At the time, many wondered if this marked the end of online poker, which had been booming at a rate that woulda had virtually the entire planet + Jupiter playing by now. Ironically, what was supposed to be a death knell for online poker would actually be what made several of my friends and colleagues (temporarily) rich … and the principals of Full Tilt and PokerStars and Ultimate Bet (momentarily, in the scheme of things) extremely powerful.

Let’s have a little flashback, shall we … to slightly more innocent-til-proven-guilty times … commemorating this uber-significant day in poker history:

Poker Faces in the Crowd
October 16, 2006

Online poker is kinda-sorta illegal now. Pokerati wanted to know America’s thoughts … so we asked the question, How has the new law affected you?

Jennifer Cortez
Account executive

“I think it’s just wonderful. My boyfriend played that PartyPoker like all the time. But now we will be able to see the latest Jennifer Aniston movie, and we can take more walks while holding hands. Do you know how many baby showers we’ve missed because Christopher was ‘near the bubble’?”

Ghassan Abdulhamid Bibi
Starbuck’s barista

“This is total bullshit! I have been playing AQpoker.com step tournaments for two years in an effort to qualify for the WSOP and help Al Qaeda make enough money to purchase nuclear weapons from North Korea. The plan to sneak them through America’s weak ports was almost ready to go, but now we have been foiled again. Damn you George Bush! Allah Akbar al-Poker!”

Maurice Nelson
Quadriplegic

“The new law is clearly discriminatory and violates my rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. It’s hard to play in a casino when you can’t use your arms.”

Mrs. Michalski
Occasional Pokerati reader

“Dan, I know you’re upset, hon, but try to see the bright side. I think this will be really good for you, because from what I’ve read on the internet, you almost always lose at poker. Will you be coming over for Thanksgiving?”

“Choad”
Official ferret of Kappa Alpha, University of Arkansas

“Uh, poker what? I have no idea. Why are you asking me? I am frickin’ ferret. Look, over there, socks!

Jeffrey Schmollack
Fake WSOP Commissioner

“Off the record? We’re talking off the record? OK, dude, let me tell you, this is so awesome. I mean AWEsome! We didn’t have a fucking clue how we were ever going to handle 12,000 [players at the next WSOP]. And let me tell you something else … those online sites … they made a lot of money. Like billions, man. Give us two years and you’ll see, with soft money greasing the right pockets and the Brits out of the equation, it can all belong to Harrah’s. Why do you think we want that WSOP.com website so bad?”

I was working for Party Gaming in 2006, as chief editor of PokerBlog.com … There, albeit briefly, sadly, I had the freedom to hire and deploy a team to write about whatever we wanted, wherever we wanted, and however we wanted … so long as the content was rich with searchable keywords about poker. Or at least that was the plan pre-UIGEA.

In my time with Party, only one post would get pulled from Pokerblog — my semi-satirical response to this brand new industry-altering US law (above). There would be no argument or debate — the order to remove supposedly came from the very top, Mitch Garber, Party’s relatively new CEO.

“Just put it on Pokerati if you think it’s that important,” my boss in London relented.

Which I did, eventually no longer scratching my head as to why that post may have been such a big deal.

@TexDolly
No main event for me.maybe the DOJ will stake me.
1:10 AM Jul 4th via Twitter for iPhone

Less than a half hour earlier Brunson tweeted:

@TexDolly
Busted… Total nightmare… Goodbye WSOP
12:42 AM Jul 4th via Twitter for iPhone

… which seems about as long as it might take to come up with such a jab at the DOJ.

UPDATE: He changed his mind.

Still looking to get confirmation on how many main events Brunson has missed before. Many seem to recall his sitting out for a few years in the ’80s — as do I — but have yet to find any definitive source on where he stands in the record books for total number of WSOP main events, consecutive or otherwise.

Brunson joins a growing list of prominent big-money pros who have publicly declared their intent to sit out the 2011 WSOP, along with big-money Full Tilters who have gone silent amid severe legal and financial difficulties and thus are expected to be no-shows.

Doyle Brunson
Phil Ivey
Tony G
Howard Lederer
Chris Ferguson

Am I missing anyone? I mean other than Russ Hamilton …

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!

It takes place in Colorado in 1880 … the gold rush is on and the town of Rincon is fast becoming known for its juicy games and associated vice. And as much as I was intrigued by the role of black people and Christianity post-Civil War (as portrayed in the late ’60s) … what really stood out was how the players shuffled their chips.

Anyhow, the music is kinda country meets the Doors, with gambler’s lyrics sung by an old-school Vegas crooner. And with last month’s news that production of Rounders 2 is underway … well, Five Card Stud, a song about the game that was the great Uncle to contemporary Texas Hold’em, reminded me how much poker stories have changed over the years, and how much they haven’t.

The Hall of Fame’s criteria are:

• Player must have played against known top competition
• Played for high stakes
• Played consistently well, gaining respect of peers
• Stood the test of time
• Contributed to the overall growth and success of the game (this normally applies to non-players, but I think players should help in this aspect as well)

Some additional criteria to consider include:

• Tournament Success
• Cash Game Success
• Depth of Poker Knowledge (NLHE specialist vs. mixed game master)
• And..finally…public perception (because this is really important these days)

But, of course, there is a little battle to settle. While Dan Harrington and Erik Seidel cleared the hurdle, Barry Greenstein and Scotty Nguyen are neck-and-neck, so before we can do anything we have to settle a simple question, who (in my mind) is worthy of a vote?

Scotty Nguyen vs. Barry Greenstein

I thought this would be a little easier than doing the rest of this article, because I just have to boil things down to the facts. While Scotty Nguyen has a more impressive tournament record and holds some pretty prestigious accolades, he is only a tournament player. Barry Greenstein plays both cash and tournaments, but he hasn’t even cashed in the Main Event yet. I won’t count media perception, because again I maintain Scotty’s actions in the 2008 HORSE event is not enough for me to punish him for this. In fact, his interaction with his fans on twitter (or at least someone that works for Scotty is) eclipses that of almost any pro out there. Barry does have a feather in his cap though, being the Robin Hood of Poker and donating vast sums of money to charity. So this boils down to does the ability to play both cash and tournaments beat the ability to win big tournaments consistently?

