Below is our second DC Update for 2012 available exclusively to 2012 PPA members.  Because we’ve received so many questions from members about PokerPAC and how and why it’s important in our fight for the game we love, I’m providing this week’s DC Update with a bit of background on PACs generally, and specifically why PokerPAC is so important.

PPA DC Update | February 1, 2012 | Bryan Spadaro | Poker Players Alliance

While I am not technically a lobbyist for the PPA, I am excited to write this week’s insider piece to our membership.  This week’s piece is about Political Action Committees, or PAC’s, an area in which I have expertise.

As the Republican primary race continues into 2012 you’ve undoubtedly heard a lot about PAC’s and Super PAC’s, and the role they play in deciding the outcome of these primary races.  A bit of history first.  PACs were first created under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. A PAC enables likeminded individuals to voluntarily pool their financial resources in order to contribute to candidates running for federal and state offices.  This allows corporations and associations, who are barred under law from using their own business (corporate) funds, to create a connected entity that can raise and then disperse funds to candidates they want to support.  This is exactly what PokerPAC is, the connected PAC of the Poker Players Alliance.

One of the questions I hear most about PACs is “where does the money go?” Well, as PPA’s PAC director, I can say, contributing it is a lot easier than raising it.  First, it is important to know that every dollar PokerPAC raises is contributed to candidates and campaigns that support the rights of poker players.  No money PokerPAC raises is used for overhead, salaries, compliance, marketing, etc., 100 percent goes toward the fight for our game.  Another way to answer the question is to look back to the 2010 elections, and explain some of the ways we spent PokerPAC resources.  In the 2010 cycle, PokerPAC endorsed 58 candidates.  1) In many cases, we contributed money directly from the PokerPAC to the campaigns of our endorsed candidates.  This is most common and perhaps most effective way we can support a candidate. 2) Also, in every PPA-targeted race we sent an endorsement email to all PPA members living in the district (or state) letting them know why we support the candidate and encouraged the local poker players to support them too.  These “in-kind” emails cost money and a small percentage of PokerPAC resources went to pay for these endorsements.

In a few cases the PokerPAC went “All-In” for candidates. 3) In Nevada and Colorado, two of the closest Senate races of 2010, the PPA supported candidates who were strong supporters of your poker rights and their challengers were opponents of your freedom to play online poker.  Leading up to Election Day we hosted events for the candidates so the poker community in that state could meet them and learn about why they deserved a poker player’s support.  4) PokerPAC also used resources to run online advertising and phone calls letting poker players know to support our candidate.  In both races we won!  And both Senators have acknowledged PokerPAC’s role in helping them win their races.  That is about as good as it gets for a PAC Director like me: to know that the actions we took had a direct, positive, and tangible effect on a very important outcome.

That is why we ask for your support of PokerPAC, and why it is so important to go beyond your $15 annual PPA membership.  I hope you found this piece to be interesting and informative, and as always, if you have any questions, please send them to email@theppa.org, and we will be happy to answer them for you.

Thanks again for your 2012 membership.  If you haven’t done so already, please consider becoming even more involved with the PPA by becoming a contributor to PokerPAC, the PPA’s political action arm.

Proud to Play,

Bryan Spadaro

Disclaimer: You can only contribute to our Political Action Committee if you (i) are a United States citizen or landed immigrant (e.g., hold a green card), (ii) are over the age of 18 years, (iii) are a member of the PPA, and (iv) are not a government contractor. You can only make contributions from your personal funds; you may not contribute corporate funds or funds from other prohibited sources. Contributions are not tax deductible. You must also provide where indicated your full name (i.e., first name, middle name or initial and last name), your mailing address, your occupation, and the name of your employer.

Meeting with members before and after the hearing, I was immensely proud to hear every lawmaker tell us that they are being contacted by poker players. The question on the lawmakers’ minds was not “if” internet poker should be regulated, but rather “how” regulation should look.

Senator D’Amato did an exceptional job and delivered impassioned remarks defending your right to play.  He urged Congress to adopt rules and regulations to ensure American consumers have a safe marketplace in which to play poker on the Internet.  In fact, when it came to consumer protections the conclusion of every witness before the Committee was that regulation was far better than the status quo.  And, more importantly, that sentiment was also expressed almost unanimously by the lawmakers who attended the hearing.  The question on the lawmakers’ minds was not “if” internet poker should be regulated, but rather “how” should regulation look.

We have come a long, long way from just a few short years ago when Congress could only talk about how best to prohibit Internet gambling and poker.  This shift in attitude has much to do with the advocacy efforts of your PPA and the poker community in general who have done so much to educate lawmakers on this issue.  We have turned opponents into champions for our cause and completely changed the debate in Washington D.C.

As I stood with Senator D’Amato today meeting with members of the Committee — before and after the hearing — I was immensely proud to hear every lawmaker tell us that they are being contacted by poker players in their districts. While politicians often give us reason to be cynical about government, one thing is clear, they appreciate hearing from the voters on issues that matter most. Please keep up the pressure and please continue to make your voice heard. It is truly paying off!

We all have much to be proud of, but there is still much more to do.  I hope you will consider the next step in supporting the PPA by becoming a 2012 member today.  We are offering a special $15.00 deal (normally $20.00) that gives you a PPA membership for the remainder of 2011 and all of 2012!  This should be a “snap call” for any poker player who wants to continue the fight for our poker rights.

Other Highlights

• The PPA would like to thank Congressman Joe Barton for his continued leadership on this issue.  He was excellent at today’s hearing and he is working to educate every member of Congress about the benefits of regulated Internet poker.  Check out his opening statement from today’s hearing.
• This week the National District Attorney’s Association, the oldest and largest professional organization representing criminal prosecutors in the world, issued a statement in support of regulated Internet poker.
• Check out a good opinion piece by former FBI Director Louis Freeh and former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge highlighting the need for Internet poker regulation.
• The Hill, one of the leading publications for Congress, has a good recap of today’s hearing.

Again, I hope you will please stand with the PPA and share in our continued success by becoming a 2012 PPA member today for just $15.00!

Thank you.

Proud to Play,

John A. Pappas
Executive Director

It didnt’t really bother me when Poker Spot folded, because that guy had history. And I laughed about the money Aces Poker stole, because anyone who trusted them couldn’t ever spot a cheat. The Ultimate Bet scandal wasn’t really that surprising, as we’d heard stories about him for years. And it never shocked me when they cheated me in Atlantic City, or went partners against me in Vegas, or at Foxwoods tried to do a runner with my funds. The nips, the moves, the cheats, the angle shooters, and those that were just plain thieves. For the past ten years when the stars put on their caps and badges and smiled for the TV, we used to smile to ourselves. And then we’d laugh as we’d tick off the big names in poker and say, “But he’s really just a little scumbag, isn’t he?” Because they pretty much all were. And that’s the way it’s always been.

I didn’t always think like that, of course, and neither did you. I came into poker just like yourself, wide eyed and dough faced and on the back of a little bit of luck. Full of passion for the game and a romantic view of the poker world and a desire to be accepted by the rambling gambling men who ruled. It’s natural when you have a pocketful of money and a bellyful of gamble and all the confidence in the world, it’s natural that when it comes to people you can be a little naïve. I certainly was, and so probably were you.

