewers agree with me on that. Check any Internet forum or message board devoted to poker and you'll read plenty of threads and posts about how much this guy's commentary stinks. He has some fans, yes, but they aren't exactly the majority.
I wish that my TV could selectively mute. I would seriously block out every single word coming out of Norm's mouth, leaving Lon's semi-intelligent commentary and the soft, sweet sounds of the chips.