In the end, I’ve surprised even myself, and I’m giving the edge and the tiebreaker to Scotty Nguyen for his impressive tournament record beating Greenstein’s cash chops. It really just comes down to feel and a coin flip, and I would want to take both, but if I have to choose one I’ve gotta take Scotty, he’s just too damn entertaining.

Edge: Nguyen

So there you have it, Scotty, Dan, and Erik would be the people I would vote for based on this year’s ballot. Now we’ll go through each part of the criteria to determine who has an edge, then based on the edges people have, assign a number of votes. I won’t go into whether I value one category higher than another, but hopefully my final rankings won’t be too “WTF?!”

Played Against Known Top Competition, Played for High Stakes, Stood the Test of Time, and Played Consistently Well

I lumped these together because honestly, there really isn’t a distinction between the three. They all have done these aspects equally well in their own ways.

Edge: Draw

Contributed to the Growth of the Game

• Seidel was on the design team for Full Tilt Poker, and as such helped contribute to the growth of online poker with the US’s #2 trafficked cardroom.
• Harrington has written many books about tournament and cash poker, elevating the knowledge base of thousands of poker players since he has written the book.
• Nguyen’s entertaining personality helps TV poker continue to be a draw for the casual fan.

Edge: Harrington (and a big one at that)

Tournament Success

• Harrington has reached the final table of the main event 4 times, winning it once. He also has another bracelet and a WPT title.
• Nguyen has 5 bracelets, one in the 1999 WSOP ME and another in the 2008 $50k HORSE. Also has a WPT title.
• Seidel has 8 WSOP bracelets and 1 WPT title.

Edge: Nguyen (for his big wins) and Seidel (for sheer volume)

Cash Game Success

None of the players are big on their cash game play, only Dan Harrington has much evidence of this given his books on the subject. Seidel played in the Mayfair Club, but that was over 20 years ago.

Edge: None, with a slight tilt to Harrington for at least having evidence of still being a cash game player.

Depth of Poker Knowledge

• Based on accomplishments alone, Harrington is strictly a NLHE specialist, while he may dabble in other games, he doesn’t have much hardware to show for it.
• Seidel has bracelets in 2-7, Omaha, and Hold’em
• Nguyen has bracelets in NLHE, HORSE, and Omaha

Edge: Nguyen

Public (read: My) Perception of the Player

• Scotty’s double edged sword is that he has a lively personality, but it can get him in trouble.
• Erik is definitely a poker player, he was against hole card cams and doesn’t have a personality that people can latch onto.
• Dan is a teacher, and is given mostly positive coverage. While he also doesn’t have as much of a personality as Scotty, he’s definitely known for his green Red Sox cap and his demeanor at the table.

Edge: Harrington

Final Verdict

I have ten votes to give. I tend to weight contributions and public perception slightly higher than raw accomplishments, because poker is still growing and we need people to help grow the sport. Those people that have done so should be given their just rewards. Likewise, I then look at tournament accolades next, followed by how deep a player’s knowledge of the game is.

And the results are:

• Dan Harrington: 5 (for his contributions to the game, his public perception, and to a lesser extent his tournament play)
• Scotty Nguyen: 3 (for his tournament accomplishments and depth of knowledge)
• Erik Seidel: 2 (for his tournament accomplishments alone)

I will confess, when I started this, I had a heavy bias toward Dan Harrington and Erik Seidel. But over the course of this process, Scotty came in as a dark horse and ended up with more votes than Seidel at the end of the day. I feel confident in this vote, and while I don’t have a say this year, I hope that this analysis helps others draw their own conclusions. And they’ll have to do it fast, voting ends on Friday.

• Dan Harrington: 9
• Barry Greenstein: 7
• Phil Ivey: 6

But with 4 more people to go, none of these players are safe (well, three people need to get 10s in order to knock our Harrington, but you get the idea.) The last four are Tom McEvoy, Daniel Negreanu, Scotty Nguyen, and Erik Siedel.

Tom McEvoy

Age: 65
Time Played: 30+ years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: WSOP tournaments every year
Accolades:

• 1983 WSOP Main Event Champion
• 4 WSOP Bracelets
• 38 WSOP Cashes
• Tournament winnings: $2,931,000
• Team Pokerstars Pro

Off the Felt:

• Prolific writer, writing The Championship Series of poker books
• (EDIT) Largely responsible for smoke-free poker rooms

Thoughts: Tom McEvoy has an incredibly long tournament resume that stretches back over 25 years; it goes all the way back to his win in the main event in 1983. He was the first player ever to win a WSOP ME after satelliting in, and he has put up an impressive 4 bracelets wins. However, the accolades kind of stop there. He hasn’t won a bracelet since 1992 (and no, the Champions Invitational does not count), has barely made any noise at all in the last few years, and his tournament winnings seems low for someone that has been around for someone last long as Tom, even if you account for inflation. His books do give him a similar, albeit smaller, boost to what Dan Harrington got for his publications. I personally haven’t read any of them, but its on my to-do list. That said, the fact that they are regulated to my “to-do” list as opposed to, say, the “must read” list, may suggest a bit of a decline in how those books are perceived.

Final Points: 5

Daniel Negreanu

Age: 36
Time Played: 15+ years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Consistently high buy-in tournaments and the largest cash games in Vegas
Accolades:

• 4 WSOP Bracelets
• 47 WSOP Cashes
• 2 WPT Titles
• Tournament winnings:$12,751,000
• Team Pokerstars Pro

Off the Felt:

• Main contributor to “Power Hold’em Strategy”
• Main Pro behind PokerVT
• Contributed to Super System II in the 2-7 Triple Draw chapter
• On pretty much every poker TV show under the sun…unless he cant go because of sponsorship issues.

