Shenanigans at the WSOP
Date: Sun, Jul 13, 2008
Hellmuth Ends the Day With a Blow-up
Cristian Dragomir opened with a raise to 80,000 before Hellmuth made it
255,000 to go from the small blind.
"I hope he doesn't have aces," said Hellmuth as Dragomir asked for a count.
After a few moments, Dragomir made the call.
They saw a flop of 9c-10c-7s and Hellmuth checked to Dragomir, who thought
for a moment before firing a healthy bet of 300,000. Hellmuth sighed in disgust
before folding As-Kh face-up on the table.
Matusow laughed and said to Dragomir to show the bluff, and Dragomir
flipped 10d-4d! Matusow and the crowd roared in hysterics as Hellmuth jumped out
of his seat and stormed around the room berating his opponent for calling his
reraise with ten high.
"Listen buddy, you're an idiot!" screamed Hellmuth. "This is the Main Event
and you are the worst player in history!" he continued as the crowd was loving
every moment of the blow-up.
Dragomir's entourage continued to cheer as Hellmuth continued the barrage.
The TD stepped in and issued a warning to Hellmuth to settle down before
Dragomir stood up out of his chair to put Hellmuth back in his place with a cry
of, "Enough is enough!"
Fortunately for both players the clock ticked over to the end of the level,
and the end of the day's play to settle both players down. They eventually shook
hands and began to bag up their chips as Mike Matusow summed up the situation
best as he shouted, "Thank God for Phil Hellmuth! Thank God for Chris
Moneymaker!"
What a way to end the day!
Extra! Extra! Hellmuth Starts Day 6 in the Penalty Box
Everyone thought Phil Hellmuth ended the day just with a blow-up and a
warning, but that's not the case. He continued to berate Cristian Dragomir for
several minutes after the last hand we described and after floorperson Robbie
Thompson issued him a warning. That prompted Thompson to summon supervisor Steve
Frezer to the feature table. Frezer listened to Thompson's description of the
situation and then assessed Hellmuth a one-orbit penalty to start Day 6.
Never a dull moment when Hellmuth's around.
Then we move to the action early today:
Sitting This One Out
As we reported just prior to the conclusion of last night's play, Phil
Hellmuth will be serving a one-orbit penalty and sitting out the first nine
hands of play. With the blinds and antes where they are, this time-out will cost
Hellmuth a total of 81,000 chips, or roughly 11% of his total stack.
It should come as no suprise that Hellmuth starts Day 6 back at the main
ESPN featured table on the Milwaukee's Best Light stage. With just moments until
the cards are in the air, the other eight players have arrived, unbagged their
chips, and have been mic'd up by the crew, but "The Poker Brat" is nowhere in
sight.
Off the Hook
Just before the announcement of "shuffle up and deal," Hellmuth
strolled into the tournament area and took his seat. He was dealt into the first
hand which he raised from under the gun, winning the blinds and antes.
When a floor supervisor was asked about the alleged one-round penalty
Hellmuth was to serve, a reply of "it's been overruled" was given.
Phil Hellmuth's One-Orbit Penalty Overturned
Many people were surprised when Phil Hellmuth sat down at the ESPN
Featured Table and played the first hand of the day after receiving a one-round
penalty for his behavior during the final hand of play last night.
When asked why Hellmuth was not sitting out, WSOP Commissioner Jeffrey
Pollack told us, "The penalty has been overturned, and we will be issuing a
formal statement shortly."
Stay tuned for more on this development.
Official Statement from the WSOP on Phil Hellmuth's Penalty
The following statement was just released by the World Series of Poker
regarding Phil Hellmuth's penalty, which was overturned at the start of play
today:
"This morning Phil Hellmuth met with Jack Effel, WSOP Tournament Director,
Howard Greenbaum, Harrah's Regional Vice President for Specialty Gaming, and
Jeffrey Pollack, Commissioner of the WSOP. Based on that meeting and an official
review of the situation, it was decided that the penalty imposed on Mr. Hellmuth
at the conclusion of play last night was excessive."
"Warnings and penalties are intended to correct inappropriate behavior and
our rulings should be as fair as possible, given the circumstances," said
Pollack. "In this instance, the punishment did not fit the crime."
"Phil has now been warned and put on notice in a way that he never has
been," Pollack added.
This has "shenanigans" written all over it.
First, if you're Joe Ordinary Player who got assigned a penalty, could you even get a meeting with the people named in the WSOP press release? I doubt it. If asked, they would now probably say that of course they would give the same consideration to anybody similarly situated. But only a fool would believe that. It's simply not plausible. My guess is that you have to have a poker agent and/or attorney with insider connections to even be able to get a phone call returned from those guys.
Second, what the hell is the "Harrah's Regional Vice President for Specialty Gaming" doing in that meeting? When did he become part of the tournament staff in charge of enforcement of tournament rules? Answer: Never. He's not. The WSOP's own rules for 2008 specify, at #98: "The Tournament Supervisor's, or highest authority in the room, decision is final." Doesn't mention that the "Harrah's Regional Vice President for Specialty Gaming" gets involved. Maybe "final" means "subject to us changing our minds later if we fear that television revenue might drop as a result of the previously not-really-final decision." Maybe it depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.