I’m ashamed that I have sat by in silence while you all cheated, stole, and lied. I know you, you thieving tournament directors, you scumbag poker players, you dirtbag angle shooters with your names stitched on your shirts. I know you. And I’m ashamed that I’ve sat here for twenty years and let you rule the poker world as long as I was still getting paid.

But you get wiser because you have to. My circle got small and my radar got sharp and I could count all the people that I could really trust on maybe one hand. And I told them they could trust me. And pretty much everyone else were scumbags and cheats. In poker, that’s the way it’s always been. That’s the way it’s been for me, and that’s the way it is for you. And we don’t ever talk out of turn. Because in this world if you shit where you eat, then you’ll end up hungry. That’s what you need to know about poker. That’s what you need to know about me.

I’ve been around long enough so that just one more scam, cheat, or mismanagement of funds, one more of those should be just like more water off another duck’s back. But something happened to me when Full Tilt Poker collapsed. This one is different. This has laid me low. It’s not just anger I feel, it’s not just disdain, and I can’t sit here like I always do and smile to myself and point fingers and call them scum. Because what I feel more than anything else right now, is shame.

I am ashamed of you, Howard, and you, Chris, as well. Your actions have made me ashamed. But I’m also ashamed of every one of you that owns Full Tilt Poker stock and has sat in silence. You don’t want to give that money back. It’s nothing to do with you. You were just someone getting paid. You’re sitting in silence and running around and playing in tournaments and talking to your lawyer and feeling sorry for yourself. Shame on you, shame on your silence every last one. But that’s not all. Shame on those of you taking money to wear logos now, in the past and in the future, no matter the site. I’m ashamed that your moral code stops at every paycheck, that you ignore and turn your back and sweep under the rug rather than demand an answer. I’m ashamed of your goddamn hypocrisy and your proclamations about morality while your hush money spills out of your goddamn ass. I’m ashamed of those of you who are quick to condemn another rather than ask those tough questions of yourself. I’m ashamed of those of you who are willing to turn a blind eye because it involves your friends. I’m ashamed that not one of you really care about anyone but yourself, because how could poker ever remotely be called a sport when none of you have a shred of respect? And I’m ashamed that a bunch of fat cat dot com millionaires will never ever be able to imagine any perspective other than their own.

Most of all, of course, I’m ashamed of myself. I’m ashamed that I have sat by in silence while you all cheated, stole, and lied. I refused to speak up. I know you, you thieving tournament directors, you scumbag poker players, you dirtbag angle shooters with your names stitched on your shirts. I know you. And I’m ashamed that I’ve sat here for twenty years and let you rule the poker world as long as I was still getting paid. I’m ashamed that I will demand all day for ethics, honesty, and transparency as long as there is no personal sacrifice involved. I’m ashamed that I only want to clean things up as long as they don’t affect the bottom line. You take your ethics and shove them. You take your integrity and stuff it. Shame on you. You’re no better than the rest of them. And I’m no better than you.

In glass houses, don’t throw stones. Know thyself. The most naïve thing any one of us could think is that what’s left is honest. The most cowardly thing any of us could say right now is don’t upset the apple cart. And the most shameful thing any of us could be right now is happy to not demand answers as long as we are still getting paid. The only thing stopping player power is the players themselves. And that is totally shameful. This is only poker like it always has been, nothing new. And maybe that’s the most shameful thing of all.

Don’t sweat it Chris. I’m not really ashamed of you. I always knew you were just a little scumbag.

My dedication to poker tournaments and the game itself is two decades old. Starting with my first foray into the role of tournament director in 1997 and through my founding of the Tournament Directors Association (TDA) with Linda Johnson, Jan Fisher, and Dave Lamb in 2001, I have worked tirelessly to standardize tournament rules and to make poker a better game for everyone involved.

This is the reason that we host the website www.PokerTDA.com, open the TDA to all interested parties, and make myself available on Twitter and other social media outlets. My passion for poker only grows when I share it with others.

The rule is not new, and does not ban table talk by any means … A recreational player may not understand, nor even care to know all the rules, but professionals who make a living at the game should.

During the 2011 World Series of Poker “nearly live” telecast from the Rio, I became aware of comments from Daniel Negreanu (@RealKidPoker) through my own Twitter feed (@SavagePoker). He said that the TDA created a “new” rule that banned table talk. This certainly is not the case and in hindsight, it was learned that he had received an incorrect ruling at the table that had nothing to do with TDA rules. Since social media has limited words with which to sufficiently explain the rule and its longtime existence, this clarification seems necessary.

The TDA board, in conjunction with tournament directors and card room managers, has donated thousands of hours to standardize rules in the best interest of the game.  When well-known poker players like Negreanu and Phil Hellmuth choose to say on national television that “the TDA has it wrong” and “does not care about what the players want,” it becomes personal.

The Rule
To begin with the basics, the TDA rule at the center of the recent discussion is the “No Disclosure” rule, which states:

Players are obligated to protect the other players in the tournament at all times. Therefore, players, whether in the hand or not, may not:

The one-player-to-a-hand rule will be enforced.

Regarding Negreanu’s previous statements, the rule is not new, as it was enacted more than seven years ago. In addition, it does not ban table talk by any means.

He also stated that players should be able to “say whatever you want in a heads-up pot at any point of the tournament.” In theory, that sounds great for the television audience. But keep in mind that far less than one percent of all poker tournaments are televised! Thus, the rule that pertains to all poker players must apply to all tournaments, televised or not. Rules cannot be changed to help individual players or enhance a televised tournament.

A quote, brought to my attention by @GaryC101, from Neil Peart of Rush sums it up best: “Glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity.” OK, kind of a random quote but says a lot about the situation in my opinion and I consider integrity the most important trait of a good tournament director.

Personally, I would like to see Negreanu say anything he wants on television, as he is one of the most entertaining players to watch. His popularity and influence on the game of poker is immense. However, as a tournament director, I believe the integrity of the game is more important than the entertainment provided by a single event. I agree with his point that the rule is difficult to enforce but it needs to be there to provide a reason for TD’s to investigate possible collusion or soft play situations.

In-Depth Analysis
Let’s start with a purely hypothetical situation:

Player A is friends with Player B and backs him in a major tournament. Both have significant chips late in a tournament. They are seated at the same table and involved in a hand. Player B raises, and it folds around to Player A, who reraises and says, “I have aces.” Player B folds kings.

This obviously does not make for better poker. In fact, it could easily be considered “soft play” or collusion, and making this permissible only encourages such actions. I am not by any means suggesting that Negreanu is in favor of soft play or collusion, but this is just one of several very negative ramifications that can arise from what he says he believes players should be able to say at the table.

Moreover, tournament directors around the world cannot be expected to be aware of all friendships, relationships, and backing arrangements between players in a tournament. Therefore, the rules are established to enable enforcement for all players, regardless of their associations. And all are protected from any collusion or appearances of collusion.An interesting idea was proposed by Barry Greenstein, who believes the current TDA rule is not enforced. He suggested that a player should be able to discuss his/her hand when action is on that player and they are facing a bet.

I discussed this idea with Dave Lamb, and we recognized the flaws in that idea.

First, it is not acceptable to disclose the contents of your hand in a multi-way action pot.