Thoughts: Initially, I just thought writing one simple sentence and leaving it at that: If I don’t think Phil Ivey deserves getting in this year, then Daniel Negreanu definitely will not. And while this sums up my position on Daniel pretty exactly, it does belittle his accomplishments. $12.75 million dollars is enough money to live off of forever, and that doesn’t even include the money he has won at the cash tables (well, the non-High Stakes Poker cash tables anyway). His tournament resume shows there is a reason he is so high on the all-time money list, but there is another reason Daniel gets so much attention; he is a media whore, in probably the best way you could use that phrase. He is on pretty much any show Pokerstars can get their hands on, and even shows where his sponsor doesn’t have a stake. Daniel also has been writing about poker (in books and through his blog) and coaching (through PokerVT) for years. You pretty much can’t get through a year of following poker without seeing something about Daniel at least once a week. Of course, he also speaks his mind, which got him in trouble earlier this year and in times past, so while we always enjoy honesty when we can get it, it does make us cringe when something non-PC gets said. Its the price of marketing yourself as a high profile poker superstar, but its a job that, for the most part, Daniel has done very well in. At the end of the day, if I am applying a somewhat arbitrary age requirement on Phil, it also applies to Daniel, and if I’m more likely to vote for Ivey than Negreanu, then Negreanu is going to be a little lower on the totem pole, at least this year.

Final Points: 5

Scotty Nguyen

Age: 47
Time Played: 25+ years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Consistently high buy-in tournaments around the world
Accolades:

• 1998 WSOP Main Event Champion
• 2008 Chip Reese Trophy Winner ($50k HORSE)
• 5 WSOP Bracelets
• 37 WSOP Cashes
• 1 WPT Title
• Tournament winnings:$11,341,000

Off the Felt:

• Showed us how alcohol and poker sometimes don’t mix.

Thoughts: I will confess, I have not been in the business long enough to understand fully how Scotty rubs some members of the media the wrong way. Yes, he was an absolute jerk in the 2008 HORSE, but he has apologized for that profusely and at the very least he has moved on. Maybe its the fact he adds “baby” to the end of every sentence, which makes dictating and quoting him an absolute nightmare (or really easy). Whatever it is, he is the only player to have both a Main Event win and a $50K HORSE win, and his experience across all the games is something that should be able to put people past one bad final table. Not only that, but Scotty is 5th on the All-time Money List, has 5 bracelets, a WPT title, and has final tabled that series a whopping 9 times. He does get dinged for being purely a tournament player, but his accomplishments certainly warrant a serious look at being inducted this year, the next year, and beyond.

Final Points: 7

Erik Seidel

Age: 50
Time Played: 25+ years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Consistent high buy-in tournaments around the world
Accolades:

• 8 WSOP Bracelets
• 60 WSOP Cashes
• 1 WPT Title
• Tournament winnings:$10,350,000
• Member of Team Full Tilt

Off the Felt:

• Part of the design team for Full Tilt Poker

Thoughts: Now…I get some of the negative things about Erik Seidel. In an era of colorful personalities, Erik is quiet, reserved, and very much just a poker player. However, you can say the exact same thing about Phil Ivey, or at the very least be in the same kind of ballpark. Phil is way up there on everyone’s list “in spite of that”, so I don’t see why Erik would get the shakedown for a similar personality. Also, Erik was against hole card cams because it would let people know what player’s strategies are when they play poker, even weighted against its necessity in television poker coverage. We all know who won that battle as well as its results, both on TV’s end and on Seidel’s. Despite those pesky holecard cams, he has won 3 bracelets from 2003 onward, and recently was the runner-up to Annie Duke in the 2010 NBC National Heads-Up championship. Like Scotty, he is a tournament specialist, but 8 bracelets, a WPT title, and over $10 million in career winnings certainly are the right kind of stats to have if you want to get in the hall purely based on your tournament chops.

Final Points: 8

So due to excellent planning, there are 4 people in the top 3 because there is a tie…Harrington, Siedel, Greenstein and Nguyen. In the final part of the series, I’ll see who to cut between Greenstein and Nguyen, and then how many votes the three finalists will get for this year’s ballot.

• Chris Ferguson: 4
• Barry Greenstein: 7
• Jennifer Harman-Traniello: 2

This time around we look at Dan Harrington, Phil Ivey, and Linda Johnson, and you can see how they stack up after the jump.

Dan Harrington

Age: 64
Time Played: 25 years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Known for his tournament play, although known to play cash games as well, just not the highest stakes
Accolades:

• 1995 WSOP Main Event champion
• 2 WSOP Bracelets
• 1 WPT Title
• 4 WSOP Main Event Final Tables
• Tournament winnings: $6,608,000

Off the Felt:

• Writer of the prolific “Harrington on Hold’em” series of books, initially covering just tournament play but then expanding to talk about cash games and online play in later books.

Thoughts: For someone that doesn’t appear on paper to have that many accomplishments, Dan Harrington sure knows how to show up the competition. Despite only holding 2 WSOP bracelets, he has made the final table of the $10k Main Event a whopping 4 times, accounting for most of the money he has made in the WSOP. This consistent play to the top, that culminated in a 1995 win and a strong run post-boom, gives Dan’s resume a big boost. But the biggest boost he could get is from his extremely popular “Harrington on Hold’em” series. Even players today say that they use Harrington’s models and playstyle as a building block for how they will construct their own strategies, which isn’t bad considering the tight-aggressive style is sometimes scoffed at by the internet crowd. The fact that he hasn’t cashed for much doesn’t seem to hold back the fact he has won over $6 million on the tournament circuit either. The only thing I can think of that is wrong with Dan’s resume is that he hasn’t been very active the past few years, and in fact, according to Hendon Mob, hasn’t cashed at all in 2010. While that may hurt him a little bit, its hard to think “Action Dan” isn’t a very strong candidate amongst this year’s crowd.

