Poker News / Short-Stacked Shamus / 14 May 2010 / 1 Comments

Hard to believe, but in just two short weeks the first hands will be dealt at the 2010 World Series of Poker. While players all over the world plan their trips to Las Vegas to participate in the 57 different bracelet events, those who will be reporting on the action are readying for their annual pilgrimage as well.

Last week I shared the first part of my WSOP Bloggers Roundtable -- a Q&A with a group of well-known poker bloggers, all of whom have had experience covering the Series. This week we move to our second and final six-handed table, around whom are seated the following scribes:

• Change100, author of Pot Committed and reporter and live blogger for PokerNews.

• "Mean Gene" Bromberg, contributor to the UltimateBet blog whose writings can also be found at GeneBromberg.com. Also a photographer, Gene contributed that picture of the WSOP Media Press Box above.

• AlCantHang of Full Tilt Poker's Poker from the Rail blog, as well as Dead Money = Sir AlCantHang.

• Andrew Feldman, poker editor, columnist, producer, and tournament director for the ESPN Poker Club. Besides hosting ESPN's Inside Deal and The Poker Edge podcast, Feldman also contributes to the ESPN poker blog along with Gary Wise, Bernard Lee, and Laura Lane.

• Steve "Chops" Preiss, one of the Entities at Wicked Chops Poker, voted Best Poker Blog for 2009 in the Bluff Magazine Readers Choice Awards.

• Dan Michalski, creator and chief contributor at Pokerati. Michalski is also presently gearing up for the 2010 World Cup over at Soccerati.

Short-Stacked Shamus: The World Series of Poker is nearly upon us. Which stories are you most interested in following this summer? Which players are going to be among the "ones to watch" for you at this year's WSOP (and why)?

Change100: I think the level of talent in the batch of 21-year-olds making their WSOP debut this summer is just astonishing. Guys like Ashton Griffin and Tom Marchese who play in the biggest cash games online and already have significant live victories under their belts (the NAPT Venetian $25K Bounty Shootout and $5K Main Event respectively) are playing the WSOP the first time. So are guys like Dan "djk123" Kelly and Randal "RandALLin" Flowers. Luke "FullFlush" Schwartz and his foul mouth will be debuting as well.

What I'm really going to be looking forward to is seeing Annette Obrestad finally play in the WSOP. I've covered events all over the world and still, watching her win the WSOP-E Main Event is by far the most dramatic and emotionally charged moment I've experienced in poker.

Mean Gene: I'm curious to see how the WSOP operation runs without Jeffrey Pollack at the helm -- to see if there's any change in "tone" between Harrah's and the players. And, if Harrah's has plans to take the WSOP brand online, how they deal with the big online sites (and the high-profile players who represent them) might be of interest. I'm also interested to see how the cavernous Pavilion Room does as a poker venue; it makes the Amazon Room look like a broom closet.

Obviously the player everyone will be watching is Annette Obrestad, even more so now that she's signed with Full Tilt. She's already a superstar, a bracelet winner, before playing her first WSOP event in Vegas. She's going to get the full-court press from the media, and probably considerable attention from outlets outside the poker sphere.

AlCantHang: Maybe it's because of the recent announcement, but I'm really looking forward to seeing how Annette Obrestad will fare in her first run at the WSOP in Las Vegas. It's seems a long time since she won the World Series of Poker Europe Main Event and she's coming in with a lot of pressure. I'll also be interested to see how big these extra $1,000 "donkaments" will be after the massive single one last year -- whether they will all be huge or the "wealth" will be spread across the different weekends.

Andrew Feldman: There are a ton of storylines that I'm looking forward to this summer, but most of them involve the WSOP Las Vegas rookies. The debut of Annette Obrestad is one of the most hyped debuts we've ever been part of. She does walk in with a bracelet, but how she makes it through the WSOP grind will be interesting to see.

The other main story I'll be focusing on is Hellmuth. With 11 bracelets and Sam Chauhan by his side, will Phil be able to extend his lead over Doyle and Johnny this year?

Chops: I'm definitely curious to see how the landscape changes (if at all) after June 1 and if there's a big drop in numbers. Everyone is talking about it being the Year of the Woman™ and while I don't think we'll see three open event bracelet winners like Ty Stewart predicted on Poker2Nite, I think we may see one, which would be a 100% increase from your average year.

