Anonymous Pro

---

OP-ED

---

Daniel Negreanu is the E.F. Hutton of poker. He relishes the role. He knows that if in the throes of passion he utters, “Do it. Do it. Do it just like that. Make sure there is a 150-300 level!” that — no matter whether he ends the night in warm, introspective afterglow –the tournament he plays the next day will have a 150-300 level. It’s the perk of being the most outspoken of the best poker players in the world. You’re allowed to open your mouth, makes billionaires dance, and change the world in which you live on a whim. It would be something you could respect about Kid Poker, if he only knew when to keep his mouth shut.

There was a time when world markets turned on whether Alan Greenspan had a good breakfast. The same is true of Negreanu. With a mere sneer, he can change the structure of a tournament. With a grumble in his tummy, he can get tofu served in the casino kitchen. With a wink and a smile, he can create a television show. His words—almost always—are game changers.

Make no mistake: most of the mainstream poker media exists because of and at the will of the online poker companies. If not for direct or indirect funding from the likes of Full Tilt and PokerStars, most poker magazines and websites you read regularly would go under in six months or less. It’s not a matter of news; it’s a matter of how they create revenue to stay afloat.

Ninety percent of time, the Negreanu-affected changes make the poker world better. There is no denying the man’s intelligence, skill, or innovative acumen. The problem is, Negreanu doesn’t respect his power. He wields it like a drunk with a gun. Most of the time he knows to keep it in his pants. Ten percent of the time, he waves it around the bar threatening to shoot whomever he’s imagined has upset his sense of order or eaten his veggie burger.

More…

Michele Lewis

---

OP-ED

As a woman who began playing poker in the early 90’s on the smoky Riverboats of Louisiana, I was almost always the only woman at the table and often the only woman in the poker room. Other than my weekly friendly game, the Mirage poker room in Las Vegas (before the Bellagio opened) was the only time I played with other women. It wasn’t always easy being the only woman in the game. Nor was it easy being excluded from a friendly game that instituted a No Vagina Rule because some new fish didn’t want his wife to play. While sexist remarks at the poker table were uncomfortable at times, I’ve also seen cheating, robberies, fights, guns, racism, and five of nine opponents having a piece of each others action.

Of the four WSOP Ladies events in which I’ve played, I paid for one and was backed in three. Had I been given the choice to choose the event… it certainly wouldn’t have been the Ladies event. It’s not that I’m unsupportive of the Ladies event; yet, I’m not exactly supportive of it either. Reason being, who am I to say what someone should do with their time and money? Who am I to persuade another’s belief? Yet, sometimes I can’t help myself to reverse the role and think… as a woman, how would I feel if there were a Men’s-only event and no Ladies event? And so, I ponder the annual WSOP gender dilemma, not forming strong opinions one way or the other, but with some basic, recurring thoughts that to me seem like matters of common sense:

• Gender Specific Events: It’s only equal that men are given their own event held at the same time with the same buy-in, structure, extra prizes and treatment. If men are unable to play with their own gender, then they’re being singled out. Sorry to burst any bubbles but if men aren’t afforded the same opportunity…then we’re hypocrites and the Ladies event should be dissolved.
• Dissenting Opinions: As they say in Texas, opinions are like assholes … everyone’s got one. Chastising other’s opinions is expecting someone else to comply with our own view. That’s not equality, it’s not freedom to choose. It’s a childish tantrum of needing to be right. Last time I checked, the WSOP wasn’t located in a Communist country. And this gender crap is turning into a narcissistic dictatorship over a piece of jewelry. A good friend of mine always asked me…do you want to be right or do you want to be happy? I won’t bore you with details on my own happiness, but I will tell you that I heard a lot of unhappy complaining this weekend.
• Men Playing the Ladies Event: Seems to me if you want change then go through the appropriate corporate channels. It’s quite simple, either be part of the solution or be part of the problem. Now we have drama, potential legal issues and remind me again… was someone seriously injured?

More…

I just voted for the Maven Awards. Not usually my bag to give out all my confirming email data (in a time-consuming way) that lets someone else plausibly sell or profit from my internet ID. In fact, many know I consciously chose not to vote for the WSOP-TOC because I couldn’t help but see that as an email harvesting operation for WSOP.com, done in a way that trivializes the value of sites like Pokerati when it comes to someday sending players to the WSOP for online poker play.

(Also, by standing on such principles, I didn’t have to tell Tom he had a more promising future in selling pants than trying to qualify for the TOC.)

However, because the Maven Awards presumably isn’t looking to open an online poker room in the near future, and because, frankly, I was feeling bad for women in poker after the punk-bitch episodes in this year’s WSOP-Ladies event … I decided to give up my IP address to support the cause … somebody’s cause … in a way that seems like a good step toward someday negating the need for a separate Women in Poker Hall of Fame.

Much to my plausibly noble delight, it turns out The Maven Awards has an anonymous voting option that still does a decent job of preventing blatant ballot stuffing. (I tried; would require too much work for me to vote twice.)

I’m not sure when their voting deadline is, but it’s gotta be soon … so I encourage you to get your votes in, too, by voting here. Below are whom I voted for in each of the 14 categories and why:

More…

J.G.

---

OP-ED

To start, I must address the reasons for obscuring my identity. Matters such as the ones I’ll address in the coming paragraphs should be open to free and intelligent discussion within the community. Perhaps a person of stronger will would view the open airing of a difficult topic as so beneficial to all that he could ignore the personal discomforts. I think we all remember the second Star Trek movie, when Spock so logically stated that the needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the one.

Sadly, however, I’m not the man Spock was, even though he’s only half man. The fact is, I fear for my safety, and you’ll understand why shortly. I must ask any poker media that wish to interview me after reading this piece to respect my desire for anonymity. All video must be shot in backlit silhouette so that my features are obscured and my
nose doesn’t look too large. I will conduct audio interviews if I can be assured that a filter will be applied that will make my voice indistinguishable form Alec Baldwin’s.

There are only two possible explanations for an onslaught of events such as these. The first is that ugly outcomes are a near mathematical certainty in tournament poker. The other is that you are terribly unlucky. If you run bad, there must be someone who runs like God.

The Truth of the WSOP
I’ve spent the last five summers in Las Vegas working around the WSOP, and every year I hear the same desperation. About two and a half weeks into the events, most players are feeling worn down by the tournament poker. Draws fail to materialize, decks run colder than an Alberta February, and beats so bad they leave scars occur constantly.

More…