Final Points: 9

Phil Ivey

Age: 34
Time Played: Around 15 years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Consistent presence in the highest tournaments and cash games in the world
Accolades:

• 8 WSOP Bracelets
• 40 WSOP Cashes
• 1 WPT Title
• Tournament winnings: $13,545,000
• Untold millions in cash game winnings
• Member of Team Full Tilt

Off the Felt:

• Aside from being a poker god amongst mortals, nothing really.

Thoughts: On paper, Phil Ivey is just blowing everyone away. I mean, really, what else can I say about him. He wins or gets close to winning in everything he plays, has won tens of millions of dollars in cash games, and even if he lost a lot of that at the craps tables his fat distribution sponsorship checks from Full Tilt probably aren’t hurting either. There is just one issue that is going to have people wondering WTF Pokerati was thinking when they had me start contributing; he’s just too young. As I said in the first entry, I believe in the Chip Reese Rule, which states players should only be considered for the Hall of Fame if they are over 40 years old and have had more than 10 years of being a professional poker player. Ivey is going to get in, I don’t doubt that, and nothing is going to stop me from giving him high marks for his amazing accomplishments at the very young age of 34. But has he really “stood the test of time”? Yes, it would be the most ridiculous case of runbad ever if we see Ivey playing 1/2 at the MGM in 10 years time, but he just hasn’t been around this Earth long enough for me to feel he worthy of getting in this year. Ivey’s entry is all but assured, but when you’ve got some people forgetting there was poker before Ivey already, best to get some of the more old-school folks in while their long list of accomplishments are still in some folks’ minds.

Final Points: 6

Linda Johnson

Age: 56
Time Played: Over 20 years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: High level tournaments, though most play these days is online
Accolades:

• 1 WSOP Bracelet
• 7 WSOP cashes
• Tournament winnings: $300,000

Off the Felt:

• Extensive work for the WPT during the first few seasons
• On the Board of Directors of the TDA (Tournament Directors Association)
• Publisher for Cardplayer until she sold to Barry Shulman in 1998

Thoughts: This is our “non-player” nominee of the year, for sure. Yes, Linda has won a bracelet, and its a non-Ladies event bracelet (thank God because I don’t want to bring up that argument again), but her accomplishments are better seen off the felt. She helped get the WPT off the ground, which while I’m on record as saying it was on death’s door all of six months ago, is surging now with the lower buy-ins and was certainly one of the reasons poker is as big as it is today. Her work on the Tournament Directors Association helped smooth things out between TDs, and while we dont have just one unified payout/blind structure at the very least things are better off now then they could have been if no one talked to each other. Finally, she owned Cardplayer Magazine before it was cool and evil. Way before it was cool and evil. Her media and behind-the-scenes accomplishments are many, but the issue is that they are all behind-the-scenes. Mike Sexton was inducted last year because he has been the face of the WPT since the beginning, and people recognized him for that work. And I will have to confess something; I barely knew who she was until I did some research. You can bet that if my “generation” is coming up the ranks of the media, her chances are fading fast (believe me, we don’t normally do any research). This year’s group is way too strong to get a shot this time around, and while her contributions are great, I just can’t reconcile with the fact that she’s probably in the second half of the top 10 list at the end of the day. I do hope she gets in, but its not gonna go anywhere until some of the big players get filtered out.

Final Points: 4

Next time we round out the list with Tom McEvoy, Daniel Negreanu, Scotty Nguyen, and Erik Seidel. And the fourth and final piece will take the top 3 players and see how many votes I would give to each (out of 10 total) if I had a vote in the process.

• Age (because I am a proponent of the Chip Resse Rule)
• Time active in poker as a professional
• Recognized Tournament/Cash Stakes played at both peak of performance and now
• Tournament Accolades (WSOP/WPT/EPT Titles/Cashes, relevant important other tournament wins)
• Contributions off the felt

At the end of each candidate I will add my own personal thoughts as well as how many points I would give a particular person (out of 10) if I felt like I just had to vote for the candidate on the ballot. Just for reference, I think I need to at least explain the “final score” a little bit. If a 1 is “Not Deserving” and a 10 is “Should have already been inducted”, and the other numbers are varying degrees between the two extremes. A 5 would be that they are deserving of entry in the hall, but not necessarily this year. So you can do the math to figure out where things far. At the end of this series, I will take the three highest point totals and use that to determine who I would vote for on my ballot for this year’s HoF class. I may not have a vote, but I might be able to help persuade others that may.

Because of the obvious length this would inevitably be if I did all 10 players in one go; I’ll be going in alphabetical order in a four part series. The first three, which you can see by clicking below, are Chris Ferguson, Barry Greenstein, and Jennifer Harman(-Traniello).

Chris Ferguson

Age: 47
Time Played: Over 20 years, as a professional for 11
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Consistently high buy-in WSOP tournaments, not a heavy cash game player
Accolades:

• 5 WSOP Bracelets
• 63 WSOP Cashes
• 2008 NBC Heads-up Champion
• Tournament winnings: $8,056,000
• Member of Team Full Tilt

Off the Felt:

• Helped launch Full Tilt Poker and was a developer of its software

Thoughts: Chris has only been in professional poker for 11 years, which puts him in the same category as other, younger players in Phil Ivey and Daniel Negreanu. Still, he has amassed an impressive resume in a short amount of time, with 5 bracelets and the third most cashes in WSOP history. His tournament skills alone should be enough to get him in the hall. However, his cash game prowess is lacking, and is not found very much at the biggest games in Vegas or online, so that has to be a point against him. Also, while he has a lot of bracelets, they were all pre-Moneymaker boom, so it remains to be seen just how well Chris can compete in the new internet age.