As far as players we're watching, you know every year some online guy (Brock Parker) or seasoned pro (Tom Schneider) breaks through, runs good, and wins a few bracelets. But we'll be keeping our eye on two obvious guys: Phil Hellmuth (seems refocused and fixed some leaks) and Phil Ivey (bracelet prop bets will keep him motivated).

Dan Michalski: Naturally I think everyone's going to be watching Annette15. I wonder if such a youngster can live up to the hype with all eyes on her. I also think the dudes at Victory Poker will be players to watch -- in part because they have so much planned for this Series both on the table and off, and because they've got a pretty damn good team.

Beyond the players actually playing, we can't help but watch the business side of it. When Harrah's first took over, whether right or wrong I assumed they were the corporate evil empire of poker. Over time, however, the WSOP team showed they were not that -- that they were ultimately looking to create the best experience for fans and players as possible. Will that spirit carry over with the new regime?

Short-Stacked Shamus: Once again we've seen a few changes to the WSOP schedule this time around, including the introduction of numerous $1,000 buy-in NLHE events, a change to the $50K "The Player's Championship" (now an 8-game mix with a NLHE final table), the addition of a new $25K NLHE 6-max. event, and the return of the WSOP Tournament of Champions. Which new event(s) are you most looking forward to (and why)?

Mean Gene: I'm not a fan of making the Player's Championship final table no-limit, but if getting it on ESPN is the priority then so be it. The TV exposure should draw all the heavy hitters to the event and the final table should be stacked. As will the Tournament of Champions final table, but I'm kind of meh about the TOC. I'm not keen on the fans voting in their favorites, and I'm not big on focusing so much attention on an invitational with a tiny field. But again, TV dictates policy.

AlCantHang: The Tournament of Champions is interesting because the field is basically set with a popularity contest. There are going to be some very deserving players sitting on the sidelines watching. The $50k "Player's Championship" will also be a great way to kick off the 2010 WSOP -- similar to last year's "40th Anniversary" kick off with a small but distinguished field and the rail packed early.

Andrew Feldman: The $50,000 Players Championship is going to be an event to remember and I think everyone is looking forward to this event. I'm also very excited for the $25,000 six-max. As the popularity of that style game continues to grow, it'll be interesting to see how large a field it can attract and if they'll play regardless of TV coverage.

Chops: Really glad the WSOP is bringing some excitement back to the $50k H.O.R.S.E. event. It went so downhill last year by every measurable, and it seems like the players are back into it again this year. The $40k six-handed event should be lights out too, where you'll see some of the up-and-coming online guys shine.

Dan Michalski: Oy, not to be a cynic, but I don't think there are any events I'm "excited" about. Yes, the ones you mention will be interesting, so maybe I am a bit "curious" how they'll shake out. But the event-related stories that will be most intriguing will take place over the course of multiple events. If someone took down two $1k events, for example, that would become pretty exciting as said new bracelet winner started going deep. Likewise, if a $1k winner also performed in one the big-boy events, that too would be particularly noteworthy.

Change100: I'm a huge fan of the new TOC format, so I'm looking forward to covering that one the most. I will be avoiding the Rio like herpes during the $1,000 donkaments.

Short-Stacked Shamus: One element of the schedule that will remain the same is the delayed final table for the Main Event, back for a third year. Now that we've seen it a couple of times, what is your current opinion of the "November Nine"?

AlCantHang: The purist in me says it's an abomination, play the tournament out. The business man in me says it's a great idea to promote the series and tournament. Unfortunately I still don't think they've done a very good job using the time between getting to the final 9 and November to promote the brand and getting information out there. Maybe this year?

Andrew Feldman: At this point, I love it. I love going into the final table knowing as much about every player as I can. Speaking to all of them as they go through their preparations during the time off is great. You really get to know the players and can speak intelligently about each one by being given this opportunity. Also, even though I know who eventually makes it, I love to watch the players make their journey to the final table on TV.

Chops: Big fan of the N9™. Wasn't very much for it at first, but it's really help elevate the prestige of the final table. It also helps with years like 2008, when you have a dud of a final table, and you can build some personalities along the way and allow for some of the no-names to have a few good tournament scores during the in-between months (think Ivan Demidov in 2008 or Antoine Saout/Kevin Schaffel last year).

