Poker Officially Sucks Now

Hello,

After watching the WSOP Main Event Final Table tonight, I have come to the conclusion that skill in tournament poker means absolutely nothing. It only means anything long-term and unless you plan on making the WSOP Main Event Final Table many, many, many, many times in your life, forget the skill and just pray that your short-stack luck holds up. After what I just saw, the World Series of Poker Main Event just became completely and totally meaningless to me. Winning that tournament is TOTAL luck and ZERO skill. Deep-stack cash games is about the only way to see skill in poker. I don't think I'll be watching next year, or any tournament poker for that matter. It's just not fun watching people roll dice and calling it poker.

And they really need to stop calling these "every-men" unlikely final table competitors. The Final Table has been nothing but every-men. I'm sorry but I feel the Main Event has lost all it's meaning now that it's a giant lottery. I'd take it for the money but I'd also take a win in the lottery for the money. But that doesn't mean I think that people who win the lottery have some sort of skill. Since 2000, most of the Final Tables have been full of a bunch of idiots who can't play and it bores the hell out of me as a viewer. They have to stop waiting four months to show garbage. So disappointing.

I found it funny that Moneymaker was interviewed during the Main Event on ESPN talking about the hand when he knocked out Johnny Chan in 2003. He mentioned his reasoning for raising on the button, or something like that. The funny thing is he had no idea at the time what the hell he was doing. He is only able to explain that hand after years of looking at it from the perspective of someone who learned a few poker terms. He sucks just as most of the people who make WSOP final tables. The tournament has become a big joke and if I was a pro, I wouldn't waste my time entering tournaments. It's a definite losing proposition for the majority of pros. There is no way that it is a positive EV series in which to play. Pros should stick to the side games and skip the Series that is now a joke. There are already so many bracelets out there that it's starting to lose all meaning. Ugh. What a horrible Final Table this year. Gotta go puke now.

Can't wait for more HSP. Now that's some nice poker.

See you on the felt,

Poker Hall of Fame: 2009 Nominations

Hello,

The Poker Hall of Fame was established in 1979 to highlight those individuals who have significantly contributed to the game of poker. It is not limited to those who play the game but rather, it showcases those who have, in one way or another, advanced poker for the better. It includes players such as Doyle Brunson , Johnny Moss, Johny Chan, James Butler Hickok ("Wild Bill" Hickok) and Phil Hellmuth as well as non-players such as Benny Binion, the founder of the World Series of Poker as well as his son, Jack Binion. This year, unlike in years before, Harrah's Casino, the owner of the Poker Hall of Fame along with the WSOP, accepted nominations from the public. Once nominations were made, the public was then able to vote to decide which nominees would go to the Poker Hall of Fame Governing Council, comprised of thirty people, for a vote. The thirty member panel is made up of the current living Poker Hall of Fame members as well as a fifteen member media panel.

This year, the following list of ten people will go before the Council (listed in alphabetical order). The Council may add any name it deems necessary.

• Tom Dwan
• Barry Greenstein
• Dan Harrington
• Phil Ivey
• Tom McEvoy
• Men Nguyen
• Scotty Nguyen
• Daniel Negreanu
• Erik Seidel
• Mike Sexton
  

Any nominee receiving at least 75% of the vote will be inducted to the Poker Hall of Fame. The inductees will be announced at the WSOP Main Event final table in November.

There were four players who did not make this list due to too few votes from the public that I think will not only ultimately make it into the Poker Hall of Fame, but should be on the list each year until they do. They are Chris Ferguson, Howard Lederer, Allen Cunningham and David Sklansky. I think Matt Savage, Tournament Director of the WSOP, will probably make it eventually but I don't think he needs to be on the list every year until he does. I believe that he will be inducted whether or not he makes it to the public list. One player of note who did not make the list but was nominated was Chris Moneymaker. Unfortunately, as much as I think he is a terrible player, and has continued to prove himself as such, he should eventually find his way in simply because of the "Effect" he has had on poker. Attributing about a half billion dollars in WSOP tournament buy-ins to his win should enable him to eventually be inducted.

