From the Desk of the Poker Philosopher

This incident occurred a while ago, but I just came across this first-hand account from a hired chef who was not playing in the game posted on The Agitator:

The raid occurred around 7:40 p.m. I was in the kitchen area which was just inside the front door when suddenly there was loud banging from the door. Within seconds, the room was full of Dallas SWAT officers yelling for everyone to put their hands in the air. Behind the Dallas SWAT team came many more law enforcement officers and several camera crews for the A&E reality show, Dallas SWAT. The camera crew’s chests were clearly marked as “A&E Film Crew.”

Bear in mind that, prior to police entering, the place was virtually quiet. There was the sound of poker chips in the air, but not much else. The players were essentially professionals and working stiffs having fun…there were doctors, lawyers, accountants, and other professionals. There was hardly anything “dangerous” about the place at all. In fact, the cops found no weapons in the facility or on anyone there. The show of force and weaponry brought by the cops was simply outrageous and unjustified, given the circumstances, but, then again, are they enforcing the law or making a TV show?

Among other things, I think this is an interesting comparison with the way decisions made by Harrah's and the hosts of World Poker Tour events are driven by camera crews and the needs of the networks that broadcast poker.

Labels: Harrah's, narrative, news, poker, underground poker club, WPT, wsop

Stumble It!

Frankly, I didn't do a very good job of courting/attracting media attention despite my deep run in the WSOP. But here are a few links to coverage of my play:

Interview with Poker Stars

O By the Way Blog 1

O By the Way Blog 2

PokerNews Photos

Poker Savvy/Cardplayer Round Table

And honorable mention goes to the Hendon Mob, who reported that:

"Only five players -- Andrew Brokos, Pat Dattilo, Marc Friedman, Vinod Jadav, and Stefan Mattsson -- cashed in both the 2006 and 2007 Main Events. All were going for their third consecutive cash this year. However, only one player survived (and is guaranteed to cash). He is Stefan Mattsson, from Stockholm, Sweden – currently in 308th place)."

Really, 308th place? Sick run, Stefan. I'm really surprised there were only five of us who cashed in '06 and '07.

Also according to Hendon Mob, the record for consecutive cashes is held by Bo Sehlstedt, who cashed in 2004-2007 but failed to cash this year. C'mon, Stefan, we can take him.

Labels: Card Player, news, personal, poker, Poker Savvy, tournament, wsop

Stumble It!

I came out to Vegas a few days early to get into the swing of things, to see some friends with whom I play and talk poker regularly online but rarely see in real life, and to take care of some business. This will be my third time playing in the main event, and it amazes me how much has changed since I first came to Las Vegas two years ago. In 2006, I was a nervous kid who knew no one, was known by no one, and was in awe of every famous player I'd seen on TV.

I can't claim to be a poker celebrity, but yesterday I got a taste of what that would be like. After waking early, going for a swim, having breakfast, and putting in some non-poker work at my computer, I made my first trip to the Rio. I wasn't going to play but to meet up with Bill Ordine, a reporter from my hometown paper, the Baltimore Sun, who is working on an article on poker and philanthropy. He'd already interviewed Barry Greenstein, who's known as “the Robin Hood of Poker” for donating over a million dollars in tournament winnings to a children's charity, and Annie Duke, who organized a $5000 buy-in charity tournament called Ante Up for Africa to coincide with the WSOP.

My own story is a little different. I've donated only a little more than 5% of my poker winnings to the non-profit organization that I founded, the Boston Debate League (BDL). My real contribution is all of the time and work that I put into it. Poker is what enables me to do that. I average 20-25 hours of work per week for each, and I make enough playing poker that I can afford to put that kind of time into the BDL.

It's great that Bill is doing this article, because poker sometimes gets a bad rap among the general public. People tend to believe, not entirely without reason, that poker encourages a cut-throat, every-man-for-himself mindset and that it rewards lying, treachery, and deceit. Hopefully an article in a major newspaper that focuses on the good that poker enables people to do will help to clean up that image.

