New York City Poker Room Reviews -- Public Service Announcement

Even though it's been over a year since my last review, I still get a fair number of people who find their way here looking for the latest and greatest in NYC poker. As a service to the entire city (and moreso myself), here's the scoop:

Poker is dead in New York.

The NYPD have done their "finest" to shut down every major room. As of this writing, there are less than a handful of very small (1 or 2 tables max), very discreet poker rooms operating in Manhattan. I won't be mentioning any of them in this space, out of deference to the low profile the management of said rooms would like to keep.

I'd also like to reiterate that I have had a standing policy now, for over a year, of not providing any blind referrals to NYC rooms. It's not that I think any of you are cops angling to shut these places down -- trust me, I'm sure the NYPD knows where they are -- but it's more that I'm respecting the decisions of the management of these rooms not to try to become the next Mayfair or Playstation, which is a one-way ticket to a bust by the NYPD.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings, but you're better off getting on the bus to Atlantic City.

Read more...

Searching for Bobby Bracelet

Seems someone in Hollywood is looking for Bobby Bracelet. Did you hear that ladies?

Read more...

Quick and Dirty Analysis of the WPT Lawsuit

(with thanks to Chugarte for helping me refine my thoughts)

One thing should be made crystal clear straight off the bat: this is about the WPT release. The Players have tacked on several other outlandish claims to the complaint, but this is about the release. The players have been annoyed by the WPT release for a long time and now are finally trying to do something about it. They have good reason to be annoyed -- the release is ridiculously broad:

...Player...hereby irrevocably grants to WPT the right to film, record, edit, reproduce and otherwise use Player's name, photograph, likeness, signature, biographical information, appearance, actions (including without limitation, revealing Player's hole cards), conversations ... and/or voice ... in, and in connection with, the Programs and/or the "World Poker Tour" ... and any and all derivative, allied, subsidiary and/or ancillary uses related thereto (including, without limitation, merchandising, commercial tie-ins, publications, home entertainment, video games, commodities, etc.), in whole or in part, by any and all means, media, devices, processes and technology now or hereafter known or devised in perpetuity throughout the universe.

Essentially, the players are being asked to give up substantial rights to their own likeness for FREE (technically, since WPTE takes a small cut of every buy-in, the players are paying for the privilege), which will hurt their ability to enter into other endorsement and sponsorship deals down the line. Obviously, this sucks for the players, but is it illegal?

Maybe.

Definition of the relevant market is always a key issue in an antitrust case. In order to show that a market actor is unreasonably restraining trade or preventing competitors from entering a market, you have to show what the market is. The complaint in the WPT case muddles this issue a bit; at points, it seems to define the market as "the services and intellectual property rights of elite, high stakes poker players". But at other points, the market definition is implied to be the market for "televised, high stakes poker tournaments", and in still other places is expressly defined as some sort of aggregation of the two ["the services and intellectual property rights of elite, high stakes poker players who provides these services and rights in connection with their participation in televised, high stakes poker tournaments."]

Obviously, the Players had some trouble defining a relevant market that would pass the laugh test, and I think that's going to be a problematic issue going forward as you'll see below.

But, accepting the Players' market definition ("the services and intellectual property rights of elite, high stakes poker players"), how do the actions of the WPTE unreasonably restrain that market? There are dozens of non-WPT affiliated casinos (even after you exclude "sister" casinos that are allegedly unable to host tournaments that compete with the WPT) in the U.S., and there is nothing preventing any of those casinos from hosting televised high stakes poker tournaments that will compete for "services and intellectual property rights of elite, high stakes professional poker players". Many already do (WSOP, U.S. Poker Championships at the Taj as two examples). Not only that, but if the market is "services and intellectual property rights of elite, high stakes professional poker players", why do the tournaments even have to be televised?

The WPT casinos themselves are not outright restricted from hosting other large buy-in tournaments. The only requirements are that those tournaments not conflict with a WPT tournament and not be televised. An argument can certainly be made that the agreements between WPTE and the WPT casinos imposing those restrictions were necessary to create and maintain a WPT brand, and that such a brand actually has a pro-competitive effect on the market.