Final Points: 4

Barry Greenstein

Age: 55
Time Played: Professionally for over 20 years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Consistently high buy-in WSOP tournaments, frequent member of the biggest cash games in Las Vegas
Accolades:

• 3 WSOP Bracelets
• 46 WSOP cashes
• 2 WPT Titles
• Tournament winnings: $7,144,000
• Member of Team Pokerstars Pro

Off the Felt:

• Wrote Ace on the River, a highly influential poker book.
• Dubbed “The Robin Hood of Poker”, has notably pledged tournament winnings to charities in the past
• Co-founded Pokerroad Radio, and continues to produce content and promote the site.

Thoughts: Barry is a staple in “The Big Game” and he has done exceptionally well in tournaments as well. His tournament stats actually show that he was not a big tournament player until after the Moneymaker Boom, and as a matter of fact all his WPT and WSOP titles come after 2003. His continued success in the game over a long period of time, as well as starting in a time when being a professional poker player was not exactly a well-thought-of profession, certainly gives him longevity in the sport. The only blemishes are that he “only” has 3 bracelets despite his long career, and that he actually hasn’t cashed in the main event (at least according to Hendon Mob). Still, he certainly has only played against the best for years, and is still here, so Barry must be doing something right.

Final Points: 7

Jennifer Harman-Traniello

Age: 45
Time Played: Professionally for over 15 years
Tournament/Cash Stakes: Consistently high buy-in WSOP tournaments, frequent member of the biggest cash games in Las Vegas
Accolades:

• 2 WSOP Bracelets
• 24 WSOP cashes
• Tournament winnings: $2,609,000
• Member of Team Full Tilt

Off the Felt:

• Contributed to Super System II’s chapter on Limit Hold’em

Thoughts: Now, I don’t really understand the bile for Jen Harman. I’ve seen a lot of “NEVER HAPPENING” and lumping together her with Tom McEvoy in the category of “useless” (more on that when I get to him in part 3). And a lot of this is unwarranted. Yes, she gets the bump for being a female in some people’s eyes, but lets be fair, she was playing poker long before the boom, and is just happy to be playing the game, gender didn’t really play a role here. So, while she’s not the first, but she is one of the best and has been for a while. That said, you can tell right off the bat that her resume languishes behind the previous two players. Only two bracelets (both before 2003), and a significantly lower number of cashes and winnings than either Chris or Barry. So even if I could give her credit for helping pioneer women in poker (something, again, I recognize she would not be the first in), I can’t really justify giving a higher score to her than the other two. She is still here and still playing, but we can’t “keep score” as easily in cash games as we can with tournaments. She might get to the hall eventually (and probably should), but its not happening with this list of candidates to go up against. (Note: I did feel like I had more to say about Jennifer Harman because she has been getting quite a bit of negative press regarding her nomination. I wrote this before reading Gary Wise’s article on the subject, and admittedly I think his thoughts mirror my own.)

Final Points: 2

So that will do it for the first three candidates. Be sure to discuss these and point out anything that I might have missed, it may influence the final tally, and I’d note who or what swayed me one way or another if it came to that. Just take note that my evaluations do not necessarily represent Pokerati’s decision toward the WSOP Hall of Fame, I am just providing an additional perspective.

Sunday: Dan Harrington, Phil Ivey, and Linda Johnson.

Harrington – 81
Seidel – 56
Ivey – 54
Johnson – 33
Greenstein – 30
McEvoy – 20
Nguyen – 15
Negreanu – 9
Ferguson – 12
Harman – 0

Click here to cast your mock ballot if you haven’t already.
Note: We’ve added a spot for write-ins and for you to leave your Twitter ID!

Of the 33 ballots tabulated, two had to be thrown out, which should be a bummer for Scotty Nguyen, since he had the most among the illegitimate points, and I don’t mean that in any sorta racist way.

You know, when Scotty does get in, you can imagine much will be made of his whole “Baby” shtick. That right there tells me something, as it would be much more “adorable” coming from a withering inductee in his 70s than an active player apparently getting paid in product for his sponsorship deal with Jheri curl.

With age always relevant in the Hall of Fame selection process, naturally, @BJNemeth and I couldn’t resist a Socratic dialogue competitively pissing in the wind about the meaning of the emphasized phrase this year:

DM: here is the age issue in a “sport” where you don’t retire:

if moneymaker NEVER did anything again he still deserves to be in eventually before he dies.
if durrrr happened to win a bracelet or two and die an untimely death before age 30, he probably deserves in too … eventually

BJ: To me, this year means things like Phil Ivey & Daniel Negreanu not being “old enough” to get in. I still think they need to codify the Chip Reese Rule into the rules. Voters obviously take age into account already, or else Ivey would have made it last year.

If not for age, Brunson would pick Ivey over Seidel, and even Change100′s PokerNews editorial would seem absurd for suggesting Linda Johnson over Phil Ivey.

Formalize the Chip Reese Rule (players must be 40 years old, with at least a 10-year poker career to be eligible), and these awkward, unwritten problems go away.

DM: so should people below 40 get in only in the result of an untimely death? maybe … but i totally disagree with your 10-year-rule, on the moneymaker clause above.

BJ: I was going for brevity. If a player dies before they reach 40, they become eligible on what would be their 40th birthday. Also, they wouldn’t be eligible until 10 years after their poker career began. (To avoid Durrrr-like issues w/ 40-year-old rookies.)

DM: BJ, you are starting to get absurd.

BJ: I think anyone who suggests that Chris Moneymaker belongs in the Hall of Fame (in anything other than an honorary capacity) is the absurd one.

DM: sigh … but awesome. Moneymaker = Edmund Hoyle.

BJ: I will actively campaign against Moneymaker in the Hall of Fame. Absolute nonsense.

DM: I agree.

Again, cast your mock ballot here. No matter how these results compare to the real ones, the plan here at Pokerati is to use the data as irrefutable proof that “our people” are smarter than everyone else.