Poker hasn't just given me the financial freedom to do “good work”. It's also taught me valuable skills that a liberal arts education did not. To paraphrase Ms. Duke, poker isn't fundamentally a game of lying, it's a game of pricing and negotiation. I do feel it's given me some business sense that has proven useful in meetings with foundations, prospective donors, the Boston Public Schools, and other individuals and institutions with which the BDL works.

Largely, the interaction between my poker “work” and my urban debate work has been a one-way street. That is, poker gave me the skills and financial freedom to grow the Boston Debate League, but the latter didn't do much for my poker game, except maybe making me feel less of a leech on society by gambling for a living.

Recently, however, that's started to change. In addition to playing, I now make money by coaching poker as well. Sometimes this is with individual students who pay me by the hour, but I also work for a video training site called Poker Savvy Plus. They pay me to record videos of myself playing or talking about poker and then offer these videos on a subscription basis to people who want to improve their game. My experience teaching debate and working with professional teachers has definitely made me a more successful and popular poker coach.

Yesterday, I got to meet my co-workers at Poker Savvy for the first time (in most cases- there were a few I already knew). But first, I had about an hour to kill between my interview with Bill and my meet-up with Poker Savvy. So, I headed down to the Amazon Room, the convention center at the Rio Hotel & Casino where the WSOP is held. I was hoping I might see someone I knew, but the odds were slim. Actually, the odds were good that I'd see someone I knew but slim that I'd recognize them. Since I play poker almost exclusively online, I plenty of people by their screen names but have no clue what most of them look like.

As luck would have it, though, I was spotted by my friend Richard almost immediately. Richard goes by Shorty both because of his last name is and because he is immensely tall. He was just starting a 20-minute break from a tournament he was playing, so I accompanied him for a quick bite at the WSOP Poker Kitchen while he told me how things had been going for him so far in Las Vegas. Mostly he raved about how soft and juicy the side games were and asked what I was planning on playing.

I told him the truth, which is that I had exactly $10,000 in cash on me, which I needed to buy into the main event. My plan was to play $5/$10 or $10/$25 games, hope for the best, and then find a Bank of America (there are none on the Strip, so I'd have to take a cab there and back) to withdraw more if I didn't win. Shorty told me that he was leaving town that night and would be happy to lend me some cash since he wouldn't need it. We exchanged phone numbers so that we could meet up when he was finished playing that night, and then he got back to his tournament.

I wandered around for a bit longer and then headed up to the suite in the Rio that Cardplayer magazine had converted into a studio for the duration of the WSOP. This is where I'd be meeting everyone else from Poker Savvy to record a roundtable Q&A session where we discussed poker topics submitted by Cardplayer readers.

Since I arrived about fifteen minutes early, I had some time to hang out with the Cardplayer crew, including the main reporters/hosts for their internet content: Shawn Green and Lizzie Harrison. Those of you who follow the poker scene may know these two, and those of you who don't probably won't be surprised to learn that Lizzie is an attractive and buxom twenty-something. Her looks have earned her a bit of a cult following on internet poker forums, and I can assure you that she is at least twice as hot in real life. But she, Shawn, and the rest of the Cardplayer crew were also very down to earth and fun to shoot the breeze with.

After about twenty minutes, the other Poker Savvy people started to arrive: Justin “Jurollo” Rollo, Dani “Ansky” Stern, Isaac “Ike” Haxton, Chris “Tribefan” Rhodes, Tony “Bond18” Dunst, and some of the behind-the-scenes guys. We took our seats and waited for the star of the show, Mike “The Mouth” Matusow, to join us during his break from the Ante Up for Poker tournament.

For those who don't know, Mike is, to understate the matter, a character. Though he's had tremendous success as a poker player, winning multiple WSOP bracelets and several six-figure prizes, he's also lost a lot of money to compulsive gambling and spent some time in jail for possession of cocaine. He's called “The Mouth” because he talks non-stop at the table, often berating his opponents' play, singing his own praises, or just generally calling attention to himself.

Lately, he's made some impressive gains in getting himself together. In the last year, he's dropped over sixty pounds, motivated by a $100,000 prop bet to get from 241 lbs down to 179. Just recently, he won his third WSOP bracelet in the $5000 rebuy 2-7 single draw rebuy event.

