Yes, players do sell pieces of themselves so the blow is lesser on their bankrolls due to the variance of tournaments, but in this case, it's much more of a gesture from Tony G to the fans who would like to get a bit of a sweat on the action. Oftentimes, players will do this sort of thing as well, and it really makes things exciting to follow when you have a small investment with a chance to win.
flintsword — PokerNews is not live reporting from WSOP Asia-Pacific, nor hosting the live streams are we are not the official live reporting team. We are providing daily recap coverage and feature articles from the event, and will continue our partnership with the WSOP this summer as the official live reporting team.
IBombyou — You make good points. Keep in mind that WSOP is working to launch their own real-money poker site eventually, so they will not tie themselves to a site like PokerStars or Full Tilt Poker for satellites, although I agree that they should.
I'm not so sure "failure" is the right word. It's more of a work in progress and will need to be looked at in order for the events to grow, which they will in time. Remember that when WSOP Europe was in its inaugural year, the three events attracted 105, 156 and 362 entrants, so it's not always a massive bang from the start.
pposse — I believe that bet is no longer running.
thegimp9 — Did you read Rich Ryan's Five Thoughts? He addresses this issue in the third thought.
vehement_voodoo — Antonio Esfandiari has three bracelets.
donfisher1971 — I'm always for tournaments and venues working somewhat together to schedule their events more back-to-back than on top of one another, much like many European events have started doing. They can then draw bigger crowds for extended periods of time in what they call festivals. Still, the $200,000 guarantee and big names hosting the event should help attract a good field size.
Almost seems that no matter what, there will be scheduling conflicts these days. Poker is everywhere!
Chad_Holloway — Well, it's Team Asia-Pacific, so he the team may include much more than just Aussies. I could see one player from New Zealand, one from Australia and two from the Asian region filling out the team behind Hachem.
CheehC — Joe Hachem has a bit more tie to the WSOP than Lee Nelson does, though, but I can see what you mean by your argument. Leo Boxell would also be a great choice. We've seen America face Europe in this thing before, so I'm personally very interested in seeing who is on that team.
Thanks, looking into it.
wvttk — I would disagree with your comment regarding the gamble one needs to succeed in poker. All of the top players have a lot of gamble in them. It's the ability to put money on the line and push edges that often makes them succeed. The more risk adverse you are, the less you're going to succeed in today's poker world. With the way the game has developed so much in the past several years, the skill today is much larger than it has ever been. Given that rise in average skill, a player must push smaller edges more and more in order to gain that overall edge. Simply sitting around and waiting for spots that are 80-20 simply don't work anymore. In order to win big in cash games or tournaments, you have to have a big amount of gamble in you.
Yes, it was an interesting video coming from a very interesting and controversial story. It's sad to see the Partouche Poker Tour fold after everything that happened, as the tour seemed to be fairly successful overall. Guarantees on poker events are always difficult to gauge, especially when there are some that are extremely large. Given how many events take place all over on a regular basis in today's poker world, it's not often all players flock to the same event, making it harder to reach a guarantee.
It would be interesting to see Partouche possibly try and gain some respect back by investigating the Pasualini-Rossi incident a bit more. If these players did in fact cheat, Partouche should do all the can to make it right.
ppierce34 — Thanks. We'll be digging up some old strategy pieces one a week if we can and releasing them as parts of the Strategy Vault series. Glad you enjoyed it!
Medukie — Sorry about that, my brain was wired backwards in thinking. Fixed.
sylvain.guinepa — Yes, cops are suspended when under investigation, but are these two players being investigated? As far as I know, they aren't. I've seen the video, too. Yes, the cheating accusations seem like a very, very true reality, but until an investigation is conducted, this is simply a video suggesting the players cheating. The GPI is taking their own stance based on the video when, in fact, they are not the organization that makes the determining rule as to whether or not this cheating is proved. That responsibility lies with the tournament organization and the casino, and I would highly suggest both of them look into this matter promptly instead of turning a blind eye.
It might even be a good idea for the GPI to contact the tournament organization and the casino to tell them they are no longer going to accept results to be used in their rankings unless both take action and move towards an investigation on this matter.
I really hope that everyone here commenting about how Rich Ryan's stance about not removing the numbers realizes that, as it stands right now, this is only alleged cheating and an accusation. No titles have been stripped and no money has been removed from the players involved because nothing has yet to be proven. Until that happens, the numbers have to stand, don't they?
And yes, I have seen the video and I do have my own opinion on the situation. Right now, though, facts and fact, and the fact of the matter is that this has not been officially deemed cheating. Until the tournament organization or casino proves the cheating, removes the title and the money from the players, it simply stands as an accusation. If the GPI began suspending players based on accusations, you must realize that many players might be under suspension.
When Ali Tekintamgac was disqualified for cheating in 2010, he was not awarded his prize money, but the tournament organization and casino proved he cheated and deemed it as such. That same thing must happen here before players are suspended simply under accusations.
ppierce34 — First off, kudos for the Pierce reference in your username.
Second, I'm not exactly sure that's what Rich Ryan is trying to say here. I think what he's trying to say is (correct me if I'm wrong, Rich) that until these two players are proved to have cheated, the money stripped and the title stripped, then it's still just an accusation. In the end, we probably can't base these suspensions or bans simply on accusations. Until the tournament body removes the title and takes back the money it still stands. This goes along with what flintsword was saying at the start of his post.
flintsword — Negreanu is not playing due to a prior commitment that he made with some friends, and he feels that it is more important to honor his word on the prior engagement. You can see the video he released later on in the night where he discusses his reason for opting out of the NBC event below:
Pokerguy21 — I agree with the automatic bids, as it would create sort of a bigger contest amongst the players on the entire circuit and good for the game as a whole. It'd also help to constantly keep faces fresh on this list, and we'd have a solid form of criteria to judge the list by rather than knowing it's just who got picked by a group of producers. Previously, there were automatic qualifiers, but that criteria was not used for 2013. If you listen to the most recent PokerNews Podcast, Kristy, Rich and myself discuss the list and also some ideas on how to improve the selection process. Check that out in episode No. 136. (http://www.pokernews.com/podcast/)