Second, it is not acceptable to disclose the contents of your hand preflop when facing a bet.

Barry responded that it would be okay when facing a bet on the river if you were only going to call, not raise. However, that does not seem enforceable and only creates more confusion for tournament staff, dealers, and players.

The bottom line is that the TDA is never going to agree to a rule that not only allows, but legalizes soft play and collusion.

The most common question I’ve received of late is this: “If table talk is legal but players cannot disclose the contents of their hands, what can they say”? The answer is simply anything except information relating to the content of their own hand with action pending. Whether lying or telling the truth about the contents or the strength of a hand, it breaks the rule and may be penalized. There is not a blanket rule for when it is a penalty or not but with the “non disclosure” rule in place it gives the players the right to investigate possible situations.

Friends
The most difficult part of this situation has been responding to television sound bites with which friends like Negreanu have addressed this issue. Also the sudden urgency is perplexing considering the rule has been in place for more than seven years.

Greenstein and Negreanu were asked to attend the June 2011 TDA summit in Las Vegas, in the same Convention Center as the WSOP. There were more than 120 tournament directors and card room managers at the summit, and anyone was allowed to discuss any rule issues or concerns. However, at that conference, Greenstein asked about procedures for raising blinds when time expires in a current blind structure, and Negreanu brought up shorting limit bets. Neither chose to discuss the “no disclosure” rule.

Suddenly, however, Negreanu’s airing of his grievance on ESPN, as well as Hellmuth’s declaration on the same broadcast that he intends to change the rule, brought it to the forefront and forced me to address the issue.

The recreational poker tournament player may not understand every rule, or even care to know all of the rules, but professionals who make a living at the game should learn and study the entirety of the TDA rules.

Moreover, these rules are in place and enforced in order to create uniformity, as they are used by nearly every major tournament venue around the world. More than 1,500 tournament directors, card room managers, and their staffs are members of the TDA, and the rules are accepted and enforced globally.

That doesn’t mean the TDA isn’t open for discussions. However, the “no disclosure” rule has been in place for many years, and there has never been an issue with it until this incident. Airing grievances may make for good television, but it does not permit the detailed analysis necessary for drafting the most functional and fair poker tournament rules that protect the integrity of the game. There will be more opportunities in the future to revisit the “no disclosure” rule and it will most definitely come up at our next TDA Summit not yet planned.

I have received a ton of feedback on this issue some positive and some negative. I have also taken personal attacks for defending a rule hundreds have put in place, which I feel is really unfair. I have worked diligently in my career to further the great game of poker with the TDA and its members and despite accusations to the contrary we care deeply about the players, as the majority are players as well.

In the end, I choose the integrity of poker, which is good for the game, over good television every time.

Your body is an intricate and delicate system designed to sense threat, and biologically programmed to avoid it. Your nervous system is a vast information highway that runs every cellular process in the body. From breathing and your heartbeat to movement and thought, your nervous system affects every process of your body.

So what’s happening in your body during a hand?

Because of the unknown outcomes, the variability of chance, and the sheer financial risk, poker is stressful by design. Let me be clear about what I mean. Let’s define stress as a physical, emotional or chemical factor that causes bodily or mental tension and let’s avoid judgment of whether stress is good or bad. Stress simply exists and we live in relation to it.

So during a hand, regardless of age, gender, ethnicity or experience at the table, a body responds to stress exactly the same. Stress is a threat and regardless of the size, shape, cause or intensity the body reacts with a Fight or Flight response.

Originally intended to protect you, the fight or flight response causes a release of hormones that:

• Increase your heart rate
• Increase your blood glucose (blood sugar)
• Put you in a “ready” state

Ever have the feeling that you need caffeine, sugar and other stimulants to keep you on your toes? You’re simply prolonging the “high” your body has already initiated.

The flip side of your stress response is that these hormones also:

• Decrease your immune system function, making you more susceptible to illness
• Decrease your digestive system function, making you get less from what you eat
• Affect your ability to control your mood, motivation and fear factors

This last point is particularly important. When your stress response is on, there is a five-lane, one-way highway from the emotional center of your brain (limbic system) to the thinking center of your brain (pre-frontal cortex) that dampens your ability to access rational thought. Emotion is running the show and no amount of statistical math, strategy or poker skill can stop it.

But there is one scientifically proven way to interrupt this emotional rollercoaster of hormones and put your rational mind back in the driver’s seat:

Asking a question stimulates the thinking center of your brain and interrupts the stress response — limiting its negative effects.

You can’t ask just any old question. When your stress response is on (as it almost always will be in poker) you have to ask the right question for you: A powerful inquiry that sparks curiosity. This is something you can work with a coach on: Creating powerful questions to ask yourself when needing an antidote to tilt.

To get started finding your powerful question, check out the questions below:

What does poker give you that you can’t get anywhere else?

With all the rejection and pain that poker can bring, what makes being a poker player worth it to you?

What skill or gift do you have that gives you an edge at the table?

One player I work with uses the theme song from Rocky to imagine himself as a fighter, able to face any opponent and forever willing to get back up and fight no matter what the circumstances. Poker gives him the opportunity to face a challenge that he finds exciting. The experience of overcoming obstacles and being financially rewarded makes it worth it and the gift this player brings to the table is strength, endurance and a willingness to fight for what he wants.

Can you see how answering the three questions above created a vibe for this player that is more powerful and positive than the circumstances of any hand can shake?

It’s a critical first step toward controlling your game in the phase of physiological stress. Because if you’re not using your mind to connect with your body when it hits, the game is more likely to be controlling you.

At the World Series of Poker, they announce the event and coveted bracelet winners and then play the national anthem of the country they come from. Play stops at all the cash games and the players stand and remove their hats. When an American won, my table stood with their hands over their hearts and sang. I looked out over that vast sea of poker players and was overcome by emotion. The song always gives me tingles but there was also a love and astonishment at how wonderful the playing conditions have become for this sport. Yes, it is a sport.

The players’ manners are terrific today compared to the past. Johnny Moss was known for being abusive to dealers. Puggy Pearson was worse. He pissed on one once. Another Hall of Famer, Joe Bernstein, bit a dealer.

I cannot sing enough praise for the poker management of Harrah’s. I had long conversations with Bill Sattler, Director of Poker, and aslo Jake Reville, Cathy Klufer, and Carrie Jacobs. For twenty years, I taught management subjects at Texas Tech. The magnificent professionalism of Harrah’s management makes me wish I could go lecture on how great they are. I played in the cheap no limit where you only buy $300. I’ve never lost at the Rio, but only played there seven times. I’m not trying to beat the best in the world anymore. I’m too old.

My first trip to the World Series was in 1975. I first went to Las Vegas in 1960 to work as a shill in the poker room at the Golden Nugget, playing poker on house money. When I would look out over that poker heaven called the Rio and thousands of players, I’d remember when there was only one poker table in downtown Las Vegas where the player had any chance at all to win. There was one $6 limit razz game with a 25 cent rake. The rest were “snatch games.” The rake was stronger than Grandma’s breath. I never saw a poker winner. We shills cheated by signaling when we had a pair. We’d sat our two cards in five stud at a forty-five degree angle. Benny Binion got me the job for Bill Boyd, as I was “vouched in” by Curly Cavitt.