So we are all sitting in front of the cameras and waiting for Mike when suddenly there is a loud thump on the door. Someone opens it, and The Mouth comes crashing into the suite like a stampeding rhinoceros. “You all wouldn't believe how f---ing fast I f---ing ran to get up here,” he pants, nostrils flared. “Let's do it! Let's go! Let's get this thing f---ing started!” he shouts, clapping his hands. He takes the last available seat, which is in the back.

I'm wondering if the most famous guy here shouldn't be seated more prominently, but it turns out not to matter, because Mike makes himself the center of attention no matter what. He fields the first question enthusiastically and then interrupts whomever is speaking when he decides he has something to add. When he isn't shouting over us, he is gesticulating wildly to the people off-camera that he has to go in a minute or that he would like a bottle of water. We pass it to him, and he consumes the entire thing in a single ten-second chug, then tosses it haphazardly aside.

I don't imagine that much strategy content slipped past Mike's antics, but the clip should at least be good for comedic value. It doesn't appear to be up on Cardplayer's website yet, but I'll let you know when it is.

After the taping, we went out for drinks sans Mike. Truthfully, an afternoon with a bunch of internet poker players is not generally something I'd look forward to. Most are brash, self-absorbed, whiny, and otherwise annoying. But I must say that to a person, my co-pros at Poker Savvy were a great bunch. They are all very successful at poker and have a lot to brag about, but they don't come across as stuck up or anything, and they have some good stories.

For the full-time professionals, the WSOP is a magical time of year. Groups of guys, from four to ten or more, rent palatial houses in Las Vegas and spend weeks playing poker and partying their asses off. I don't think any of the best stories were intended for public consumption, but you can probably imagine the sort of debauchery that a bunch of guys in their early twenties with way too much money can get up to in Las Vegas. I'm only a few years older than most of them, but that whole lifestyle has never really been my scene. There are times when I feel little pangs of regret and a sense that I could be living a seriously crazy life, but for the most part it doesn't appeal to me. I do love hearing the stories, though.

We left the bar around seven, and I got a ride back to the Rio. I'd had only one drink in anticipation of putting in some hours at the tables that night. As I was waiting for a seat to open up, I ran into Shorty again. He had just been eliminated from his tournament and was going to go pack his bags then bring me some cash before leaving for the airport.

About an hour later, I was seated in a tight but not particularly tough 10/25 game when I spotted Shorty wandering the cash game section. I stood up and waved to catch his attention, played one more hand, then walked away from the table for a minute to speak with him. “Here's $7500,” he greeted me, handing me a roll of $100 bills. I pocketed it as he shared some intel on players at my table whom he'd played with in the last few days, then I wished him a good flight and returned to my game.

This really underscores the value of reputation in the poker community. I've known Shorty for about three years online, but we've met only two or three times in real life. Yet, just as a favor, he's willing to lend me $7500 in cash on the understanding that I'll send him a check when I get back to Boston. It's just a reality of high stakes poker that people often need access to large sums of cash, and now to money on various online poker sites as well, and it's infinitely easier to manage the logistics of moving this money among friends than to deal with the hassle and expense of wire transfers, getting to an off-Strip bank, or withdrawing from an ATM.

Poker friends can also help you raise money by staking you in a juicy game that's beyond your bankroll. They reduce your risk by putting up some of the money you need. Then if you lose, they eat the loss, and if you win, they get a cut. In fact, I was up on the WSOP before I even got to Las Vegas as a result of buying 10% of a friend who has had a phenomenal run, making two final tables.

Of course there are scumbags who take advantage of people, borrow money they can't or won't pay back, and rip off their investors. But reputation spreads quickly, and these people can quickly be cut off from the world of poker financing. Because I have been an active and ethical member of the poker community for several years, I know many people who would lend me money in a pinch, stake me for nearly any tournament I wanted to play, or help me transfer funds between online poker sites. And there are plenty of people for whom I would do the same.

Labels: gambling, Las Vegas, Mike Matusow, news, personal, poker, Poker Savvy, trip report, wsop

Stumble It!

