Cookies on the PokerNews Website

We use cookies to support interactive features like login and voting. Also, we allow trusted media partners to analyze site usage. Keep cookies enabled to enjoy the full site experience. By browsing our site with cookies enabled, you are agreeing to their use. Review our cookies information for more details.

Continue using cookies


Name:Donnie Peters
Send message

Forum Posts

PartyScout — I've always been a fan of Ivey, yes. I think the majority of everyone involved in poker one way or another is a fan of his. I'm also huge fan of Andy Bloch and the MIT Blackjack Team, which is basically the same thing as what Ivey did, in my opinion.

Chad_Holloway — I wish we all knew the exact true story of what all went down at Full Tilt Poker, first. I think we'd all be a little more upset if this was Howard Lederer simply because he'd be gambling with money that supposedly came from all of us players. That'd be my biggest issue if this was Lederer.

Awesome read, Mac. Very informative about the legal inner workings that goes into a lawsuit like this. I think this piece definitely lends itself to further showing Phil Ivey didn't really do anything wrong or illegal here. Sure, it may be frowned upon by the casino, but Ivey took an edge he had against them and it just seems they are mad and chasing their losses.

Juffinn6 — After all that happened with online poker in the U.S. and the legal issues a site like PokerStars is having after operating in the States following the UIGEA, it seems other sites are taking the "safe" route in other countries when any sort of pressure is placed on their operations legally. Hopefully it all gets ironed out sooner than later. Poker needs to be allowed everywhere.

RichardS — Will definitely be great for poker in Vanessa Selbst is able to finish at the top of the GPI in 2014, but I'm not sure here schedule of events that she'll be playing would allow for it. She doesn't put in a ton of volume like some of these other players.

She is open about going to for European Poker Tour Player of the Year title, though, which would be great. She's currently second to Ole Schemion in that race with the Grand Final in Monte Carlo coming up. I don't think her earning this title would do leaps and bounds for poker on a global scale, because it's only the EPT, but it should do a lot of the game and women in poker in Europe.

pamelam and JamesL — Agree. Ivey did make a vast amount of requests and the casino honored them. The casino is responsible for inspection of all gaming materials that go into play. Ivey sought out an edge and took it. If anyone is at fault here, it's Gemaco for printing a defaulted deck of cards.

Chad_Holloway — How is this any different than seeking out a casino venue that would use a different deck size blackjack shoe for counting? How is it any different than finding a place where the roulette wheels have just one zero instead of two?

Spirit of the game? You mean the game the casino is always trying to increase its edge against the player in order to win money? Outside of poker, there is no "spirit of the game" in casinos. They're pushing every edge against you, and a player is never going to be a winner. That's a fact. This is similar to card counting, in my opinion. Yes, it's frowned upon by casinos, but it's not illegal and is a tactic used by players to increase their edge.

The casino knew full well what it was getting into here, as do all casinos. The fact that they lost and then went after the money is pretty absurd. It's not like Ivey showed up at the casino, marked the cards with invisible ink, and used special glasses to see the markings. That's cheating. This is not.

BASSCRUISER — "Take a little hit here and you'll make it up easily through participation in future tournaments."

That is a very, very true statement here. The best example I can see from this would be what PokerStars did in buying up Full Tilt Poker, including it's debt to players and reimbursing it. PokerStars is now seen as a savior, and rightfully so, in the eyes of many.

For everyone here claiming Phil Ivey lacks ethics or pointing out that he did something wrong, he didn't. Like DutchBoyd1 said, "Ivey won by exploiting their own defective equipment" and that is him simply gaining an edge over the casino. This is exactly what casinos do to all players in their games — they exploit the edges they have in order for the house to have the winning edge in all games.

RichardS — You bring up a good point about what people spend their money on, but it's funny that states oppose online gambling yet the majority of them have some form of lottery. When we're specifically talking about online poker — a game of skill — it's very hypocritical for a state to disallow online poker to become legal but allow lotteries to be legal.

As of right now, only six states in the U.S. don't have some form of lottery, which, as we all know, is a complete gamble with no skill involved whatsoever.

RichardS — I think what you're trying to get at is that online poker works as a feeder system to live venues, whether it be cash or tournaments. I agree with this, and oftentimes people get their start in poker through testing out the game online. For one, these players can play for a fraction of the cost it takes to learn at a live venue because the buy-ins are much, much smaller. Second, you're not visible, so making mistakes behind a computer screen doesn't come with the embarrassment of being in the flesh. Third, online poker sites tend to offer a much wider variety of games to try out, whereas most casinos or card rooms are limited, mostly to hold'em.