At the early World Series, and Binion’s cash games there seemed to be very regular squabbles, and the floor man was making constant obvious rulings. We called them the “famous Binion’s five dollar squabble” because they were holding up the game. The Rio is almost void of that. One reason is that early players often blamed the dealer for bad luck and bad beats. No matter how tough the Binion’s were, and they were even tougher than you think, they allowed verbal and even physical abuse of the dealers. Hall of Famers Johnny Moss and John Bonneti were legendary for their verbal abuse. When Bonnetti made the final table in 1990, his acid-tongued aggression did not stop. Puggy Pearson actually pissed on a dealer once. Another Hall of Famer, Joe Bernstein, bit a dealer. Puggy wore costumes. Once he came as a Native Amercian, with a full war bonnet with feathers to the floor, and war paint. At the time of the first Gulf War, he came as Saddam Hussein. Puggy parked a motor home outside Binion’s back door. On the side was painted, “I’ll play any man from any land any game that he can name for any amount that he can count.” He meant it. Puggy was a neighbor of my cousin’s, Bill Stapp. Given poker’s stigma, he told the neighborhood he was a school teacher.

I have only played at the Rio seven times, but have never seen behavior even close to the way players acted in those days. The players’ manners are terrific today compared to the past.

Bad behavior included frequently tearing up the offensive bad beat cards, throwing cards, especially at the dealer. In a home game, Gene Bass put an ace in his sandwich and ate it.

The old regular retirees who came in the early morning like shift workers would tip the dealer fifty cents. They might throw a dollar chip, and say, “Half back.” Once at the Mirage, Bill Gates played the three–six limit. He’d throw a dollar and say, “Half back.”

Late one night, back when I was damn fool enough to drink, I was ridiculing the half back crowd, and palming all the fifty cent pieces in the game and taking them off the table, which is technically rat holing, and against the rules. I now rat hole hundreds when I’m off winner and play on velvet. After a while, I looked behind me, and there was a plain clothes Binion’s tough. He gave me a really scary look, and opened his jacket to expose a big semi-automatic pistol. My behavior improved in a heart beat, and they were coming fast.

My all-time favorites of the early Hall of Famers were the gentlemen, Crandell Addington and Doyle Brunson. Both have given me dynamite quotes for my Bluff Europe articles. Crandell was younger than the rest. He still holds the record for the most main event final tables in the early days. He’d dress fantastically with boots, a perfect Stetson, and always a tie. He won a big prop bet that he would not loosen his tie during the long, long main event. Crandell looked like Hollywood’s idea of the leading man, a very handsome road gambler. He was one of the biggest road gamblers in many states by his mid-twenties. Look up Crandell Addington on google images.

One of the greatest things about the early World Series, were the stories I’d collect. For over fifty years, I’ve collected the stories and old gambling and West Texas sayings. At the Rio, I got on a really lucky rush, my best sequence of cards all year. I said, “I’m holding more hands than any manicurist in town. That hand was as big as a foot.” After fifty years, the table still laughs.

Paradise Found?
I wore a hat with my novel title, and JohnnyHughes.com on it. After awhile, someone would ask if I was Johnny Hughes. I’d reply,”Do you think I”d wear this stupid hat if I wasn’t?” At this World Series, I met Lance Bradley, editor of Bluff, and the legendary Kevin Mathers, another Bluff editor. I ran into Toupee Jay at the Cardoza booth manned by a young man with the great name of Casagrande. I talked with Nolan Dalla, who I remember a little as a loud and funny drunk at the poker table and the coffee shop. He was their press guy and he was with Benny Behan, the owner’s son which made it even funnier. He was that rarity, a charming drunk, like me. One thing that has not changed, but only grown much richer, are the stories poker players share. Now there are top writers like Al Can’t Hang, Dan Michalski, and Paul “Dr. Pauly” McGuire documenting poker’s history as it happens.

Jack Binion was the real leader and major brain behind the growth of the World Series. When he left, his sister Becky Behen, oversaw a steady decline. Once there was a dealer walk out, and she badmouthed them in the newspaper. She didn’t pay the floor staff the agreed on amount. The world class buffet went to plastic eating utensils.

When Binion’s Horseshoe closed, I went to downtown Las Vegas and peeked in the front window. One lone lamp illuminated the ghost like dice tables, and slot machines. It reminded me of a dark theater, which it really was, and the work light. That was poker’s darkest hour, and Harrah’s rode to the rescue like John Wayne and the U.S. Cavalry. Hear the bugle?

I’ve been robbed and arrested several times because of poker. I’d have to move or the game would have to move. I’ve played poker many places. Once in the basement of a Catholic hospital, an angry nun broke up the game. In the dorms, the athletic trainer broke up the games. We played in a car lot with only four chairs. Late arrivals had to sit on a tire. Once we played very high above a cold storage facility. We wore coats, our teeth were rattling, and we played seven-five low ball very fast to keep warm. I played regularly in a whore house and most with outlaws: bookies, loan sharks, thieves, many ex-convicts, lawyers, and pimps. Poker was a lot of trouble.

In going to the World Series, I’d go watch the Lady’s event, seven stud on Mother’s Day. I was there when Poker Hall of Famer Barbara Enright was the first woman at the final table.

The contrast with the ideal playing conditions at the Rio is striking. There was very little waiting time. The people from all over the world were friendly conversationalists.

The dealer training and employee courtesy add to the enjoyment. Harrah’s saved poker and made it what it is today. Their corporate culture produces skilled leaders like Bill Sattler, Jake Reville, Cathy Klufa, and Carrie Jacobs. That culture can be felt on the felt. Good vibes! Poker has come a long way. Harrah’s deserves a lot of the credit. I stay at the centrally located and reasonable Imperial Palace, another Harrah’s property with a nice, small poker room. I’ll be back!

Mindset, mindset, mindset! It’s a common buzzword around poker, and with each calculated risk/reward scenario being played out inside the inner workings of the brain, there’s no doubt that a poker player’s mindset is important. If you haven’t cleared your head of hang ups, fears, negative habits and weak confidence, you just won’t go far.

But your head is attached to your body, and if you haven’t put consistent effort towards taking care of your body, your mind will be less likely to cooperate. That doesn’t have to mean running marathons or lifting weights. There are things poker players can do without dramatically altering their routines that can improve the chances that your mind will be in the right place at the right time. No matter what your current level of fitness, here are 5 simple ways for poker players to keep their bodies in gear throughout the WSOP:

Hydration
Half your weight in ounces of water is the general rule for “enough water” and if you drink that much you’d miss more hands than it’s worth with trips to the bathroom. So here’s the tip: Just drink water. Drink your energy drinks when you need them (notice “need them”, which is not morning, noon and night) and lay off the soda, alcohol and anything that’s not water.

• More water = improved blood flow (blood is thinner) = more oxygen to your brain = clearer thinking and improved focus = less stress

Sleep
Please, no less than 7 hours. You need sleep. You need good sleep, and to get good sleep, you need a routine. With long nights of poker it can be hard to hit the sack at the same time so have an end of day routine regardless of what time that may be. A few things you do everyday to wind down. Let your body get off the poker track and actually relax so you’ll come back with a clear head for the next round.