Mike and Adam managed to get a 35-minute interview with Chief Operating Officer of the heretofore tight-lipped Tokwiro Enterprises, Paul Leggett, on this week's 2+2 Pokercast. The subject, of course, was the recent cheating scandal at Ultimate Bet. I imagine these kinds of interviews, where the interviewer needs to press the subject hard for information without alienating him, can be tricky, but I thought the 2+2 hosts did a great job. In fact this was probably the most interesting of their shows I've heard. Here are a few things in particular I found interesting:

1. Cheating at Ultimate Bet- Ultimate Bet's press release carefully avoided the word "cheating", instead using the phrase "unfair play". Mike and Adam resolved to press Leggett to use the word cheating, but surprisingly he employed it readily and without prompting.

2. Refunds- Leggett also referred many times to "refunding" money that was stolen from players. I'm really surprised by this choice of words, because it seems to imply that Tokwiro is returning money they have rather than compensating affected players out of their own pockets, which is what they claim is happening. I find it very strange that they don't make a bigger deal out of the fact that they are doing this. I mean, if they were actually taking millions of dollars from their own coffers to replace money that they didn't steal, you'd think they'd jump up and down about what an amazing thing it is they are doing for their players. But Leggett constantly refers to it as a "refund" and could not sound more dispassionate when he insists, "We're very upset that someone was able to do this on our site, to our players."

3. Stolen From UB?- Leggett repeatedly refers to money stolen "from our players, from our site" as though money were taken from them as well. I'm pretty sure he actually means that it was stolen through or using UB rather than from UB. It's like he's trying to portray his company as a victim in all of this as well. I guess if their story is true, then UB is a victim, because their reputation is shot to hell and they are on the hook for all the money.

4. Coughing- Leggett clears his throat constantly, pretty much any time he's asked a tough question. It's hard to say, though, whether he's nervous because he's lying or nervous because he's getting grilled.

5. Absolute Poker Cheating Deal- Apparently, Tokwiro, which also owns AP, struck a deal with the perpetrators of the cheating on that site. In exchange for a detailed explanation of how the cheating was carried out, they agreed not to release the names of the individuals or attempt to prosecute the crime. This is new information and certainly inconsistent with the allegation that that cheating was carried out by owners of the site.

6. Kahnawake Gaming Commission Fine- Leggett confirms that the KGC fined Tokwiro $500,000 for the AP incident in addition to the cost of the audit that was performed. I really wish Mike and Adam had asked what the KGC was doing with this money. Since when does the regulator get to issue arbitrary fines and then keep the money for themselves? Yet as far as I know the KGC hasn't said or done anything publicly with that money for the affected players.

7. Joe Norton Not So Corrupt- This made me laugh out loud. After Leggett cites the KGC fine, Mike and Adam ask if the KGC is really so independent, given that former Kahnawake Grand Chief Joe Norton is the sole owner of Tokwiro Enterprises. Leggett, who not surprisingly seems to have a close working relationship with Norton, says that Joe didn't found Tokwiro until he was out of public office. He then adds that this is no more corrupt than a US Senator going to work for a lobbyist after he leaves office. That's a real high moral standard they're holding themselves to....

8. Return Visit? After the interview, Mike and Adam decide to keep inviting Leggett back every few months in an attempt to hold him to his timeline and insure that his promsies are kept. This is a great idea, and I hope they'll stick with it.

Labels: Absolute Poker, cheating, news, poker, Ultimate Bet

Stumble It!

Ultimate Bet released a press release today admitting that employees of "the previous ownership of UltimateBet" were responsible for cheating high limit players out of an unspecified amount of money, largely believed to run into the millions, thanks to "unauthorized software code that allowed the perpetrators to obtain hole card information during live play". In other words, UB employees could see players' hole cards and exploited this to steal quite a lot of money from high stakes players over the course of about two years.

The theft was uncovered through the collective effort of several 2+2'ers who were high stakes regulars at UB affected by the theft, most prominently trambopoline, dlpnyc21, josem, and also Nat Arem. 2+2 Moderator Cornell Fiji composed a thorough summary of what is believed to have happened along with the damning evidence that goes well beyond what UB admits in its press release.

