Funny, I didn’t get the FIDPA release Jen did, but I did get an email from Jesse Jones to members of the WPA (I’m one of the few who somehow paid twice) … and it seems these two ops are finding their distinct paths. FIDPA, I know, is all about the rules. In fact, I heard about a month ago from both ML’s that their rules were in affect at the Bellagio for the big WPT event last week. Have not confirmed that, however supposedly when Jack McClelland made the Daniel Negreanu rule change mid-tourney at the WPT Championship, you couldn’t get a written version of that rule, because it didn’t exist — no written tourney rules at Bellagio — so apparently they were happy to finally get something on paper.

(And the way the FIDPA 80 work … they leave room for adjustments, so theoretically you could go to a tourney and the TD woulds say, “We’re using FIDPA rules today, except for #47, where we’re going to let you blah blah blah” or “… and we have one extra rule of our own: no coughing.”)

The WPA meanwhile, seems to have moved their rules agenda to the backburner, focusing instead on tournament rake — pushing for more sponsorship/commercial money to be added to major event prize pools, a la the PGA:

It’s a disgrace that tournament poker players for the most part do not share the revenue generated by their participation in events (e.g. television, sponsorship, etc). In most or all events players put in all of the prize money via the buy-in, have 6-10% of their money taken out, and only a small number of participants make a payday. Any revenue generated by sponsors or other means is not shared with you the players.

This is something we must change.

This is the WPA’s principal focus. This is why you joined the WPA. This is why we need your support.

Yeow! I’m not so sure I agree with the not-shared part … those waters they put on the table ain’t free, ya know! But the All In Energy Drink is!

Though I suppose both operations ultimately wanna become the FIFA of poker, it looks like their going about it in two kinda different ways

Though it’s not unusual for pros to show up late for WSOP tourneys, something was amiss during one of the last 1500s when Scotty Nguyen didn’t show up til well into the 100/200 level …

Apparently Scotty lost one of his capuchin monkeys. The fire department was still trying to get the the pesky little primate out of a tree when Scotty decided he just had to go. Not sure what the status is of said monkey, but one thing that is interesting is how the floor handled his depleted stack.

From Adanthar:

Naturally, Scotty was unhappy about that and asked the dealer why he didn’t have 3K. But at the WSOP, only late registrations get their full 3K chips (and get seated in Seat 10); everyone else gets a regular seat and then gets blinded off if they’re late, which is normal. Scotty, though, obviously didn’t like the idea of starting out with a 9 bet stack, said “I’m not playing”, and went off to find the tournament director. I think he just wanted to be allowed to unregister, but instead, a couple of minutes later, the floor showed up with a full stack and gave it to him. On the one hand, this is pretty much blatant cheating - it’s a free 1200 chips that nobody not named Scotty Nguyen would ever get;

Murmur?

(Thanks, Shamus, for the link.)

A player in a hand against Kathy Liebert made a royal flush on the turn … he claims he didn’t realize it, which seems believable when he was last to act and checked on the river.

The player was issued a warning, because at the WSOP it’s against the rules to check the nuts when you’re last to act on the river.

(This rule is new to me … makes sense-ish. But am curious what happens if, say, I have the nuts, am first to act, bet, the next guy raises, and I just call. Will see if I can find out the answer to this in the next half hour month.)

Found this vid, shot at the EPT Championship last month in Monte Carlo … where Daniel Negreanu pwns a Scandi reporter (new word for me!), or maybe it’s the other way around:

There’s question whether or not it was staged. In Las Vegas I am pretty sure his shove would be considered assault, but maybe not so in Monaco? Either way, my experience at the tables tells me that 2 in 12 to 14 Scandis are slowrollers … so that suggests it’s statistically possible it was an authentic provocation.

At the moment my background music is Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith on Spike the main event of the 2007 WSOP (Episode 4, part 2 of 5 according to YouTube):

It’s actually the first time I’ve seen this episode — if that tells you anything about the immediacy or lack thereof attached to current WSOP broadcasts … and it prominently features/follows Jamie Gold. Pretty impressed with how ESPN handled his storyline, and Gold does a pretty good job explaining the Crispin Leyser lawsuit … well enough that I start empathize for just a moment until Norman Chad follows up with a reminder of why he may not have had many supporters regardless.

(About 2:00 in.)

I wrote this post right after the 2007 WSOP, but I hadn’t pressed publish yet. With all the talk about structural changes and travel plans for the upcoming WSOP, now seem’s a good time for us to think about our (poker players’) behavior for the upcoming WSOP:

I have a request for all poker players. Anyone that wants to complain at the WSOP 2008, please STAY HOME! I don’t care how much dead money you bring to the tables, I don’t want to hear the yakking when I’m taking a leak.

At the 2007 WSOP, bitching was the theme. Here are just a few of the complaints that I heard.

• Harrah’s is making too much money. Have you seen how much juice they are taking out?
• The food is horrible
• The dealers are making too many mistakes
• It’s cold
• It’s hot
• The lines are too long
• The structures are too fast, too slow, too medium
• The walk is too long to the tournament area
• There are too many tournaments
• The cocktail service is bad.

Is that enough or should I keep going?

More…

I loved being a tournament director — training dealers was particularly fun at the Lodge, and I can think of no truer example of getting to be a benevolent dictator. You have some basic big rules to follow, and then lots of little rules that you can interpret in any number of arguable ways … but the ultimate determination is left to a supreme court of one — and there are no appeals, unless, of course, you decide to change your mind.

Bellagio tourney director Jack McLelland introduced a little democracy to the WPT today — responding to some complaints on Daniel Negreanu’s blog* — by putting his show-one-show-both rule to a vote among the remaining players, who overwhelmingly supported this seemingly sensible mid-tourney change. The short-stack lobby, however, was unsuccessful in persuading the Bellagio’s Dear Tourney Leader to lower the blinds.

From the WPT Live Updates:

Rule Change!
Tuesday, April 22, 2008 12:15 PM PDT

Before the start of play, Daniel Negreanu and Jack McClelland stood up on the stage next to the featured table to make an announcement.

McClelland talked about Negreanu’s blog, stating that Negreanu’s complaints about the show one card, show both rule may be valid, and that he would like to put it to a vote.

So he asked the room if they would be opposed to a rule change. The response was overwhelming to say the least. Nearly every person in the room voted to change the rule.

McClelland responded with, “In the words of Steve Lipscomb, “Ahh…. F#%K it,”" and just like that the rule was changed.

Players are still not allowed to flash a card in the middle of the hand, however. The rule only allows you to flash a card after the hand is over.

After McClelland gave himself a 20-minute penalty [for language], he did warn the players that he has been training the dealers for three years to turn both cards over, and that they should be patient with them as they learn the new rule all over again.

*NOTE: Still looking for a direct link to the post McClelland was referring to. If anyone has it, please pass along. Thanks.