The obvious and pretty much inescapable conclusion from his meddling in this mess is that the primary question they had under consideration was not "What is fair?" or "What do the rules say?" or "What is the right thing to do here?" or "How have we treated other players with similar outbursts?" but rather "What is best for Harrah's?" What they clearly decided was best for Harrah's was to minimize the chance that Hellmuth would be eliminated from the tournament before reaching the final table, as he would be a big draw for TV ratings.
Third, how is it, exactly, that screaming (assuming that PN is reporting accurately here) to one's opponent that he is an idiot and the worst player in history is not deserving of a one-round sit-out, which is the mildest penalty they have to impose? WSOP 2008 Rule 35 reads, in relevant part, "Any player who directs any profane and/or abusive language at another player, dealer or tournament staff member or who makes any profane and/or abusive comments about another player, dealer or tournament staff member will be penalized in accordance with Rules No. 31 and/or 51." Note the word "will" there. Not "may be penalized," but "will be penalized." It is mandatory. We have to conclude, then, that in the opinion of the highest WSOP brass, screaming that your opponent is an idiot and the worst player in poker somehow does not constitute "abusive language" or "abusive comments." I'd love to hear them explain that.
Finally, what's this business about Hellmuth now being on notice? Is there anybody in the poker world who had already had more warnings, or had more behavioral penalties imposed than Phil Hellmuth? Are we seriously to believe that the WSOP directors concluded that maybe he just didn't know what the rules were, or what proper conduct required, and thus was deserving of just a warning instead of an actual penalty. What complete bullshit.
This is not the only way in which Hellmuth has been placed above the WSOP rules. As documented by California Jen at Pokerati here, Hellmuth alone was given a pass for the huge UltimateBet logo on his shirt that clearly exceeded the explicit tournament rules.
This is reminiscent of the apparently special treatment given Scotty Nguyen earlier in the series.
Shenanigans. Low, scummy, rotten, unfair, favoritism shenanigans, coming from the highest levels of authority at the WSOP.
It's not cheating, just uncouth--and maybe not even that
Date: Sun, Jul 13, 2008
I've gotten behind on my Pokerati reading, trying to catch up today. The above photo (and two more nearly identical to it) accompanied this post from a few days ago:
Attempted Cheater Caught on Tape
These shots were taken on Day 2 [of the World Series of Poker Main Event],
and they show the player sitting to Pat Poels’ left trying to sneak a peak at
his hole cards. I told Pat about this, btw, and like Tommy Grand or Joey Greco,
I showed him the surveillance footage of the disappointing truth.
“It’s better that you know,” I told him.
But Pat reassured me that it’s OK, his opponent didn’t see anything,
because “I’m very good at looking at my cards,” he said with a straight face as
if he were being totally serious about a practiced skill. “Just ask Robert, he’s
told me before when trying to sweat me he can’t see my cards.”
Pat is currently on break in Day 4 of the main event — 450k in chips with
350 players remaining, one of whom is not the guy at right.
Posted by DanM at 4:04 pm
I have some problems with this.
First, I'm guessing that the phrase "surveillance footage" is tongue in cheek. I assume that DanM doesn't have access to actual Rio surveillance cameras. I also doubt that the Rio has any of its security cameras situated at an angle that low.
Second, even if we assume that the guy pictured is attempting to sneak a peek at Pat Poels's hole cards, that is not cheating (a point which, the instant post's headline notwithstanding, DanM conceded in a follow-up post the next day). I think it's scummy, and I do just about anything I reasonably can do to avoid the situation (as I've detailed here), but it's not cheating.
Third, I don't think it's at all clear that the man pictured is attempting to look at another player's card. Sure, that's possible, but it's also possible that his gaze is actually somewhere else, for example, watching the hands of the player to Poels's right. I tend to watch other players' hands much more than their faces. This is for several reasons: (1) I think that hands give off as much information as faces do, and maybe more. (2) It's less confrontational than looking at others right in the eye. (3) It's a lot easier to follow the action and know when it's my turn by watching the movement of chips and cards.
This practice of mine means that if the player to my right, or the one two to my right, has a habit of not looking at his hole cards until it's his turn to act (a common thing), then I'm nearly always going to be looking right there while he's checking his cards. It might appear that I'm trying to sneak a peek, but either these players are ones who already know how to block views--intentional or otherwise--or it's a problem that I've already dealt with. In other words, if looking at his hands is giving me a look at his cards, I'll handle that in some manner. In fact, when it's an issue, I usually explain to the player that I have to be looking right there so that I know when he has acted and it is my turn.
All of which is a long way of saying that the guy in the photo could be completely innocent, doing exactly what he's supposed to be doing in order to follow the bets and folds. I therefore disapprove of the rush to judgment, as if something nefarious is the only possible explanation for where his gaze appears to be. Yeah, maybe he's a low-life cheating scum-sucker, but this photo is awfully weak evidence for such an accusation. I can easily imagine myself being caught in an identical posture, having neither done nor even attempted anything the least bit shady.