In this new thread, Cornell is once again doing an admirable job exposing all of the deception in the press release. I'm not going to try to summarize it all, but basically it is at the very least a shameful lapse, and more probably deliberate negligence, that UB's security didn't notice any of this until 2+2's amateur investigators compiled undeniable evidence. If security isn't tracking win rates and investigating the play of the biggest winners in the biggest games on the site, what exactly are they doing? How is it that amateurs with nothing more than Poker Tracker databases can unravel this stuff, but a supposedly professional security team cannot?

Moreover, UB claims that it knew nothing about the potential for its software to be exploited in this way. But UB is owned by Tokwiro Enterprises, which also owns Absolute Poker, which was the subject of another scandal where a similar vulnerability was exploited from the inside. It's absurd for them to claim that they couldn't have anticipated this, and it's disgraceful that they either didn't anticipate it or actively facilitated the theft.

Nat Arem had a chance to question one of their representatives, but don't expect too much new info from that Q&A session.

Like Absolute Poker, UB tries to reassure its customers by pointing to its "regulatory agency", the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. Aside from the gross incompetence (or worse) demonstrated above, there's another big problem with the KGC: Joe Norton, the owner of Tokwiro Enterprises, is also the former Grand Chief of the Kahnawake Mohawk tribe of Montreal! In other words, there is nothing independent about the KGC.

During his time as Grand Chief, Norton was accused of more than his share of shady dealings and corrupt bargains. Though members of his tribe accused him of being a puppet of the Quebec government, he also had a well-publicized (in Canada) clash with Canadian police and soldiers.

In a lot of ways, this latest scandal is very discouraging and disheartening. However, both UB and AP were eventually forced to admit that something had gone wrong and to return player funds that were stolen. This demonstrates the power of the online poker community to exercise some level of independent oversight over the sites where we play. Ideally, this will discourage other sites from trying anything shady in the future. However, if the only ramification for UB, after all this time and effort, is that they have to return the funds that weren't theirs to begin with, then this will not be much of a deterrent.

So what can we do? I've got some ideas, and I hope you'll offer others.

1. Boycott AP and UB. I never played on AP, and I've pulled all of my money off of UB. If a scandal like this doesn't bankrupt UB or at least crush their market share, then it will not be a deterrent to any future malfeasance by them or anyone else. I was probably one of maybe twenty people regularly playing 25/50 NL on their site, so hopefully my action will be missed, as will that of other high limit players who refuse to play there.

2. Stop endorsing them. High-profile players like Annie Duke and Phil Hellmuth need to end their affiliation with UB. It is downright unethical for them to be encouraging people to play on this site. Similarly, Cliff "JohnnyBax" Josephy should be ashamed of himself for signing with them this week. He claims he was convinced of their desire to change, but based on what he's said publicly about this, it doesn't seem like he was especially well-informed about the allegations nor that he went to great lengths to question whomever he spoke with from UB's management. Then again, he is supposedly a pretty shrewd businessman, so perhaps he knows something I don't. But I think he ought to either say a lot more about why he has confidence in UB or stop encouraging others to play there.

3. Ask tough questions of other sites. I'm no expert on this, but personally, Poker Stars and Full Tilt Poker are the only sites I'm comfortable playing on right now. Still, I think it would be best to get specific, public statements from them about the nature of their security, why their software is not vulnerable to the exploits that led to the theft on UB and AP, who regulates them and how, etc. UB and AP have been able to hedge, make misleading statements, and deny responsibility because in many cases they had not made explicit statements before these scandals about the nature of their security. As players, we should have a more explicit understanding of the level of security the sites will provide. There should be measurable benchmarks and pre-agreed ramifications for them if something illicit happens on their site. If 2+2 could create a Players' Bill of Rights or something, thousands of us could ask sites like Poker Stars, FTP, and especially UB to agree to it as a condition for our business.

4. Create a genuinely independent regulatory authority with teeth. Similar to (3), there should at least be an independent regulator whom sites could voluntarily hire to certify the security of their software. Then we as players could refuse our business to anyone who didn't pay for that certification. There's probably money to be made here if it's done right, and it would be a huge boon for online poker generally.

5. Legalize and regulate online poker in the US. Obviously I think this would be a good thing anyway, but as much as opponents of poker may try to use scandals such as this as arguments against legalization, I believe they are actually arguments in favor. Not that government involvement is a guarantor of legitimacy, but it's got to be better than the legal netherworld in which internet poker currently exists. Once again, there's money to be made here.