State-by-state online poker also increases the reach of various live venues that opt into having a site. Take Nevada, for example. Reno and Las Vegas are the two big cities with plentiful options of live casinos, but not everyone wants to drive the distance to and from them on a daily basis. With online poker available to an entire state, everyone within state boundaries is able to play, so casinos are still pulling in some form of revenue from those players who aren't able to physically make it to the venue.

Fezz — You make some good points, particularly that there needs to be a larger presence standing up for poker-playing rights. Would love to see a greater movement in this regard going forward and fighting for poker in the U.S.

bgpoker419 — I don't entirely agree here. Brick-and-mortar casinos lasted long before online poker and online gambling were available. They continued to last when online poker was taken away in the U.S., and have also lasted in jurisdictions around the world where no online gaming was available. While I disagree with you that brick-and-mortar casinos would die without online gaming, I agree with you that brick-and-mortar casinos could definitely benefit from online gaming, which I think is the bigger picture that needs focus.

zzjitterzz — Sorry about that. Misread the MSPT schedule. Thanks, and good luck in the event!

RichardS — As long as he keeps playing a decent volume of events, I suspect the same.

svizac — I second what Rich responded with. Keep in mind that uncapping the event might actually hurt numbers and make the field size much smaller than expected. When businessmen and amateurs know that pros can keep checking the field and the size right up until start time to jump in, it makes them think the died size could grow to something completely unwanted on their behalf.

zzjitterzz — According to the Full Tilt Poker website's description of Flip Tournaments, "Players begin each Flip Tournament with 10 chips and most tournaments conclude within a few hands." The flip round is a shootout style, so the players would flip until a winner is determined.

Onmyway — After the flip round, "All players who reach the second round in a regular Flipout Tournament will share in the prize pool. The remaining entrants are reseated at new tables and the tournament continues with a standard betting structure." That said, it sounds like things will "reset" to a normal multi-table tournament following the flip round.

While poker is a skill game, one can't argue that there is still an element of gamble to the game and certainly a luck factor. I think it's pretty apparent to anyone signing up to play these Flipout Tournaments that the gamble/luck factor has been ratcheted up a notch or two for this new, interesting, and fun way to start off a poker tournament. That said, no one who signs up should complain about the little extra luck involved right at the beginning. Plus, it's only for that first round and then from there on out things are normal. Finding new, innovative ways to keep poker fun and exciting is always a plus for the game.

Bad_Sir_Ivan — If trained correctly, the dealers should be able to implement this system rather easily. The problem is that with these big tournament fields, oftentimes more dealers are summoned to the job than normal, sometimes through very quick training turnaround or from other areas and games within the casino or venue. The larger the pool of dealers, the less the quality tends to be.

I love the idea written by afrankenberger, as it offers a much better solution to the problem than just sticking a shot clock on everyone in a giant main event field. The World Poker Tour has the right idea behind looking to fix the problem, but the tour can't confine the solutions to just the practice of implementing a shot clock into play. I strongly believe first and foremost that this is on the players, in two ways.

First, the players need to all take it upon themselves to act a bit faster. Think of it as getting better, too. For many, poker is a job, or at least a means to make extra money. You train to get better, which shouldn't just involve skill, but also aiming to make your decisions faster. After all, don't the pros want to play more hands against the amateurs?

Second, the players need to self police the situation. Andy's process allows for a little bit of this, but until something like this is put into place, acting like Daniel Negreanu would seems to be best. There's nothing wrong with wanting your table to play at a normal speed.

I think the discussion of "Who will be poker's next superstar?" is a great one. I would agree that Daniel Negreanu is in a league of his own, but I could also say he's the lead of a top tier of five that includes Doyle Brunson, Phil Hellmuth, Phil Ivey, and Chris Moneymaker. There's definitely tiers to superstardom, and all of the players you mentioned, Rich, are on the cusp of breaking into the top level or two, or they have the qualities to be able to do so.

A lot of what determines who becomes the next superstar also has to do with who the media (PokerNews included) opts to push the spotlight on. There are so many great personalities out there in poker and that's who I think we as media need to be focusing on. The winners will shine because of the wins they produce and titles they get ahold of, but it's the personalities and the stories behind those personalities that draw people into the game of poker.

ScottPorcella — Might be a little too difficult to implement a shot clock right from the start of a tournament. I think if the WPT does opt to use a shot clock next season at some point in each tournament, it will eventually grow into being used throughout the entire tournament. Just need to start somewhere, iron out the kinks, make sure everything works as planned, and then grow it.

But I would agree with you if you are saying it's more needed at the beginning of a tournament than at the end. The deeper a tournament goes, the more important decisions are, especially when the field is deep into the money. It's the nonsensical tanking on Day 1s that are hurtful to the game.

OZphoneix — Why do you say that?