This needed to be said
Date: Sun, Jul 13, 2008
"California Jen" over at Pokerati has a two-part guide to not being rude and/or disgusting in poker rooms, here and here. Go read and obey.
A brief political interlude
Date: Sat, Jul 12, 2008
If freedom to play poker specifically, and personal liberties more generally, is/are at the top of your list of political priorities, I'd say that your best presidential ticket is the Libertarian Party, with Bob Barr and Wayne Root. Here's an interview with the latter:
http://tv.pokernews.com/off-the-felt/Wayne+Root/1586319197
Before and after
Date: Fri, Jul 11, 2008
Mike Matusow got a lot of attention for his weight loss when he showed up for the first day of the World Series of Poker having shed just enough pounds to win a $100,000 prop bet from Ted Forrest.
But not only did Matusow, by his own admission, start packing the weight back on the very next day, he's a complete piker when compared to what Thomas "Thunder" Keller has done. Compare these two photos I found of him, the first from 2004, and the second from this month. I saw a brief interview he did with PokerNews during his first WSOP event, and he said that he has dropped nearly 200 pounds.
And, as far as I know, it didn't take a prop bet to motivate him. Nice work, sir.
(Of course, he could take another smidgen off of that weight if he shaved that nasty little goatee....)
Still standing at the Main Event
Date: Fri, Jul 11, 2008
As Day 4 begins, there are plenty of recognizable names still alive in the field. I would pick these as probably the best-known (in no particular order)
Matt Matros - 822,500
Alan Jaffray - 908,500
Tiffany Michelle - 249,000
Kido Pham - 228,500
Jean-Robert Bellande - 124,500
Phil Hellmuth - 475,000
Bob Bright - 324,000
Van Nguyen - 145,500
Lou Esposito - 302,000
Kirill Gerasimov - 146,500
Tim West - 63,500
Gus Hansen - 355,000
Mark Vos - 468,000
Thayer Rasmussen - 394,000
Thomas Keller - 294,000
Mike Matusow - 438,500
Maya Geller-Antonius - 245,000
Allen Cunningham - 386,500
Dave Colclough - 140,000
Hevad Khan - 338,500
Hasan Habib - 326,000
Alex Outhred - 326,000
Matt Lessinger - 268,000
Shahram Sheikhan - 724,000
Jon Friedberg - 426,000
Bertrand Grospellier - 181,500
Evelyn Ng - 414,500
Chip Jett - 318,500
Hoyt Corkins - 439,500
Dag Martin Mikkelsen - 931,000
Mike Wattel - 89,000
Johnny Chan - 252,000
Jon Turner - 726,500
Adam Schoenfeld - 200,000
Alexander Kostritsyn - 887,000
Thierry van den Berg - 170,500
Andrew Brokos - 566,500
Robert Mizrachi - 138,000
Steve Billirakis - 124,000
Cliff Josephy - 59,000
Victor Ramdin - 471,000
Of those, I would be OK with any of them taking down the big one, except for (1) Phil Hellmuth (the inflation of his ego would exceed the bounds of the universe, according to the known laws of physics), (2) Van Nguyen (because she is married to the cheating scumbag Men Nguyen), (3) Mike Matusow (because he's just repulsive), (4) Shawn Sheikhan (ditto).
The ones I would be most happy to see win include Matt Matros, Gus Hansen, Thomas Keller, Allen Cunningham, Hasan Habib, Matt Lessinger, Hoyt Corkins, Adam Schoenfeld, Andrew Brokos, and Cliff Josephy. They're all players that I've come to like and respect (though never having met any of them).
Oh, and, of course, Johnny fuckin' Chan.
I should also note this list of remaining players that I believe the entire world press corps is united in praying do not make the final table, lest every spell-checker on the planet go into meltdown:
Mirza Nagji - 91,500
Phongthep Thiptinnakon - 333,000
Jamal Sawaqdeh - 201,000
Thamir Akrawi - 153,000
Nick Voyatzis - 263,000
Pawel Andrzejewski - 340,000
Yde van Deutekom - 462,000
Charalampos Tsaoussis - 52,500
Graddus Terwiss Cha Van - 318,000
Jiri Hlavaty - 235,000
Eetu Vehilainen - 105000
Finally, here's the guy with the name that not a single journalist on Earth would be able to resist making puns on: Tri Nguyen - 370,000. (Try to win?)
I'm officially scared now
Date: Fri, Jul 11, 2008
The robots are coming! The robots are coming!
See http://www.pokernews.com/news/2008/07/man-machine-II-poker-championship-polaris-defeats-stoxpoker-team.htm.
That pretty much does it for mankind, the way I see it. If we can't even beat the computers at poker, we might as well just hand the keys to the planet over to them right now, and go cower in the corner in anticipation of our inevitable enslavement.