According to the rules, among other things, players must have stood the test of time, played for high stakes and earned the respect of their peers. For non-players, they must have contributed to the overall growth of poker. Benny Binion, for example, was voted in for the latter reason. Of the players on this list, only Tom Dwan has not achieved eligibility (although I believe he can still technically be voted in). For one thing, while not a requirement, he does not have any WSOP bracelets. And although he has almost a $1 million in live tournament earnings, he has no high-profile wins. No one can argue that he doesn't play against the toughest competition for the highest stakes on the regular basis. He is also considered to an extremely tough player in his own right. However, he is simply way too young and has not played nearly long enough to even be considered in my opinion. The fact that he made the top ten list and Chris Ferguson did not shows how little people understand who belongs in the Poker Hall of Fame. There is a real chance of Tom Dwan going broke some time in the future. I'm not saying he will, but winning, even at the levels at which he plays, for such a short time does not cement a legacy. Chris Ferguson should clearly be in. Not next year. Not the year after. This year. He not only has five bracelets including Main Event gold, he has, and will continue to prove his poker prowess. He is in a class of his own when it comes to poker and there are few players who can do what he does.

Other than Tom Dwan, the remainder of the list will make it into the Poker Hall of Fame. If not this year, then in the years to come. However, I would like to examine some of these players and talk about who should make it this year and who needs to wait a few more years before they can be inducted. Phil Ivey would have made it this year if not for the fact that he made the Main Event final table. I think it actually hurts his chances because the inductees will be announced prior to the start of the Main Event and for some reason, I don't think his name will be on the list being that he will grace the final table. While he is already among the most feared players, it just doesn't seem right to announce his induction before play begins. He might have to wait another year or so but he is sure to get in one way or another. Daniel Negreanu, too, will have to wait. While he fits the description of a Hall of Famer, I think he simply has to wait until he gets a little older, mostly because I think there are other well respected players who have seniority.

Now for some controversy. Scotty Nguyen should not be inducted to the Hall of Fame this year. I actually think he has a long way to go before he makes it in. He too, meets all the requirements for induction. However, there is one thing holding him back—his behavior at the table. Unlike Phil Hellmuth's "bratty" behavior, Scotty Nguyen's behavior at the table is atrocious. He should be utterly ashamed of himself for the way he acted at the $50K H.O.R.S.E. event in 2008. I lost all respect for him that year and his apology was just not good enough, mostly because he didn't learn from his behavior. It continued into other tournaments, even after he apologized. If you begin typing "Scotty Nguyen" into Google, the next choices it gives you are "drunk," "horse behavior," "apology" and "controversy." Until that changes, he cannot be inducted. The Hall of Fame is not just about how one plays but also how he or she represents the game. What he did at the table was reprehensible. I like to drink occasionally too, but there is a time and a place to get drunk, and it's not at a televised final table. When his attitude adjusts, so will my opinion of him. I used to admire his play but I now change the channel when he is on TV. Even worse, he won he first Chip Reese Memorial Trophy and that just makes me sick considering for what it was Reese stood.

Men "The Master" Nguyen, too, needs to curb his drinking at the table. While he is a tremendous player—he has over 330 cashes! and 58 first place finishes including six bracelets—he needs to adjust the way he portrays himself to the public. A big part of poker today is how you act on TV and how you relate to the public. When I played with him at a $1K WPT event at the Borgata, he was down right nasty to the other players at the table. He sat there as though he was the reason the tournament was being played. He was rude to the dealers, the tournament staff and others around him. I know this was just one event but given that it was not televised, leads me to believe that that's the way he acts. This poor attitude even comes through on TV and it does not reflect well on poker. I have no doubt he will one day make it in but I would like to see more players who are ambassadors for the game be inducted, not just players who win.