To push the idea further, even if we assume that the relevant market is for televised tournaments, I'm certain that another WPTE-wannabe could come along and start up a competing circuit. The Trump casinos, Indian casinos, and other Vegas and California casinos would probably all be happy for the chance to get television exposure, not to mention the extra dollars into the casino from hosting such an event. In fact, the complaint itself states "the Conspiring Casinos have been approached about hosting televised, high stakes poker tournaments (that would compete with WPTE tournaments), but are prevented from accepting such opportunities pursuant to their agreements not to compete with each other or WPTE." Clearly, the demand is there. The fact that there is no other competitor in the market doesn't mean that WPTE is being anti-competitive per se.

That brings us to the release. As I stated up top, the release sucks, and I have tons of sympathy for the players that WPTE, which makes money off the hosting casino, the players AND the television advertisers, is simply asking the players to give up too much. That's not enough, though. The WPTE is under no obligation to negotiate the release, and is it realistic to expect WPTE to allow 1,000 participants of a WPT event each individually negotiate their release? It's not practical, from an efficiency standpoint or even from a business standpoint. Thus, we need to find an antitrust issue in the release terms.

There might be one, in the guise of an illegal "tying" claim. The argument would be that WPTE has illegally tied one product to another. For example, Con Edison, the electricity monopoly here in New York, cannot refuse to sell me electricity (the "tied" product) unless I also buy a monthly allotment of sporks (the "tying" product). In the case of the WPTE, the Players could allege that the tied product is the tournament play offered by WPTE and the tying product is the release of IP rights for "derivative" works (video games, WPTonline, etc.)

In order for this claim to be successful, however, the Players are going to have to show that WPTE has "market power" in the relevant market. The presumption is that if WPTE has "market power", the Players do not have a meaningful choice. Again, the issue boils down to defining the relevant market, and I think the Players are facing an uphill battle there.

In the end, maybe this will succeed simply by shining the spotlight on WPTE's unreasonable release and pressuring WPTE, through the court of public opinion, to change it to something more pallatable. Time will tell.

Read more...

Drowning

I know, I know - I owe Vegas trip reports. Or at least, a half-hearted attempt at a Vegas trip report. Unfortunately, I have an impending week-long trip to the City of Angels rapidly approaching on Saturday, and I am otherwise drowning under the leadup to That Which Cannot Be Named (but many of you know what it is). Wish me luck - I may be underwater for the rest of July.

P.S. Congratulations to Ryan and Zeem on their Main Event seats!

P.P.S. 0 - 2000 - 126.6

Read more...

Summer Classic 2006: The Tournament

Let's get the poker write-up out of the way first, shall we?

I can't imagine a more fitting trophy for a WPBT tournament than the Golden Hammer. The hammer that the trophy representes really *is* more useful than it seems though. For instance, when you have position on an aggressive player, you can reraise your hammer over his preflop raise and then take the pot down on the flop with nothing, but only as long as you slam your hammer down on the table and yell out "HAMMAH!" as you do so.

Yeah, so, the tournament. Does anybody care? I doubt it. But a quick overview anyway. I liked my starting table:

1. Stephan
2. MrSubliminal
3. Blinders
4. Jen Leo
5. Chad
6. Hoyazo
7. Me
8. Hoff
9. Human Head



Almost all of these people were unknowns to me. Hoyazo proved to be the most aggressive, and he was on my right. I felt like I had good control over everyone else. It helped that I was able to advertise a few solid hands early on.

I only made one significant mistake about midway through the tournament, calling an all-in for a good portion of my stack holding 99 on the button. The player in question (help with name? not sure who it was and given how many coronas I was pounding, I'm sure I wouldn't remember anyway) had moved in several times with a non-small stack and when he did it the third time, I mulled over racing him for all those chips. I wasn't short but I wasn't tall at that point either, and I was trying to decide how much I minded a race. It probably was a mistake to call even if his hand was as weak as two broadway cards; it was definitely a mistake when those two broadway cards were queens. When a pre-flop raiser don't give himself any room to play post-flop, however, he resigns himself to the CJ Effect -- for instance, his opponent spiking a 9 on the turn. I felt bad, because it was a loose, bad call on my part that worked out. Further proof that in order to win a tournament, you have to get lucky.