• More sleep = rest from the stress of playing = improved mood, patience, focus

Movement:
Your body was not meant to be still for extended periods of time. During breaks, get up and purposefully walk around. Those are seriously long hallways inside the Rio. Walk two of them, there and back, and I’d bet you’ll hit at least a ½-1 mile. If you can, go farther and workout at least once a week.

• Movement = blood flow = more oxygen to your brain = clear thinking and improved focus = less stress

Breathe
Sitting hunched over the table doesn’t give your lungs much room to expand. If you breathe shallow, you circulate less oxygen and trap toxins in your blood stream that need to get out. Every hour consciously breathe in through your nose and out through your mouth for 3 breaths.

• Conscious breathing = more oxygen to your brain = clear thinking and improved focus = less stress

Fuel
When you’re under stress — by definition any situation that makes your heart rate and blood pressure change without warning — it affects your digestion. You need fuel (aka food) to keep going and help you recover. Two simple food rules that will ensure your body gets the nutrition it needs:

1. Avoid fried food or fatty food (fatty= pizza, red meat & cream-base such as ranch dressing; fried= french fries, chicken tenders with heavy batter, and most things that leave heavy grease stains behind)
2. Eat 1 fruit and 1 vegetable at least once a day (and more if you can)

There’s no quick fix. It takes a combination of behaviors before a mindset emerges that leads to a consistent lifestyle. Poker players are athletes, albeit non-traditional ones, and if you don’t start treating yourself as such, you will find yourself losing a competitive edge to those who do.

There are two actions pending against online poker companies in the Southern District of New York — an indictment of individual defendants, and a civil forfeiture complaint against the companies. The civil forfeiture complaint seeks forfeiture of all assets of the defendants, including specified domains and bank accounts.

There have been several civil and criminal forfeiture cases brought by the DoJ in recent years, including Daniel Tzvetkoff’s and Douglas Rennick’s (which are the original and first superseding indictments in the current case). Similar forfeiture cases have also been brought against other payment processors, but in none of these cases, as far as I know, have the Poker companies filed claims objecting to the seizures. Also of note is that no players made claims either.

Any player who makes a claim [for their deposits] should expect criminal inquiry by the FBI and IRS, and would not be able to recover on provable claims for some time. If the Poker companies default on the civil forfeiture, players will have no real legal recovery.

For the purpose of filing Foreign Bank Account Reports, some players may have taken the position, consistent with the position of the IRS, that they are general unsecured creditors in a common pool fund of deposits, and as such have no control or discretion over the investment of the funds. If this position is correct, then the DoJ’s forfeiture claims may have legs, as there may be no players to come forward able to make the specific factual statements necessary for a bonafide claim. Further, in order for the Poker companies to make claims, they likely would have to submit to jurisdiction of the U.S. and open their books and records to the DoJ and IRS among others.

Players who think they can write off their funds on deposit for tax purposes, and thereby get some benefit by tax losses, may run into the problem that IRC §165 limits gambling losses to gambling winnings (plus travel and related expenses for professional gamblers). But that means the winnings must have been reported and will require proof of deposits made. For some players, proof of deposit may be problematic.

Any player who makes a claim should expect to face full disclosure requirements on inquiry by the FBI and IRS (likely Criminal Investigation Division) and would not be able to recover on provable claims for some time, and at a non-trivial expense. For among other things, for players to prevail, they will need to get cooperation from the Poker companies and produce “competent evidence”.

If there is a possibility that the Poker companies default on the civil forfeiture, the players will have no real legal recovery.

Just my observations.

Machines have always been the enemy of man, at least in movies and on television, yet somehow we never see our A.I. overlords coming until it’s too late.

Case in point, in Terminator 2: Judgment Day, Doctor Miles Bennett Dyson spends a lifetime developing artificial intelligence as part of the Skynet project, only to discover that his work is more suitable for evil than for good – the price? His life. You remember the scene: Dyson detonates his own lab, and in doing so blows himself up, sacrificing himself to save us from an army of Schwarzeneggers.

With the computer Watson now a winning contestant on Jeopardy!, the man v. machine debate has been rekindled, and it would seem that we’re in danger again, if not for our lives (yet), then for pride. In a recent Slate article, “Jeopardy, Schmeopardy: Why IBM’s next target should be a machine that plays poker“, author Chris Wilson asks whether the next logical progression from Jeopardy!’s Watson is a poker playing robot, and suggests that robots have a lot to teach us about poker, and might even be — gasp! — better.

Bots sound dangerous, and it would be easy to infer that their skill is only going to grow and that their dominance of the poker world is a forgone conclusion.

Poker bots have been hot topic in online poker for years. The fervor usually stems from a fear of the unknown. Gambling robots reached a fever pitch in 2007 when Phil Laak and Ali Eslami played against the Polaris poker bot. At the time I asked myself the obvious question – is Polaris the next terminator, and if not, then what’s the point of this experiment and why should I care? I sat down that summer with computer-poker researcher Darse Billings of the University of Alberta Computer Poker Research Group to have him explain how Polaris actually worked and to see what he thought was the point of his poker robot experiment, just to put my mind at ease.

I first asked Billings if he could kindly describe for the layperson like myself how Polaris operates. “No,” he said, and that was that. I simply wouldn’t get it. Fair enough. Next I asked if I couldn’t outsmart Polaris by playing really loose for the first third of the match and then really tight, and finally sporadic. Again, the answer was a simple and convincing, “no.” Apparently I just didn’t understand robots. Polaris, Billings explained, cannot get stuck in one particular mode of thinking. The bot is equipped with “memory decay,” which means that after a set of 20 hands it completely forgets it was ever playing to begin with and restarts its thinking process. Polaris bluffs at random, switches playing styles, and is not even one robot, but an “umbrella” bot where control is rotated to several different bots over the course of the match.

One of Billings’ bots, Mr. Orange, is programmed to interpret pots as being larger than they actually are, and to consequently over-bet, creating ever-growing pots that the bot fights harder and harder to win, putting significant pressure on a human or robot opponent. Mr. Orange’s aggressive play was so successful that Billings’ team nicknamed it Agent Orange for the bot’s ability to kill its opponents. Interestingly, Billings pointed out that Mr. Orange’s success proved what good poker players already know — aggression is key, and the only mistake a player can make against an aggressive heads-up opponent like Mr. Orange is being too tight. “Folding too much is the only thing dangerous,” Billings said, and went on to say that any two cards are worth taking to the flop. “Two-handed, luck is bigger than anyone thinks.”

Bots sound dangerous, and it would be easy to infer that their skill is only going to grow and that their dominance of the poker world is a forgone conclusion. But for online players who fear losing their bankroll to a robot opponent, Billings wholeheartedly dismissed their concern as ludicrous. “The amount of time and knowledge that would go into making even a mediocre bot,” he said, “makes them nearly impossible to run online.”

Billings also offered that bots are completely beatable, even suggesting that players should welcome bots. Part of Billings’ initial research for the Polaris project was to build a rock-paper-scissors bot that would consistently break even. The Polaris poker bot was an extension of this rock-paper-scissors design, and the bot plays poker exclusively to break even, only profiting when human players succumb to their own weaknesses. If you’re still worried, it’s worth mentioning that, despite fears, bots are not out fishing in multi-table tournaments; they’re designed to play heads-up limit games. So a strong limit player could, in theory, profit by playing bots.