The best multitable tournaments, player loyalty rewards, stats, and seeing your own picture at the table were the vision unleashed on the world on September 11th. Click to look back at the site as it was then.

It was just for play money at first, but the timing would prove fortuitous. People seemed to enjoy the software and were telling their friends … as online poker seemed to provide a much-needed escape from the ever-more-difficult to swallow news of the day.

Less than a month later, America would launch made-for-TV strikes against Al Qaeda training camps and Taliban strongholds in Afghanistan. International travel had ground to a virtual halt, and even the mail came with threats of Anthrax. At a time when Americans weren’t sure who was their friend or enemy, there was a certain peace in being able to sit down at a table with people from countries all across the world and play a game. The “PokerStars Internet Poker Room” would throw a big $5,000 freeroll that drew 836 players — making it the biggest online poker tournament in history (won by a player with the screen name “Kyle”.)

PokerStars would begin offering real-money play in December … with players able to transfer funds via Paypal, Firepay, Mastercard, and Visa … and a few months after that, in 2002, would start something called WCOOP, the World Championship of Online Poker.

Around the time of the second WCOOP, the Pentagon began proudly championing its “Iraq’s Most Wanted” deck of cards, which had the TV news regularly discussing why kings and queens were better than 5s, for example, and perhaps subconsciously reminding people they could be playing online poker. Sure enough, with war in Iraq now raging, the players came in droves, shattering records from the previous year.

It seemed without a doubt now that PokerStars had a real moneymaker on its hands.

Though I hardly recall why specifically, something about this visitor seemed peculiar enough for me to wanna preserve the moment. ith the benefit of hindsight, I’m sure I was just kidding.

More details on other payouts as they become available.

History of the World (Series of Poker)

Yep, it’s now time for the WSOP main event numbers game … if entry numbers drop significantly, my ghad what a disaster … whoa is poker! A small drop, as we saw last year, no worries, Team WSOP can spin it accordingly … If they grow slightly, cool, we are right on track since the UIGEA … see, all is fine in the poker world. If they grow TREMENDOUSLY and come anywhere near Jamie Gold-year numbers, holy fugk, the entire world is a better place, starvation has been eliminated, and Osama bin Laden has been captured!

I’m going with “slight increase” … but wouldn’t be surprised to see “slight decrease” or even “slightly bigger than expected increase”. The WSOP’s official fan page on Facebook ran a poll — How many people will you have to beat to win the 2010 WSOP Main Event? — and here were the results:

under 5,000 – 5%
5,000-6,000 – 5%
6,001-7,000 – 25%
7,001-8,000 – 29%
over 8,000 – 36%

Guaranteed: unless we cross the 8k barrier, a super-majority will be wrong.

Fact: They didn’t have these kinda off-base poll results back in the days of Friendster.

From Moss to Moneymaker:
The Early Decades

The poker world, of course, is going on five decades looking at WSOP main event entries as the biggest, most significant barometer on the health of the overall poker economy. And though I personally think these numbers can be a tad misleading, we know the WSOP is committed to not letting anyone get shut out this year, and has more table-space than ever before to accommodate the main-event masses.

However, about a week-and-a-half ago, registrations were supposedly at 1,700 or so. (1D had about 900, 1C 400, and 1A was the lowest.) Team Pokerati representative The Big Randy went to buy-in and wanted to register for Day 1D. But Day 1D was temporarily closed … part of the plan to space people out. He could accept Day 1C if he had to, but didn’t want to lock himself down for that since he knew Day 1D would open again. The messed up thing — they wouldn’t take his money!

The Varkonyizoic Period:
Early 21st Century Poker (aka the Modern Era)

There apparently was no mechanism set up for the Rio to “hold” his cash on some sort of provisional registration. I’m no bona-fide expert, but I gotta think that’s Casino 101: Don’t let customers take money off the table, especially when they really don’t want to. And if there was some reason they couldn’t treat the different Day 1s like an airline standby list, or make it like college registration … hopefully, for the sake of the all-important number we’ll be counting over the next four days, not too many people were sent home with an extra $10k for them to re-think about spending “investing”.

Last I heard was that Days 1C and 1D were temporarily closed yesterday morning.

Below is the complete historical list of main event entry numbers, so you can see what we’re competing against this year, numerically, along with additional graphs broken down a bit so you can get a better grasp of exponential growth over time: (Click to enlarge.)

1970 – 38

1971 – 6
1972 – 8
1973 – 13
1974 – 16
1975 – 21
1976 – 22
1977 – 34
1978 – 42
1979 – 54
1980 – 73

1981 – 75
1982 – 104
1983 – 108
1984 – 132
1985 – 140
1986 – 141
1987 – 152
1988 – 167
1989 – 178
1990 – 194

1991 – 215
1992 – 201
1993 – 220
1994 – 268
1995 – 273
1996 – 295
1997 – 312
1998 – 350
1999 – 393
2000 – 512

2001 – 613
2002 – 631
2003 – 839
2004 – 2,576

• 1A – ????
• 1B – ????

2005 – 5,619

• 1A – 1,885
• 1B – 1,857
• 1C – 1,877

2006 – 8,773

• 1A – 2,138
• 1B – 2,182
• 1C – 2,160
• 1D – 2,154*

2007 – 6,358

• 1A – 1,287
• 1B – 1,545
• 1C – 1,743
• 1D – 1,783

2008 – 6,844

• 1A – 1,297
• 1B – 1,158
• 1C – 1,928
• 1D – 2,461

2009 – 6,494

• 1A – 1,116
• 1B – 873
• 1C – 1,697
• 1D – 2,808

2010 – ????

* I know this number is off by one. Any corrections greatly appreciated. Likewise good stuff if anyone can fill in the question marks for Day 1s in 2004.

http://www.funtrivia.com/en/subtopics/WSOP—Legends-Of-The-Main-Event-241979.html

Who knew?!