Other than that, it was smooth sailing to the final table. I picked up my share of good hands, and between those hands and decent aggression I kept amassing chips. At my first table, Hoyazo and I took turns raising. When we broke down to two tables, I found Huge Junk on my right playing the role of Hoyazo. Again, we took turns raising other people's blinds. In fact, at one point Bob raised three hands in a row and folded the fourth. When I immediately raised that fourth hand, he said "You only did that because I folded." Well, duh!

At the final table I drew an excellent seat, with Bob and his huge junk stack three seats to my right and DoubleAs with his sizable stack two seats to my right. I brought a decent stack to the table, and when we got down to 7 players remaining I had 25% of the chips and was feeling good. It was a roller coaster from there, but I hung tough until DoubleAs ran his AJ into my AQ while we were in the blinds. I was happy for the chips, but unhappy that I crippled him because I was hoping to take on the noted poker author heads up for the title. When he went out third, my heads up opponent became Pii. Our match lasted about 15 minutes before I got him all-in on the turn of a 2h-9-Ah-7h board, me with A8 and Pii with Qh-7. He had 14 outs on the river but it was a harmless 2d. It would have served me right if he had hit, because I went for a trap on the flop by checking my ace behind his check.

All in all, the tournament was a great experience, and now I have a Golden Hammer sitting on my desk at work, eliciting curious stares and stammered questions from my co-workers. Forget the cash, kids -- the trophy and the bragging rights (I am Poker Champ) are worth way more.

Read more...

I'm Poker Champ, Bitch

I'm back in New York, after three fantastic days in Vegas. If you're curious how my trip was, take a look at these 1,000 words:

Photo credit Bill Rini. More details to come after I've had a chance to sleep.

Read more...

World Cup Finals Set

Hank Scorpio: By the way, which is your least favorite country - Italy or France?
Homer: France.
Hank Scorpio: [chuckles to himself] Nobody ever says Italy.

I think you know who I'm rooting for. See you at Mandalay sports book at 11am on Sunday, in lieu of the traditional *American* football games at Mandalay sports book that are usually watched on Sunday morning during the December blogger gatherings.

Read more...

REPOST: Vegas Moments: Final Thoughts

I originally posted the following on December 19, 2005, after coming back from my second poker blogger gathering, the 2005 Winter Classic at Imperial Palace. If you're coming out with us, please take a few moments to read this post!

Here we are, a week later, at the end of one of the longest reports I've ever written about any trip. This makes post number five. You probably noticed that only one of them had any "real" poker content in it, which may come as a bit of a curiosity. The natural assumption, if you've never been to one of these gatherings before, is that poker is going to play a central role in the trip. After all, we're all poker bloggers, right?

The thing is, poker is really just a means to an end at these gatherings. It's a way to pass the time together when we need a break from all the carousing, partying, drink-guzzling and junk-confirming that's going on. Many of us don't need Vegas for live poker -- we can get into a live poker game just about any day (or at least weekend) of the year. Riverboat casinos, barge casinos, indian casinos, Atlantic City casinos and California card barns all provide that opportunity.

Going to one of these blogger gatherings and spending all your time playing poker is like ordering the swordfish at a steakhouse. Yeah, you got what you came for, but you missed out on the real deal. If you spend all your time playing cards, you don't get to listen to Daddy talk about how much a blue whale pussy weighs. You don't get to throw back shots of Southern with Al. And you don't get to chain smoke with Iggy while heckling the daughters of drunken cowboys. You can spend any ol' day of the year playing poker, but how often do you get the chance to mock G-Rob's hair?