Dan Michalski: All good. Personally, I'd like to see a little less of a delay. But it seems that won't happen -- both because of ESPN production needs as well as Team WSOP's fondness for alliteration. October Ocho would just cause too many other problems, so fine, keep it in November. (Though wouldn't it be funny if we saw a double elimination with 10 players left to bring us a November Nine-minus-One?)

The closer they can get to an actual live broadcast, however, the better. Reducing a one-day delay to a half-day delay to eventually a 15-minute or 1-hour security delay would be just dreamy. Would also like to see the ESPN production crew work with others who are more experienced doing live events so at a minimum we can see something stellar-to-poker-geeks on ESPN 3.

Change100: I guess I've adjusted to it. I was at both of them and there's no denying that the atmosphere is electric and really exciting. It's crazy watching people line up for hours to get seats inside the theatre. Although I don't think the delay did too much for the players in terms of mainstream media visibility and increased sponsorship dollars, it did wonders for the TV ratings for the final table coverage on ESPN. And that's a good thing. Bigger ratings means more poker on TV, more poker on TV means more people playing, and more people playing means you and I still have jobs.

Mean Gene: I like the delay. It does give all the players at the final table considerable exposure and provides the "real" world with an easy-to-digest sporting event to wrap their heads around.

What I don't like is playing from nine down to two, and then having the heads-up two days later. If you're going to play it out over a weekend, I'd rather they break it up a bit -- maybe play eight hours on Saturday, play down to heads-up Sunday, then crown the champion on Monday. It's a bit much to ask a crowd to sit and watch anything for 17 hours; if the idea is to turn the Main Event into a popular mainstream sporting event then you can't have the folks in the stands stupefied with exhaustion during some of the most dramatic moments.

Short-Stacked Shamus: It has been another eventful "off-season" with much happening in poker on the professional circuit, on TV, and in the courts/on Capitol Hill. How would you describe the overall relevance of the WSOP to the game of poker, circa 2010? That is to say, in your opinion, what are the "stakes" (so to speak) with regard to the Series and its success?

Andrew Feldman: If you think poker, you think of the World Series. There may be up and coming tours, but the WSOP will always rank at the highest just based on the history that it brings each year.

Chops: I've always described the WSOP as Christmastime for poker players. It's without a doubt the most relevant tournament series and matters more than just about everything else combined.

Dan Michalski: I think clearly the three most significant entities in poker are Harrah's, PokerStars, and Full Tilt. These three -- with some help from PartyPoker and the WPT in the early days -- really shaped poker as we know it. Yet now we have Harrah's in a position where it may not want to cooperate with Stars and Tilt to the same extent they have in the past. So in the multi-BILLION-dollar game, you've got a corporate entity that some may not trust up against the one company that long term is probably the only competitor presenting a challenge when it comes to throwing the biggest-best live tourneys of the year -- but operating with owners who prefer not to identify themselves and don't travel to the US. And then you have Tilt, whose honchos do operate relatively publicly within the US but as a result are facing all sorts of threats to their business and people.

Some might say to that extent, there never has been so much at stake in the business of running tables, live and online. It looks like a round of pot-limit Omaha to me. When all is said and done, all the money's eventually going in -- someone's gonna be happy, and someone's not. These guys have always played nice together in the past -- if they didn't they wouldn't have such a big game -- but they all want ultimately to bust their opponents.

Might need to workshop that metaphor, obv... but to me that's part of what the 2010 World Series will be all about.

Change100: I think it will be interesting to see the numbers this year in terms of attendance. Last year, it was essentially flat and this year I really think we're going to see a significant drop in entries, maybe somewhere around 10-15% overall. I don't think it has anything to do with the popularity of the game or peoples' attitudes toward it, but just a direct reflection of the shitty state of the U.S. economy.

Mean Gene: The WSOP appears on ESPN, the 800-pound gorilla of sports programming. Having poker on ESPN helps legitimize the game, the people who play it, and the online companies that sponsor the game and those players. If push comes to shove, if the federal government tries to crack down on online poker, the fact that your typical American has seen poker on TV for years could be helpful in the court of popular opinion. People might look at the government launching an assault on something they've been watching on ESPN for years and think "Wait, they're saying poker is illegal?? WTF??" So having the Series on ESPN is huge -- it keeps poker firmly within the cultural mainstream.