Speaking of ambassadors of poker, Mike Sexton is a no-doubter. I cannot think of someone more deserving. If he has a bad attitude, you sure wouldn't know it. He exemplifies the way the game should be played both on and off the felt. There is not much more I can say about Sexton. He has been a champion and spokesman for the game for many years and I think other players can learn from his example. That, to me, makes him a shoo-in. Dan Harrington brings a lot to the table as well. He has two WSOP bracelets (including a Main Event win in 1995) as well as a WPT win in 2007. He made back-to-back WSOP Main Event final tables in 2003-04 which is a massive accomplishment. He is also the author of many books on tournament poker that are considered standard reading for those learning the game. He "only" has four major wins to his name and "only" 33 cashes but that's largely because he does not play as often as other professional poker players do. In fact, I am not even sure if he would categorize himself as a professional player. He has even said so in various television interviews. However, it's hard to argue with what he has accomplished and what he has done for the game through his writing. Even with the relatively few wins and cashes he has, they have obviously been pretty important considering they total over $6.1 million. Even though he has proven himself to be a competent player, and has been doing it for quite some time, I think he needs to wait as well since he there are others who dedicate more time to the game than he does. Once they are "out of the way," so-to-speak, he'll get in.

Barry Greenstein is a tough call for me. Those who like him, love him. I can take him or leave him. He has shown himself to be a deserving player and always acts appropriately both at and away from the table, but he always seems to be in the background for some reason. While he donates a tremendous amount of his poker winnings to charity, and I certainly commend that, for some reason he seems to miss with me. However, I can't fault someone for being quiet. I also think that's the way he likes it. Whether or not he makes it this year is up to people who know him better than I do. It seems as though he will make it one day and he definitely fits the description of someone who deserves it. I suppose that's why I don't get a vote.

Tom McEvoy is prolific author and accomplished poker player. He has authored or co-authored over a dozen poker books and has four bracelets under his belt including a 1983 Main Event bracelet. However, if longevity is a requirement, McEvoy has missed on that one. While he has four WSOP bracelets, three were before 1987 and the last in 1992. I believe that he will make it one day, not just for his poker but for what he has done in terms of writing about the game. Even if he didn't play, he would probably be eligible for that reason alone. I would like to see one or two more notable wins, though, before he is inducted.

The last on the list is Erik Seidel. I think that he should most definitely be voted directly in. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. With eight bracelets, a WPT Championship, over 130 cashes and over $9.2 million in tournament winnings, I fail to see how he doesn't make it in this year. He has been winning at the highest levels for over two decades and shows no signs of slowing down. He has had several high profile wins and final tables in the last few years including a WPT win, a WSOP bracelet, a second place Aussie Millions finish, as well as five WSOP final tables aside from his WSOP win. He also represents himself well at the table. What more can a player do?

Of the four players that I mentioned who were not on the list—Chris Ferguson, Howard Lederer, Allen Cunningham and David Sklansky—I will comment on one, Howard Lederer. One of the big reasons people get into the Poker Hall of Fame is the work they do to advance poker away from the table. Lederer is one of those who moved away from actually playing the game to further its advancement. Now I don't think he did this out of the goodness of his heart. He has certainly made, and will continue to make, his share of money with Full Tilt Poker and other business ventures away from the table, but nonetheless he has helped to bring the game closer to the public. Let's not forget that he can actually play. He does have two WSOP bracelets and two WPT wins. He has even proven himself in the high-stakes cash games. He is no stranger to winning on the felt but he has also done just as much away from the table. Like I said, that exemplifies a Hall of Famer to me.

So for this year, my picks from the list are Mike Sexton and Erik Seidel. I don't want to venture a guess who the other players the Council members will choose because I don't have the inside track on their thinking process. I have given a few examples of players who I think deserve the honor and explained why others do not—at least not this year. I also believe that the majority of people named in this article will in fact make it in one day. The only question left unanswered is when. You be the judge.

See you on the felt,

Lisandro's Three-peat

Hello,

I feel compelled to comment on Jeff Lisandro's three-peat. I have always liked Lisandro as people who know me can attest. I was very happy for him when he won his first bracelet in 2007 even though it was against the very tough and well-respected stud specialist Nick Frangos. That year, Lisandro was heartbroken only a couple of weeks prior to winning his bracelet when he lost to Allen Cunngingham in the PLH Championship. As readers of my blog well know, I am a big fan of stud games and limit poker in general so I really enjoy watching learning from the better stud players. Lisandro is one of the better stud players as is clearly evidenced by his four stud bracelets. He is the only players to win bracelets in all forms of stud: stud 8/b, 7-stud and razz. I just wanted to acknowledge this sweet three-peat which hasn't been done since Phil Ivey did it back in 2002. So, I wanted to take the time to congratulate a player for whom I have great respect. After watching him feel crushed after coming so close when he lost to Cunningham (he could not hold back the tears), it was nice to see him finally win one shortly thereafter. I suppose that to Lisandro, that moment seems worlds away now that he has four bracelets and has solidified himself as a great player. We all know that while one bracelet can be a fluke (I'd love a fluke like that), nobody can deny that winning four—including three in one year—is pure skill. This kind of thing is very good for poker.