In it, he directly challenges Michael Craig and Jim McManus for their takes on legendary gambler Nick the Greek Dandolos, and much of the Chicago-Tex-Vegas history between him, Johnny Moss, and Benny Binion.

I have no idea who’s right … it’s all just old-school mob-time poker to me. My take on Johnny is that he’s a solid writer with proper respect for good storytelling, the game of poker, and historical narrative. He also can end up sometimes way off in left field, like any good Texas senior should.

I actually re-read the story upon noticing the publish date of April 1. But then, after re-re-reading, I found myself second-guessing my second-guessing, which i guess is the whole point of the piece.

I remember hearing about this “new site” from Clonie way back before they even existed (and the UIGEA was about as unimaginable as Barack Obama). Was looking to see if I happened to write anything that woulda implied a belief in ownership even before Pokerati’s traffic was borne from Google searches for “Clonie Gowan naked”.

I did not find anything resembling contractual evidence, but I did come across this site’s first-ever post … which seems a bit ironic in hindsight. For those wanting to join me in this self-indulgent quest for perspective:

APRIL 21, 2004
ON TILT?
It seems like everyone and their grandmother is opening up an online poker room these days. And why not? Each imaginary table that pops open in the cyberether forms a little vortex of constant pecuniary intake (no matter what’s happening in the game itself). But is the market at a saturation point?

Probably so, but that didn’t stop Full Tilt Poker from going online this week. Despite the competition, I suspect this site — a venture put together by a bunch of top pros (Phil Ivey, Chris Ferguson, Howard Lederer, Phil Gordon, et al.) — will fare well. Haven’t played it yet, but at first glance they’ve upped the graphical interface significantly. And the ability to give your avatar facial expressions … very cool. Could change the online game when you think about it.

Posted by Dan Michalski on April 21, 2004 09:20 AM

Click the links, which are archived.org … bias or not, honestly surprising that the judge wouldn’t give these sorts of old records a look, let alone her attorneys a chance to depose the other defendants about them.

LOL: Is the market at a saturation point?

ALT HED: Kicking myself for not using an affiliate code

“We had 115 different countries have players represented this year,” said Seth Palansky, a World Series spokesman. “It’s just an astonishing amount — more than the Olympics.”

To be fair, that’s only more than the Winter Olympics. Poker still has a bit more work to catch the Summer games.

Ha ha. Burn on Palansky.

The story continues:

Not everyone is happy with the poker boom. Gambling critics like the Florida Family Policy Council say the game’s greater social acceptance is largely a result of aggressive PR efforts.

“It’s being promoted as something that’s sexy and adventurous and cool,” said council President John Stemberger. “All the big money is on the side of promoting it, not on the side of educating people as to why it’s not a smart thing.”

True enough, Mr. Stemberger, but the same thing could be said about religion, right? You think our activity can be harmful — and indeed it can — and I think your activity can be harmful … and indeed it can. But that’s where living in the wonderful US of A comes into play … As an American (and Floridians are Americans, even the ones who are Cuban) I have the personal freedom to pursue my happiness, just as you do … even though I can show you example after example of people pursuing the activities Big God money is pushing doing tremendous harm … usually with a lot more blood and death, in fact.

Trust me, when it comes to potentially addictive products, poker is much closer to Starbuck’s than Marlboro … even though financial advisors have shown time and time again how quitting a $5 a day Starbuck’s habit can equal millions of extra retirement dollars in the course of life.

Meanwhile, here’s another Herald story about Florida’s longtime wagering culture as the state considers it’s biggest expansion of gambling in history.

Super-young but true online pro vs. the “Ultimate Everyman” … you know, if everyman happened to cut trees for a living.

As you know by now, I’m probably as much a Cada fan as I am an Aston Villan (I’ve got Fake$100 invested in his winning) … but the hubbub going on right now reminds me a bit of funny-in-retrospect conversation as WSOP things got down to heads-up in 2003 …

From my first poker magazine piece in the first issue of (the recently resurrected) ALL IN:

On the last day of the 2003 WSOP main event, a handful of eliminated pros gathered around the final table to watch the action. Moneymaker — the Tennessee accountant who had never before played a live tournament — had amassed a sizable chip lead when Mike Matusow turned to fellow professional Eric Siedel and said, “I can’t believe another donkey is going to win the World Series of Poker.”

“You better hope he wins,” Seidel responded. “If Moneymaker can pull this off, it’s going to be worth at least $5 million to you and me over the next two years.”

“Are you crazy?” Matusow said, dismissively.

The only difference this go-round, of course, is that the world has already been introduced to online poker, and the Sammy Farha pro character is being played by a 21-year-old who stands to be the youngest WSOP main event champ in history (for the second year in a row).

That’s what we wanna know … after Saturday/Sunday’s marathon 9->2 session … how long do you think the heads-up battle between Darvin Moon and Joe Cada will go?

They’re currently in Level 39, with blinds at 500k/1000k + 150k.

Moon has almost the same number of chips he started with, 58,850,000, while Cada, who started with just 13,215,000, now has all the rest — 135,950,000.

What they’re fighting for, essentially: $3.36 million in cash, and then everything else that goes with being WSOP champ.

NOTE: In our previous unscientific poll, Moon got the second-most votes … Cada fourth-most.

The record for WSOP heads-up battles is 7 hours 10 minutes, set by Chip Reese vs. Andy Bloch in 2006. Before that it was 7 hours, in the 1983 main event … where after Doyle Brunson busted out in 3rd on a semi-bluff, an unknown from Michigan, Tom McEvoy, beat Rod Peate for $580,000:

BTW, for a fun historical perspective, watch the start of the television coverage of the 1983 final table here.

(BTW, semi-related but kinda an aside … Kathy Liebert, arguably the most successful on-the-tables female in history … is currently in strong chip position at a final table (5 remaining at time of press) in a $2,500 Foxwoods event. While reading the BJ guide, you can follow her ride as we are on Twitter here.)