Short-Stacked Shamus: Each of you has covered the WSOP before. What was your most memorable experience -- from a reporter's standpoint -- while covering the WSOP?

Chops: So many stick out. Our first WSOP Main Event in 2005, Phil Ivey was moved directly behind us and (unbeknownst to him) we could see his hole cards for two solid hours. That was like getting your PhD in poker. He ran the table over. Seeing pros embrace things like Girls on the Rail, calling us over, and pointing out potentials to take pics of has been fun. Sometimes the unexpected moment, like when Jeff Shulman told us he was going to throw his bracelet in the garbage or watching Dennis Phillips trying to talk people out of deals with Tilt and go with Stars... those are things that just pop up and create a memorable story. Those are always the best.

Dan Michalski: This will be my seventh. (Holy shit, that's far too many.) Winning the non-bracelet Dream Team championship with Pauly has to be up there as a super-memorable experience. I also remember one hand in '05 or '06 at the televised table where I believe it was J-J vs. A-K or something like that, and the board showed Q-Q-Q-Q-A. So much excitement, re-excitement, and re-re-excitement on the flop, turn, and river. It was so funny to see all these photographers snapping like crazy at a TV screen. I think it was Otis who came up with the headline "Live Poker Is Rigged" -- which was even funnier back then because none of us believed the online version of what had long been dubbed "the cheating game" could be. Regardless, that hand was living art -- testament to intelligent design and the mathematical brilliance of bad beats and variance. But, understandably, you'd think the media had just seen an apparition of Mary.

I also remember the 2004 WSOP -- when anyone with a website and 100 readers could get a media badge simply by showing up (at Binion's) on Day 2 of the main event. I was only there for a few days that year, but I feel it provided a privileged glimpse into how things once were. The shotguns protecting the final table money seemed like much less of a stage prop then. In the media room, interestingly, they had a non-smoking section, and some were pissed because that's where the four shared computers you had to use were if you wanted to connect to the internet.

Change100: I covered the final table of the 2007 WSOP-Europe Main Event on assignment for PokerNews. It was set up inside the disco at the Empire Casino and I had my laptop on a little cocktail table about ten feet from the stage. Jeffrey Pollack sat next to me and we started talking about Annette and what we were doing at the age of 18 instead of winning millions of pounds.

"I was working at Barnes & Noble when I was 18," I told the commissioner.

"I was scooping ice cream," he replied.

A few hours later, the cards were turned over in what would be the final hand. Annette showed a set of sevens and John Tabatabai tabled two pair. They dealt the turn and the river and she won the hand, but there was this long wait while the floor hand to count down both stacks to confirm she had Tabatabai covered. She was completely motionless behind those huge dark glasses until Jack Effel got on the mic and announced to the crowd that she had won. That's when she just melted, dropping her head into her hands and bursting into happy tears. Seriously, grown men were weeping as she held that bracelet over her head. It was a sight to see and a moment I'll never forget.

Mean Gene: I worked for PokerNews in 2008 and the day the Main Event would get down to the money I showed up for work and Garry Gates, our boss, looked at me and said "What are you doing here?" "Uh, I work here," I said, "I've been here for like six weeks now". But that wasn't what he meant -- I was actually scheduled to be off that day. Brilliant, a precious day off and it looked like I'd be spending it in the Amazon Room instead of by the pool. I couldn't leave because I was sharing a car with a friend and didn't know when he'd be done. And I was thirsty....

So I went up into the Rio, played some video poker (losing heavily) and decided to drink (also heavily). So it's like five in the afternoon and I'm wasted and I learn that the bubble is approaching and Iggy, the poker Blogfather, still has chips. I stagger back down to the Amazon Room, throw my credential around my neck, and join Pauly and Otis and F-Train on the rail sweating him.

And sweat him we did, wincing every time he put a chip in the pot. We're watching him play and I thought, the blogger circle of life is complete, we goofs started writing about poker for fun and now, years later, four of us work in the poker media and we're watching a friend play in the Main Event. I sobered up as the hand-for-hand dragged on and when the bubble finally burst, I was giddy with relief. It was just really cool that we were all there together to enjoy that moment.