Where then does this irrational fear of bots come from? Well, perhaps it’s not fear at all, but a display of how social a game poker is, even online. People want to play other people. “The bot,” Billings said, “doesn’t even know it’s playing poker.” Now what fun is that? Ego is such a huge part of poker that, not only are players obsessed with winning, but if the victory doesn’t somehow boost a player’s ego, the thrill is lost. In fact, although Billings considers himself a fine poker player, and is even the test subject against his bots, he is not interested in poker, at least not in poker against bots. Billings’ interest is in writing mathematical equations to deal with the imperfect information available at the poker table. He hopes his research might someday translate to other arenas of artificial intelligence.

Bots, with their play-for-the-tie philosophy, sound to me like the poker equivalent of soccer players, not futuristic no-limit killing machines. Billings said in 2007 that a no-limit bot was in the works and would be shockingly good, though it was “far away.” I’m guessing four years isn’t “far,” but maybe I’m wrong. Maybe 2011 is the year of the robot uprising, and Watson’s success on Jeopardy! is the first sign of apocalypse. Billings did admit that eventually the computers would win because computers “maximize what computers do well.” Now that sounded like a poker lesson for the current moment – because computers have no ego and often don’t even realize they’re playing poker, they are able to “focus” on what they do well, which is exploiting the weakness of other players.

The lesson: Don’t worry too much about bots, at least for now, but don’t get overconfident either – someday they may take over the world, so stay on their good side. Billings says his bots have “no fear, no shame, and an unlimited imagination.” Best advice is to stay ahead of the curve and allow for variance in your game, otherwise you might get stuck in a rut – and if a shifting mercury avatar asks in the chat box, “Have you seen this boy?” – fold.

I recently set off a minor controversy when I mentioned to @Pokerati that a Red Rock Casino poker dealer complained that new Heartland Poker champion Rob Perelman (@veerob) didn’t leave a dealer tip at the conclusion of the tournament.

First, I do not know Rob at all and was not making an accusation against him. I merely passed along the information because I knew @Pokerati had been covering the tournament. Second, as with any tournament cash of any size, Rob is free to spend or not spend his money any way he pleases. (He later tweeted that he tipped $2,000 on his $158,755 cash. The confusion being that he left the tip the next day after most of the dealers were gone and not directly after the tournament.)

Still, I believe the practice of tipping is an aspect of poker that merits discussion. Certainly, there is no standard for tipping in cash games or tournaments, and a lot is left to chance when the casino and other players alike rely on winners to pick up the check.

You may not agree with me to tip 10% of winnings of more than $10,000 in a poker tournament, but you can certainly agree that .00025% is extremely low!

Mike Caro makes a number of salient points when it comes to tipping in both cash games and tournaments in his article from 2006 here. How one player tips in poker is probably no different than how the same player tips at a restaurant or when getting a haircut.

Some players think that the part of a poker tournament buy-in withheld from the prize pool should cover everything. I have heard that of the house cut for the HPT main event (a $1000+100 tournament), $50 went to Red Rock Casino and $50 to the Heartland Poker Tour. I find it a little incredulous that a Las Vegas casino would split the house cut 50/50, but it’s possible.

When you think about the house cut, it is much like getting a meal in a restaurant. If you pay $50 for a nice meal it’s not because the food you ate cost $50. That $50 covers food costs, the server, the cook, the utilities and rent and leaves a profit for the restaurant owner. The server gets paid whether you leave a tip or not. The difference is that if you don’t leave a tip, that person is making $2.13 an hour. If you leave a tip of 15% to 20%, that same server can make a living wage.

Some players think that house cut is a huge profit center for the casinos. That house cut does afford some profit for the casinos, but that money has to pay a lot of people. At the WSOP, the house cut has to cover the labor costs for hundreds of dealers, floor people, servers and tournament staff.

At smaller casinos, where a tournament can literally use up every available table and dealer, this house cut is what the casino earns off its tables since there is no rake during a tournament. I manage a 40-person tournament in a four-table poker room. The tournament typically takes three hours. Until the tournament gets down to 30 people or less, every table is full and there is no place to host a cash game. The house cut makes up a percentage of what is lost in cash-game rake. This obviously doesn’t apply in a bigger casino that can afford to have a separate tournament room from its regular poker room.

As a poker dealer, I have been asked about tipping and how poker dealers are paid. Most poker dealers sign up for the Internal Revenue Service tip compliance program through their home casino or in any casino in which they are dealing a tournament. The formal part of tip compliance is: Under the Gaming Industry Tip Compliance Agreement Program (GITCA), a gaming industry employer and the Internal Revenue Service work together to reach a GITCA that establishes minimum tip rates for tipped employees in specified occupational categories, prescribes a threshold level of participation by the employer’s employees, and reduces compliance burdens for the employer and enforcement burdens for the Service.

Essentially, poker dealers (and other casino employees) are taxed a certain amount per hour for every hour they work. The rate of tip compliance is higher in bigger and busier poker rooms, less in smaller and less frequented rooms. What is consistent is if you are working eight straight hours at Aria on a Saturday night, you are taxed a certain amount per hour your rate of pay (i.e. minimum wage). If you are “dead spreading” at Excalibur at 8 AM on a Monday and don’t get a game for the first two hours, you are still taxed at your tip compliance rate.

The upside is that poker dealers in the tip compliance program keep all of their own tips. They are not reported to the IRS. They are not taxed. They are not shared. These tips are what make up the majority of a poker dealer’s wages. For a full-time Las Vegas poker dealer you can expect that your bi-weekly paycheck, after taxes and insurance, won’t buy you more than a bag or two of groceries. Your tips, however, can afford you a car and a home.

I know many a dealer who would rather be pitching cards in a four-table casino in the suburbs than in a high-stakes game on the Strip.

As I have been on the felt as both a tournament casher and a tournament dealer, I have seen both sides of this dance.

In a typical situation where the top 20 players of a tournament are getting paid, the tipping breakdown generally goes like this – 16 through 20 make a very small profit but they are willing to throw a few bucks of their profit to the dealers because they are happy to have survived the bubble. Finishers 15 through 5 are happy they cashed, but upset they didn’t cash big. They generally tip small or not at all because they have the mentality that tipping the dealers is the top finishers’ problem, not theirs. This is not true for all players, but I see it happen more often than not.

The top cashing players usually all tip based on what they think is fair – from 1 percent to 10 percent, but usually in the 3-5 percent range.

Here is where human nature really kicks in. If I buy in to a $120 tournament and win $3,000, I think I generous tip is in order. I would tip $300. However, most players I have run across do not think about the $2,880 profit they just made, but instead, think about the $300 they are about to give away. And that seems like a lot of money.

The same source of the @veerob tip told me that the second-place finisher was a local Red Rock 2-4 limit grinder who tipped $7,000 on his $79,059 cash. A 2-4 limit player is lucky to make enough just to stay ahead of the rake. Generally, that player would look at a $79,000 cash like hitting the bad beat and tip accordingly. Again, this tip is unconfirmed.

