It’s PLO week on Poker after Dark, and thus the first new televised poker I’ve been excited to watch (on first run) in forever. Though I’m sure someone had to play a 4-card hand on ESPN in 2004, I can’t remember any PLO on TV since learning the definition of a “wrap” … and certainly not since the Pokerati game began introducing low-stakes players in Vegas to PLO (with run-it-twice!) a year-an-a-half ago.

(L to R) Adams, Antonius, Ivey, Dwan, Hastings, Galfond

Hard to believe televising a short-handed cash game session of the second most popular poker game in the world — the one that has produced the biggest online pots in history — would prove “revolutionary” … but really, it is kinda historic; and that says something about the limits of creative innovation in the online poker infomercial biz.

But kudos to PAD for at least taking a peak outside the ’06-’09 box to embrace variance. Though I wouldn’t contend pot-limit Omaha and four-color decks are what will reinvigorate poker on TV … for a semi-regular PLO player who doesn’t necessarily dream of playing the game for $100k buy-ins but just wants to beat my friends once a week at 1/2, hearing about a different sector of hand possibilities almost feels fresh … and it’s always good-fun to see extra cards on the table:

Poker After Dark is trying its hand at pot-limit Omaha, according to Brian Hastings’s blog on CardRunners (via PokerJunkie). From the sound of it, imho, could be another great step in the evolution of poker on TV …

We’ve previously contended that just because mixed games don’t play well on TV, there should be an exception for PLO. It’s easy-enough for any Texas Hold’em player to follow … same winning hands (essentially) … with enough crazy beats, dramatic suck-and resuck, and occasional nut-folding to make things exciting … while opening a new realm of poker thinking that should keep viewers coming back, especially if they play the game, too.

Supposedly this rare televised high-stakes PLO cash game, played a couple days ago in Ivey’s Room @AriaPoker and airing some time next year, was 300/600 with a $100k minimum buy-in. Pretty sexy line-up, too:

While at least five of those names have inherent high-stakes appeal, and one of them is Durrrr, I particularly wanna tune in to see Farha. We always hear how Omaha is his game … but I dunno that I’ve ever seen him play PLO before with hole-card cams — and should be interesting to watch his old-school style match-up with the online generation in a game that isn’t Texas Hold’em.

Could be wrong, but If this episode plays well — which I think it will, relatively — don’t be surprised to see a little more PLO factor into other poker franchises’ TV decisions.

It seems like Beanie from Bluff (the website, not the magazine) isn’t the only one with data mining on his mind these days. Joining Paul in expressing their dismay over this increasingly common trend are the folks over at 2+2 who are starting an online petition to try and convince sites like Stars and Tilt to completely ban the use of TableRatings.

Which brings us to Brian Townsend, a Full Tilt Poker pro and popular CardRunners instructor who has recently learned something about bans and TableRatings. It seems that Townsend, Cole South, and Brian Hastings got together to brainstorm strategies for taking down Isilidur1 shortly before Hastings booked his incredible $4.2 million win against the Swedish phenom.

While their strategizing was in no way a violation of FTP’s Terms of Service, the fact that they poured over a Townsend-supplied database of hand histories in order to decipher Isildur’s playing patterns was — and, as a result, Townsend is now playing without his red status for 30 days. Our buddy Matt Parvis has the full story over at Poker News.

Yesterday, Short-Stacked Shamus took us to the quarterfinals of the 64-player Full Tilt Poker tournament.

Later in the evening, it was determined that the four players going to the semifinals would be:

David Singer v. Brian Hastings
Andy Bloch v. whitelime (Emil Patel)

When players returned to the action today, the matches were slow but solid. Patel took control of his match with Bloch and applied pressure until he took it down. Singer dominated Hastings throughout their match and finally claimed victory. That meant that the final round was:

David Singer v. whitelime (Emil Patel)

Both players started with 160K in chips and played 12-minute levels, beginning with a 75 ante and blinds at 300-600. (It was actually interesting to watch the virtual match with a little virtual audience in the background.) Singer jumped out to an early lead and never allowed Patel to gain any ground. In the end, Singer took it with pocket 8′s over Patel’s 10-3 off.

Final payouts:

1st – David Singer $560,000
2nd – Emil Patel $320,000
3rd – Brian Hastings $168,000
4th – Andy Bloch $168,000
5th – Patrik Antonius $96,000
6th – Dani Stern $96,000
7th – mischiefofmagic $96,000 (won a $535 satellite to enter)
8th – mastrblastr