AlCantHang: 2009 was my first full year covering the WSOP and the most memorable moment was watching Brian Lemke win the $5,000 No-Limit Hold'em event. Lemke's cousin Justin Shronk was a long time member of the "poker media" and had just passed away a month before the WSOP kicked off. Lemke had made through the entire field and won the bracelet wearing a Shronk Memorial t-shirt and with all his friends in the stands. It was also an experience watching Phil Ivey's run to the November Nine and I won't forget watching Billy Kopp monkey shove an easy final-nine stack drawing dead with the old five-trey suited.

Andrew Feldman: Two moments come to mind so clearly. The first was the rollercoaster of Scotty Nguyen when he was in great position to make the final table in 2007, but eventually came up short, blowing up to Philip Hilm. The entire room was electric as we watched Scotty accumulate chips, then every spectator was looking for a reason that one of the game's best just exploded on a huge stage.

The other moment came from 2005. I was walking around the room and spotted Phil Ivey's table. I walked over to it, stood at the rail (behind a player who was involved in the pot with Ivey) and Ivey stared me down! It's not like I was involved or there was any pressure on me, but I would've folded anything. I guess that's the cheapest it will ever cost anyone to feel the power of the Ivey stare.

Short-Stacked Shamus: What do you like the most about covering the WSOP? What do you like the least?

Dan Michalski: Seeing friends from around the world. Some of us aren't just trading war stories, we're sharing info in a way that leads to a greater collective knowledge of the poker world we all live in, so that's kinda cool. And we also tend to bowl a lot -- good times! On the negative side, you see a lot of lives, or at least dreams, broken at the World Series. Witnessing marriages, businesses, and bankrolls collapse can wear on your psyche; if it's not heart-wrenching, it's at least annoying.

Change100: I love the camaraderie among the media. It's like being at summer camp or on a film shoot. I love being able to see good friends on a daily basis and have people around that understand exactly what you're going through when it's four weeks in and everyone has that weary, exhausted "stare" going on. I also love picking up new moves from watching so much poker. I always tend to play better myself after watching pros for seven weeks straight.

On the flip side, I'm from Southern California, so I'm not wild about spending the best two months of the year sweating my ass off in the desert. I'd rather be on Zuma Beach in June, not inside the Rio. But honestly, the worst part about covering the WSOP for me personally is the crowds. I'm more than a little claustrophobic and I hate hate hate having to weave my way through a slow-moving sea of humanity just to get a bite to eat or take a piss. I've managed to successfully avoid covering the big donkaments the last couple of years, but there's no getting away from those Main Event Day 1s. I'm freaking out right now just thinking about that. You know how ornery I get around tourists, Shamus.

Mean Gene: Working with my friends is the best part of the WSOP. I get to work with all sorts of smart and talented and borderline-crazy people and even the bad times are good times. When the start of the World Series looms I sometimes find myself less than enthused about facing 16-hour days and covering Stud tournaments, but the fact that I'll get to see my friends and colleagues gets me amped up.

But while I love my poker pals, covering the Series from start to finish is a long time to be away from home. Seven weeks in Vegas can feel more like a sentence than an assignment, and I find myself missing my family, my friends, my couch. It can be a grind, and if you don't pace yourself you could find yourself ground down to a nub long before the Main Event.

AlCantHang: Getting to see and spend time with my friends in the poker community and each day there is a chance we will see poker history. What I don't like? 99.9% of the people I will see on a daily basis are the same degenerates over and over.

Andrew Feldman: I love the journey of the Main Event. From a massive room filled with players until only a few tables remain, you get to see each of these players work towards poker history. You're there for the ride and it's always a fun one.

Chops: I love covering the WSOP. It's my favorite time of year from a poker standpoint. Yeah, it's a grind, but it brings out the best in me and in the other Entities. It's great to see/spend time with the other so-called poker "journalists" as well.

What do I like the least? The fact they closed Sau Paulo for lunch last year. WTF? Did we lose a war?

Much thanks to Change100, Mean Gene, AlCantHang, Andrew Feldman, Chops, and Dan Michalski for taking the time.

Tags: AlCantHang, Andrew Feldman, blogs, Change100, ESPN, Gene Bromberg, Pokerati, Wicked Chops, WSOP