Every poker dealer has heard the tipping horror stories. My friend and fellow dealer @scarletlv told me of a player who tipped a half eaten candy bar. I have dealt in a casino where quarters are raked and players would tip 25 cents on a $45 pot. At a major downtown casino last summer, a player profited more than $2,000 in a tourney, but was so angry about the bad beat that knocked him out of the tournament that he slapped two quarters on the counter for the dealers and stormed out of the room. You may not agree with me to tip 10% of winnings of more than $10,000 in a poker tournament, but you can certainly agree that .00025% is extremely low!

I have dealt a number of poker tournaments in various casinos and have many friends who are dealers in Las Vegas and in other places. No matter the size of the tournament, the number of entrants or the location, the same number comes up time and time again with poker dealers — $10 per down. That is what most tournament downs (30 minute dealing sessions) average. That means that most poker dealers make $20 per hour for dealing a poker tournament (before taxes). That may seem like a lot of money, and certainly it is above the poverty line, but look at it this way:

And that’s for full-time dealers. With the supply of dealers being vastly higher than the current demand, most dealers are not full-time employees. They are extra board personnel and temp hires who take jobs where they can get them.

Locals and low-limit players are typically great tippers. They make sure they push you $1 or more after every single hand they win. Generally, bigger game players and tourists are terrible tippers. I know many a dealer who would rather be pitching cards in a four-table casino in the suburbs than in a high-stakes game on the Strip.

In the end, poker dealers are no different than servers, bartenders, valets and a whole litany of service industry jobs in Las Vegas. We do what we do because we like it and it affords us a living.

But the next time you hit that beautiful river card and take in a huge pot, take a beat and think about the hard-working person in the box making the game go smoothly.

To start, I must address the reasons for obscuring my identity. Matters such as the ones I’ll address in the coming paragraphs should be open to free and intelligent discussion within the community. Perhaps a person of stronger will would view the open airing of a difficult topic as so beneficial to all that he could ignore the personal discomforts. I think we all remember the second Star Trek movie, when Spock so logically stated that the needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the one.

Sadly, however, I’m not the man Spock was, even though he’s only half man. The fact is, I fear for my safety, and you’ll understand why shortly. I must ask any poker media that wish to interview me after reading this piece to respect my desire for anonymity. All video must be shot in backlit silhouette so that my features are obscured and my
nose doesn’t look too large. I will conduct audio interviews if I can be assured that a filter will be applied that will make my voice indistinguishable form Alec Baldwin’s.

There are only two possible explanations for an onslaught of events such as these. The first is that ugly outcomes are a near mathematical certainty in tournament poker. The other is that you are terribly unlucky. If you run bad, there must be someone who runs like God.

The Truth of the WSOP
I’ve spent the last five summers in Las Vegas working around the WSOP, and every year I hear the same desperation. About two and a half weeks into the events, most players are feeling worn down by the tournament poker. Draws fail to materialize, decks run colder than an Alberta February, and beats so bad they leave scars occur constantly.

There are only two possible explanations for an onslaught of events such as these. The first is that ugly outcomes are a near mathematical certainty in the construct of tournament poker. The notion is that simple statistics all but guarantee that over a stretch of hundreds of hands that something either inescapable or unfortunate will occur that will relieve you of your chips. This, of course, is the more common and obvious explanation.

The other less frequently discussed possibility is that you—I mean you, the guy reading this—are terribly unlucky. You’re fortune’s bitch. A palm reader might look at your hand and say, “You poor fucking bastard.” Tony Robbins would tell you to give up as there’s really no point in trying.

If this second possibility is the case, there would be an inevitable corollary. If you run bad more than you ought to, there must be someone who continually runs like a fucking God.

I’m here to tell you that I’m that guy. I am the luckbox. I continually run great. If I happen to miss a flop, I nail the turn. If the river ran any better for me, I’d be pulling Chinook salmon off the felt. I don’t enter a race I don’t win. In several east coast states they’re considering rebranding the term “flopped set“ to my surname.

I won’t go into the specifics of my win rate or my ROI. I’ll just say that the numbers are terrific. They’re more than enough to prove what you suspected all along—that you are one unlucky piece of shit who has been cursed by whatever cruel deity has seen to making your life at the table one extended session of pure fucking misery. Any reprieve that you glimpse is just a sapling of hope that will be burned before its first bud sprouts.

You were right: your life sucks. And it sucks because mine is so great.

So now you know. You can go back to whining in good conscience. Bore your friends and tablemates with bad beat stories. It’s okay, you know you’re in the right.

I’ve discussed my conclusions with some poker playing friends and they took issue with my logic. They point out that while my returns are enviable, I don’t play excessively high. Further, they say that I tend to play only when I’m prepared to enjoy the experience no matter the outcome. My wife notes that I have a challenging job that rewards my expertise, education, and experience. So I’m prepared to look at poker as a pastime that happens to bring in some extra cash. A “great hobby,” she calls it.

But I know better. I’m lucky and you’re the pathetic bastard who manages to claw his way out of bed in the morning despite knowing that you’re skill and savvy have no way of overcoming the shit storm that’s going to befall you.

I’ve only played a couple of events so far this WSOP, and I’ve bricked everything. But I really don’t care. I’ll get back to winning, I always do eventually.

There, I’ve said it. But going forward I must remain unknown. I don’t want to be harassed or jeered. I’m happy with my life the way it is. I’d like it to stay that way.

Jay Greenspan is an industry veteran and author of Hunting Fish: A Cross-Country Search for America’s Worst Poker Players (St. Martin’s Griffin, 2007).

Daniel Negreanu is the E.F. Hutton of poker. He relishes the role. He knows that if in the throes of passion he utters, “Do it. Do it. Do it just like that. Make sure there is a 150-300 level!” that — no matter whether he ends the night in warm, introspective afterglow –the tournament he plays the next day will have a 150-300 level. It’s the perk of being the most outspoken of the best poker players in the world. You’re allowed to open your mouth, makes billionaires dance, and change the world in which you live on a whim. It would be something you could respect about Kid Poker, if he only knew when to keep his mouth shut.

There was a time when world markets turned on whether Alan Greenspan had a good breakfast. The same is true of Negreanu. With a mere sneer, he can change the structure of a tournament. With a grumble in his tummy, he can get tofu served in the casino kitchen. With a wink and a smile, he can create a television show. His words—almost always—are game changers.

Make no mistake: most of the mainstream poker media exists because of and at the will of the online poker companies. If not for direct or indirect funding from the likes of Full Tilt and PokerStars, most poker magazines and websites you read regularly would go under in six months or less. It’s not a matter of news; it’s a matter of how they create revenue to stay afloat.

Ninety percent of time, the Negreanu-affected changes make the poker world better. There is no denying the man’s intelligence, skill, or innovative acumen. The problem is, Negreanu doesn’t respect his power. He wields it like a drunk with a gun. Most of the time he knows to keep it in his pants. Ten percent of the time, he waves it around the bar threatening to shoot whomever he’s imagined has upset his sense of order or eaten his veggie burger.

The problem with Negreanu being right most of the time is that people are afraid to tell him when he’s wrong. Or, perhaps, it’s that he’s grown so used to being right that he can’t ever imagine he might be at least a little incorrect. It’s hubris mixed with success that fuels his never-ending quest to make everything as he likes it.