See you on the felt,

Almost Back in the Blogosphere

Hello,

It has been nearly four months since my last blog post and I haven't played online poker in that same span of time. I have played only three sessions of live poker since then and they were friendly, microstakes home games. I did, however, play really well in those sessions.

I miss the game terribly but I cannot seem to find the time to play, even for fun. I have a lot on my plate now with graduate school, work (and work and work), the kids, etc. and poker has taken a back seat to everything else. I have been trying my best to keep up with the goings-on of the game. I still read my Cardplayer (although I am a few issues behind) and am currently watching the Poker After Dark series.

I hope to get back into blogging some time soon even if I don't start playing again. I have been wanting to comment on a lot of hands that I have seen on TV and in other blogs and magazines but it is difficult to find the time to do so. I don't even have the time for this post but I felt compelled to get something up just so I can keep the blog "open." So perhaps when summer comes along I will have more time. I will have a break from both school and my main work (teaching) and will be able to focus on my private work (web development) and possibly some poker playing and writing.

See you on the felt,

Why I Win at Poker

Hello,

This is why I am a long term winner at poker. I know this is only a penny game but it illustrates the point that most people really suck at this game. This guy called all-in on a bluff. How a play like this got rewarded is beyond me. I am still in shock, particularly at how he won the hand. No wonder I took a break. This was only the second time I played in over two months. But I suppose I have something to look forward to when I return to the game. Enjoy this one. (It's should be no surprise that he ran as fast as he could after this hand not even playing his small blind.)

Full Tilt Poker Game #8664843109: Table Stanley (6 max) - $0.05/$0.10 - No Limit Hold'em - 3:27:38 ET - 2008/10/26
Seat 1: jpetty75 ($12.70)
Seat 2: Tom Jefferson ($6.90)
Seat 3: Kittiebooboo ($12.55)
Seat 4: iverson2k2k ($8.80)
Seat 5: fune_radikal ($2.65)
Seat 6: Piramida1 ($10)
Tom Jefferson posts the small blind of $0.05
Kittiebooboo posts the big blind of $0.10
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Tom Jefferson [Kc Kd]
iverson2k2k folds
fune_radikal folds
Piramida1 folds
jpetty75 folds
Tom Jefferson raises to $0.30
Kittiebooboo has 15 seconds left to act
Kittiebooboo calls $0.20
*** FLOP *** [Jd Tc 7c]
Tom Jefferson bets $0.60
Kittiebooboo raises to $1.20 (see if I'm for real)
Tom Jefferson raises to $6.60, and is all in (why not just shove it all in?)
Kittiebooboo calls $5.40
Tom Jefferson shows [Kc Kd]
Kittiebooboo shows [8s Ad] (seriously!?)
*** TURN *** [Jd Tc 7c] [Qc] (give a two take several)
*** RIVER *** [Jd Tc 7c Qc] [Ks] (of course!)
Tom Jefferson shows three of a kind, Kings
Kittiebooboo shows a straight, Ace high
Kittiebooboo wins the pot ($12.45) with a straight, Ace high
Tom Jefferson adds $2
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $13.80 | Rake $1.35
Board: [Jd Tc 7c Qc Ks]
Seat 1: jpetty75 (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 2: Tom Jefferson (small blind) showed [Kc Kd] and lost with three of a kind, Kings
Seat 3: Kittiebooboo (big blind) showed [8s Ad] and won ($12.45) with a straight, Ace high
Seat 4: iverson2k2k didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: fune_radikal didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6: Piramida1 didn't bet (folded)

See you on the felt,