I should be fair. The competitive poker player in me (and I think, many of us) can't pass a whole four days in a place like Vegas without playing at least a little "real" poker, especially when the tables look like they're swimming with fish. That's like asking Pauly and Grubby not to visit a strip club on a night when strippers are giving lap dances for free. Not gonna happen.

When that competitive drive to fleece the fish raises its head, it's too easy to lose sight of the amazing social interactions going on around us at these events. That's why sometimes we need to just fold the hand, rack up the chips, and get up from the table. This year I told myself I would tune into those interactions more than I did last year. Last year, I breezed in and out of town with barely a word to most other bloggers. Hell, some people didn't even realize that I attended at all! I definitely succeeded in reaching my goal this year, but reading everyone else's trip reports, I still don't think I've struck the perfect balance.

Thankfully, there will be more gatherings in the future to correct this deficiency. I'm sure of it. You all are too amazing for there not to be.

Read more...

Random String of Random Thoughts

1. Brazil did not deserve to win yesterday. It was disappointing to see them lose, but my hat's off to the French side for playing a better game at both ends of the field. And was it just me, or did Ronaldo "fall" every time he touched the ball? Disgraceful.

2. England loses on penalities again and I have to laugh. There's a certain pleasure to be derived from watching one of the premier footballing nations get its hopes up every four years, have its team advance to the elimination stage, and then lose. One of the news sites I've been reading as I've been following the Cup posted this little tidbit last week:

But who are we kidding? We’ve been catching up on our reading. Namely, the latest issue of When Saturday Comes, the smart, funny soccer zine from the U.K. On the cover of this World Cup issue, put out just before the tournament started, is this picture of England strikers Michael Owen and Theo Walcott, complete with appropriate word balloons. Prophetic? Perhaps. This passage from the editorial certainly has the ring of prophecy:

"England, meanwhile, will often be unable to get the ball back off Paraguay — and when they do they will be unable to keep it for more than two passes. Despite somehow grinding out a deeply tedious 1-0 victory, they will eventually proceed to lose in fairly honourable fashion to the first decent team they come across, as in 1998, 2002 and Euro 2004."

Again: hahahahahaha.

3. A story that almost slipped under my nose: The Tour de France began yesterday, just hours after the riders who finished 2nd through 5th in last year's Tour were suspended due to doping accusations. As reported in the New York Times:

Two riders who were considered favorites to win this year's Tour were among those suspended: Jan Ullrich of Germany, the Tour champion in 1997, a five-time runner-up and last year's third-place finisher; and Ivan Basso of Italy, who was second last year and won the Giro d'Italia, the sport's No. 2 multiday race, in May. Two other top riders — Francisco Mancebo of Spain and Alexander Vinokourov of Kazakhstan, who finished fourth and fifth at last year's Tour — are also gone. Mancebo was suspended by his team, and Vinokourov lost out when Astana withdrew Friday.

This brings me to my question: what about Lance Armstrong? Are you telling me that he was THAT good that, one-nutted and all, he could beat the four guys who finished 2nd through 5th, all of whom were doping?

This is the unfortunate legacy of doping in any sport -- cycling, baseball, even soccer. The improper actions of a few extend a specter of impropriety over the sport as a whole. While I'd like to believe that Armstrong was "clean", my gut tells me it's unlikely he beat those four guys on his own. These types of alpha personalities are absolutely driven by the need to remain competitive. At some point, that need overwhelms logic and reason and the use of performance-enhancing substances becomes rationalized by thoughts like "I have to keep up with X guy who is probably doping" and "Well, this isn't on the banned list of substances so that must mean it's ok for me to use."

In Armstrong's case, the issue as to whether he was doping during his unprecedented run of Tour de France victories will probably never be resolved definitively. Some will try -- I can't take any of the reports / accusations in Le Monde seriously at this point as they seem hell-bent on destroying Armstrong's reputation over some petty humiliation that he's an American -- but in the end cycling, like baseball, needs to concentrate on the here and now and clean up their sports to ensure as level a playing field as possible for future participants.

4. See you in Vegas in four days.

Read more...