And so it came that Kid Poker put a gun to the head of the poker media and pulled the trigger. It didn’t matter to him that he hadn’t thought the issue through. It didn’t matter to him that he was tarnishing his reputation with the people who worked very hard to keep him famous. It only mattered that his chip count was wrong and that made him angry, because he has fans that want to know. It is, as always, for the fans, isn’t it?

On his blog, Negreanu wrote, “Seriously if ALL [PokerNews] had were just chip counts with zero hand updates, but the chip counts were on point, it would be better than the current coverage by a mile.”

The business of reporting on poker isn’t rocket science. It’s half effort, half art, neither half of which is respected by most of the people who play the game or read about it. It’s a new profession built on respect for such greats as Andy Glazer and Nolan Dalla. It has its good writers, and it has it’s bad ones, but it’s a craft for which few people have shown a real talent, and those people are often rewarded with just enough work to put food on the table. This is both because so many people want to do the job, and because media providers know they can get away with paying as little as possible as a result. Like any venture, people produce poker reporting for profit, and if there is no profit, it’s unlikely to get done.

Make no mistake: most of the mainstream poker media exists because of and at the will of the online poker companies. If not for the direct or indirect funding of companies like Full Tilt and PokerStars, most of the poker magazines and websites you read would go under in six months or less. The people who believe they are reading objective reporting might be amused to learn that some magazines are completely (and silently) funded by single online poker companies. Other magazines sell cover stories as part of ad buys. It’s not a matter of news. It’s a matter of how the magazines can create “nontraditional” revenue to stay afloat.

PokerNews—the official provider of World Series of Poker reports—is no different. It exists at the will of online poker companies. A majority of the company’s income comes from online poker affiliate revenue. Its tournament reporting arm is a loss leader, with the emphasis on loss. But for a timely bailout by an online poker company, PokerNews’ live tournament reporting section would have been dissolved more than a year ago.

PokerNews has the exclusive contract to report on the WSOP. It takes great pains to guard that exclusivity. Media restrictions on non-PokerNews reporters are strict. Other companies are granted—in most cases—no more than three media credentials. Photography is closely monitored and non-PokerNews photographers have restricted access to the action. Writers who are not part of the PokerNews cabal are restricted from posting timely information. Live updates of the action are verboten. Why? Because it is possible that another company could come in and do the job better. To allow anyone to come in and report would threaten PokerNews’ reputation. It would prove beyond a doubt that the job could be done better. PokerNews’ ownership—like the first exclusive provider, CardPlayer magazine—does everything it can to make sure it has complete control over timely information. Why? Because PokerNews saw what happened to CardPlayer after its disastrous effort in 2006. It was replaced, and rightly so.

This is where Daniel Negreanu is right. PokerNews’ efforts in the early part of the 2010 WSOP were not what they should’ve been. This is, however, not the fault of the reporters and editors on the ground. They work long, tireless days and produce the best possible reports they can under the circumstances. If something is wrong or incomplete, it’s not because they are lazy or incompetent. It’s because PokerNews has chosen to benefit from its contract with the WSOP while spending as little money as possible to get the job done. What’s more, the WSOP is letting PokerNews get away with it.

The people in the field—the writers, field reporters, editors, et al—know how PokerNews should be staffed. To properly cover the WSOP requires a dedicated team of chip counters who never have to look at a card, a dedicated team of field reporters and writers who only have to count stacks as a function of reporting the hands, and a team of editors overlooking it all to make sure it’s comprehensive and correct. None of the above would be an innovation. It’s been done before. It simply requires the will to spend the money. PokerNews currently refuses to do that. It’s field reporters and bloggers are working so hard on half the job, they can’t fully do the other half. Why? It’s impossible.

To fully fund a respectable operation would force PokerNews to cut into its profit, or the WSOP to spend money on a company willing to put forth the requisite effort to cover the event as it should be covered. Instead, the whole of the coverage is forced on a team of competent reporters and writers that are so stretched and dealing with a poorly-funded operation that they can’t do their jobs as well as they could be done. For this, the grunts in the field at PokerNews have received a classic Negreanu public rubdown. It’s enough that most of the people who give their all to the job should want to walk away with their middle finger held high in the air.

They don’t, however, because they both need the job and they love the game. They stick around because they rightly believe they are the best for the job. Given the proper funding and a fair system, they could go it on their own and do the job better than they could under the PokerNews reign.

Is there a solution? Well, there are many. The WSOP could open the floor to any company that could do a better job or PokerNews could actually fund its operation as it should be funded. Will either happen? It’s unlikely, but it’s more likely if people like Negreanu actually cast the blame where it belongs.

See, that’s the thing.

Negreanu is right.

The reporting at PokerNewss should be a lot better, but it won’t be until the WSOP forces the ownership of PokerNews to honor its contract, and until PokerNews’ ownership realizes that its lack of proper funding is the root of its embarrassment. If Negreanu were to say this, it might lead to some important change. Instead, he suggests PokerNews simply report chip counts, a not-so-tacit suggestion that the reporters are incapable of doing their jobs.

Will Negreanu take up this cause? That remains to be seen. It may be he’s offering his opinion without realizing he could make a difference if only he focused on the right thing.

In the meantime, Daniel Negreanu owes the poker media an apology. PokerNews owes its readers an apology. The WSOP owes its fans an apology. The problem is not with the reporting. The problem is a symptom of a systemic failure fueled by greed and ignorance that won’t be solved until somebody important stands up and forces the change.

Mr. Negreanu, I kindly submit that you could make the difference.

Over the course of my campaign for governor, I’ve had a lot of people come up to me to ask me about gambling issues in Texas. In particular, I had a gentleman the other day approach me and ask me how I felt about the fact that you can’t even play Texas Hold ’Em—at least for money—in Texas.

I told him I thought it was sad that our state leaked millions upon millions of dollars to Louisiana that could be helping fund Texas public schools.

Yesterday afternoon, I rolled out a three-part plan that will both fund improvements to Texas public schools and allow Texans the opportunity to vote on whether or not they want casino gambling in Texas.

The core of that plan would allow Texas’s existing racetracks (pending voter approval, of course) to operate full casinos (not just VLTs) and allow for the opening of a limited number of destination style resort casinos.

Texans want better public schools. And, according to a poll taken earlier this year, Texans want to be able to play Texas Hold ‘Em (and other casino games) in Texas.

In short, it is time for Texas to decide if we’re going to hold ’em or fold ’em.

Our state’s current and most recent former governor repeatedly passed the buck on major school finance reform and educational improvements. Yes, they proposed some plans and new taxes, but nothing that generated any really significant new revenue to improve educations.

If voters allow casino gambling in Texas, it will be a source of new revenue to fund improvements to Texas public schools—more than $1.3 billion a year in new revenue, in fact.

Absent any similar new significant revenue stream, Texas public schools will continue down their current path, and we won’t see any major improvements to public education. It’s like folding and walking away from the table when you have a bad hand.

Texans want better public schools. And, according to a poll taken earlier this year, Texans want to be able to play Texas Hold ‘Em (and other casino games) in Texas.

It is a win-win situation. Our schools win. Our communities and cities win because it will be a boon to economic development. The agriculture industry—particularly horse breeders—win. The state wins because it is a new revenue stream for public schools without higher property taxes. Texans win because it creates more jobs and more economic opportunity for Texans.