BJ’s Guide to the History of Women in Poker

By BJ Nemeth

HOW MANY WOMEN PLAY

1.  In major tournament fields (WSOP, WPT, etc.) women usually comprise about 3% of the field. There are no official stats kept.

2.  The 2006 WSOP Main Event had the largest field in live tournament history with 8,773 players. It is estimated that only about 300 of them were women.

3.  This year there were 6,494 players, with an estimate of about 200 women in the field.

4.  Since 2006, the WSOP Ladies events have attracted between 1,060 and 1,286 women. A comparable $1,000 WSOP event attracted a field of 6,012, and only about 200 of them were women. Conclusion? Five to six times as many women will show up for a ladies event than will show up for a mixed event.

5.  In Jim McManus’s new book, “Cowboys Full: The Story of Poker,” he estimates that women make up nearly one-third of online poker players. Again, there are no official stats kept, but this shows that women are a much larger part of the game when they don’t have to sit down with men.

6.  Only one woman — Jennifer Harman — regularly plays in the biggest cash games in the world, playing against the likes of Doyle Brunson, Daniel Negreanu, and Phil Ivey. Harman not only plays with the big boys, but according to Doyle, she is a long-term winner in the game.

WOMEN WHO WENT DEEP IN THE MAIN EVENT

1.  The WSOP Main Event has been held every year since 1970, though there were no women at all in the earliest years. The first woman to ever cash in the WSOP Main Event was Wendeen Eolis in 1986. She finished 25th against a field of 141 players. (Side note: They paid 36 that year, and Eolis only cashed for $10,000, earning back her entry fee.)

2.  Only one woman has ever made the final table of the Main Event — Barbara Enright in 1995. She finished 5th in a field of 273 players, earning $114,180.

3.  Annie Duke came close to a final table, bubbling in 10th place ($52,160) in a field of 512 players in 2000 — while she was 8 months pregnant.

4.  The highest a woman has ever finished in the WSOP Main Event compared to the field size is Tiffany Michelle’s 17th-place finish ($334,534) in 2008 against a field of 6,844. Tiffany outlasted 99.75% of the field that year. (Annie Duke and Barbara Enright both outlasted about 98.1% of their fields.)

5.  Annette Obrestad won the WSOP Europe the day before her 19th birthday, earning $2 million against a field of 362 players. It is the biggest victory in history for a woman. This is completely separate from the WSOP Main Event, but worth noting.

SUCCESSFUL WOMEN IN WSOP HISTORY

1.  The first woman to win an open WSOP bracelet was Vera Richmond in 1982, when there were 14 events. Richmond outlasted about 80 players to win a bracelet in $1,000 Ace-to-Five Draw, earning $38,500.

2.  Another woman wouldn’t win a WSOP bracelet until 1996, when Barbara Enright (who final tabled the Main Event a year earlier) outlasted 180 players to win a bracelet in $2,500 Pot-Limit Hold’em, earning $180,000.

3.  Only 12 women have ever won WSOP bracelets in open events. (That number grows to 14 if you count the Seniors-only event and the casino employees-only event, both of which are still predominantly male.)

4.  The best year for women was 2004, when three women won WSOP bracelets — Annie Duke, Kathy Liebert, and Cyndy Violette.

5.  Since 2004: No women won bracelets in 2005, 2006, or 2009. Katja Thater won a Razz bracelet in 2007, and Vanessa Selbst won a Pot-Limit Omaha bracelet in 2008.

NOTABLE ACCOMPLISHMENTS BY FEMALE PLAYERS

1.  Jennifer Harman is widely regarded as the best female cash game player in history, and she is a regular player (and a regular winner) in the “Big Game” at Bellagio. Harman is also the only woman to have ever won two WSOP bracelets in open events.

2.  Kathy Liebert is the winningest female tournament poker player in history, with more than $5.5 million in earnings. Liebert was also the first women to earn $1 million in a single tournament, by winning the 2002 Party Poker Million cruise.

3.  Van Nguyen (wife of Men “The Master” Nguyen”) won the 2008 WPT Celebrity Invitational, earning $125,500. While it’s a mixed event, it is invitation only and the field includes a much-higher-than-normal percentage of female players.

4.  No woman has ever won a regular, open WPT tournament, though two have finished second (J.J. Liu and Kathy Liebert).

5.  Two women have won EPT events. Vicky Coren won EPT London ($941,000) in 2006, and Sandra Naujoks won EPT Germany ($1.16 million) in 2009. Both did it in their home countries.

6.  Annette “Annette15″ Obrestad won the WSOP Europe the day before her 19th birthday, earning $2 million against a field of 362 players. It is the biggest victory in history for a woman.

7.  As mentioned earlier, 12 women have won WSOP bracelets in open events: Vera Richmond (1982), Barbara Enright (1996), Linda Johnson (1997), Maria Stern (1997), Jennifer Harman (2000, 2002), Jerri Thomas (2000), Nani Dollison (2001), Annie Duke (2004), Kathy Liebert (2004), Cyndy Violette (2004), Katja Thater (2007), and Vanessa Selbst (2008).

8.  Two more women won WSOP bracelets in mixed events that were predominantly male: Sandy Stupak (1984, Casino Employees event) and Clare Miller (2006, Seniors event).

HIGHEST-EARNING WOMEN

1.  We only have data on tournaments (not cash games), but only two women are among the Top 100 of the all-time money list — Kathy Liebert (38th, $5.5 million) and Annie Duke (81st, $3.7 million). Daniel Negreanu is #1 on that list with $12.4 million, closely followed by Jamie Gold, Phil Ivey, and Phil Hellmuth.

2.  Three more women are in the Top 200 of the all-time money list:  Annette Obrestad (133rd, $2.76 million), Vanessa Rousso (176th, $2.38 million), and Jennifer Harman (177th, $2.37 million). That’s just five women among the Top 200 tournament players of all time, based on earnings.