6. Spread a genuine understanding of the issue. Casual players have a right to know about the security issues at AP and UB, and its in our interest to have them playing on the more reputable sites where we are taking our business. At the same time, we don't want to be fearmongers turning the poker world off to internet poker in general. We need simultaneously to inform people that UB and AP are unsafe but that there have not even been any plausible suspicions raised about extensive cheating at sites like FTP and Poker Stars. I honestly feel that the risk of cheating on those sites is barely higher than it is in brick and mortar casinos and much lower than at underground poker clubs. However, I'll feel a lot more comfortable vouching for the credibility of those sites if and when some of my above suggestions are implemented.

Labels: Absolute Poker, Annie Duke, cheating, Full Tilt Poker, legislation, news, Phil Hellmuth, poker, Poker Stars, Two Plus Two, Ultimate Bet

Stumble It!

I've been reading some good comments here, on other blogs, and in the 2+2 thread about the final table delay that I mentioned yesterday. I want to clear up a few things, clarify my own opinion a bit, and share some of the better discussions I've seen elsewhere.

First, a couple important details. My understanding is that everyone at the final table will be paid 9th place money in July. The rest of the prize pool will be kept in a CD, and the interest will be added to the payouts. Harrah's has tried to make it sound like this is akin to adding bonus money to the prize pool, but really it's the least they could do and possibly even their legal obligation.

Furthermore, according to the official press release,

"Each of the players who make it to the WSOP Main Event Final Table will receive ninth place prize money on July 14, when the finalists are determined. Harrah’s will then provide each of those players with an all expense paid trip for two for their return to Las Vegas in November to play the final portion of the tournament.

From July 14 to November 9, a span of 117 days, players will have an opportunity to line up sponsorships, coaches, review the play of all their competitors, participate in other tournaments, and take advantage of the new publicity and promotional opportunities that will be available."

I still think this is kind of tacky and crassly commercial, but I do like the idea of the WSOP gaining popularity as a world-class sporting event. Suspense about the outcome should increase the excitement of earlier WSOP broadcasts, and if Harrah's/ESPN do a good job of publicizing the final table contestants, they could be minor celebrities by November. Obviously the player themselves will have mixed feelings about that, but it will probably be good for poker in general. I found Daniel Negreanu's analogy on this point compelling:

The way the WSOP main event airs now, the public is usually already aware of who won. The final episode plays out more like a documentary, a la, this is "how they won." That will now change. Everyone will know who is at the final table, but for three months, the question will change to "who will win" which I think is more exciting.

On the other hand, the delay greatly increases the likelihood that players will make a deal and/or sell off their equity, which could actually decrease the excitement of the final table. Harrah's understandably refuses to assist players in deal-making, and in past years there's been very little time for players to bargain amongst themselves. But four months raises all sorts of possibilities, including the involvement of lawyers, insurance firms, and other professional deal-makers. The players may well end up playing for five rather than seven figures when the dust settles.

More troubling is the risk of collusion. It would not be difficult at all for two or more of the final tablists to become friends over the course of four months and reach an informal agreement to softplay each other. Of course, more large scale cheating is a possibility as well. Several members of the media who were on a conference call with WSOP commissioner Jeffrey Pollack found his response to these concerns lacking. He basically said there would be a new code of conduct and that punishments would be "severe" (no elaboration) in the event of collusion.

Overall, I appreciate the potential benefits, though I'm a bit skeptical since the higher-ups seem not to have given ample consideration to the drawbacks. Most troubling, though, is that such a drastic decision was made primarily for the interests of ESPN rather than the players. If the WSOP is going to be run for ESPN, as this and previous decisions have suggested it is, then the players should not be paying for it. The full $10,000 entry should go into the prize pool, and ESPN, Milwaukee's Best Light, and the other sponsors should be the ones paying for staff, space, etc.

But I suppose it could be worse. If the WPT were doing this, they'd probably claim exclusive rights to market the final tablists themselves the way American Idol does.

Labels: news, poker, tournament, wsop

Stumble It!