Durrrr challenge: not the kind of stuff we were hoping for

Durrrr’s $1 million challenge has been going on for quite a while now. It’s been so long actually since Tom Dwan issued his notorious challenge to the world that many newcomers in the online poker world may not even know what it’s all about. Well, for those of you who didn’t follow the challenge sessions closer, here goes:
Rumors started floating about a possible challenge in which Tom Dwan would take on any player in the world and put up $1.5 million against the other player’s $500k, on the conclusion of a 50,000 hand nosebleed stakes heads-up poker match. These rumors took off in January 2009. Sure enough, a little later, Dwan did indeed confirm in an interview that the rumors were true and he specified the exact details of the challenge. He would take on any player in the world with Phil Galfond’s exception (I remember this detail had the poker world puzzled back then) and he would indeed post $1.5 million against his opponent’s $500k on a 50,000 hand $200/$400 PL Omaha match-up.
The unheard-of nature of the challenge soon had poker forums abuzz with anticipation. Would anyone take Dwan up on his proposal? Was he really serious about it? As it turned out, he was kind of serious about it and there were plenty of takers as nosebleed regulars queued up to get a piece of the New Jersey Wonderkid.
David Benyamine, Phil Ivey and Patrik Antonius have all expressed their willingness to take Dwan on, and the choice eventually fell to Patrik Antonius, whom Dwan has been battling for more than 7 months now.

I myself was pretty excited about the prospects of watching such a massive, never before seen online poker undertaking unfold, but quite frankly, these days I find myself rather disappointed. I mean what gives? Almost 8 months after the start of the challenge, we don’t seem to be any closer to a conclusion than we were at the very beginning. It’s awful hard to be a durrrr challenge fan as sessions are so few and far between that everyone but the most radical of railbirds finds it impossible to focus on the series. There’s pretty much zero continuity to the matter and because of that, interest tends to subside quickly. Sure, there were some pretty spectacular swings indeed, and several times one player seemed to get a decisive grip on the situation, but due to the fact that both players were involved in other high stakes games in between the sparse challenge sessions, and thus both of them had plenty of opportunities to rebuild their stacks elsewhere, even those swings proved uninteresting.
One thing has become certain by now: if the two players did indeed plan for the challenge action to go down this way, then they probably killed the hype from the get-go. Where’s the several session a week carnage the poker world had been bracing for? Where’s the sweat the drama and the heartbreak everyone expected?
Adjusting on the go from one day to another is an entirely different matter from taking a two month break after a beating and thoroughly re-assessing the situation. Shouldn’t this challenge be about stamina as well as about prowess?
What happens to the other players who had expressed their desire to take Dwan on? By the time the Antonius part of it ends, the others will probably have forgotten all about it. I’d also like to point it out that Phil Ivey is currently involved in the WSOP’s November Nine, where the odds of making seriously big money are overwhelmingly in his favor, so he might not even be interested in the durrrr challenge anymore.
Certainly, it’s not yet too late to touch the challenge up a little and to up the pace. If the two players decided to have a minimum of 2 or 3 sessions a week, and if they set a minimum time limit to each of the sessions, things would pick up immediately. Sure, such rules represent additional bounds for them and they’re not obliged to undertake anything that makes them uncomfortable in any way, but as far as the poker show is concerned, these rules would certainly come in handy.

No, all is not lost yet for the durrrr challenge, and it still retains the potential of becoming one of the biggest heads-up duels in poker history, but in order to fulfill that potential, certain changes will have to be made.
Though I must admit I’ve been quite disappointed in how things moved along so far, deep down inside I still believe that this is but the calm before the storm that will erupt down the home stretch. With the finish line far out of sight, the two players are currently in endurance mode. As soon as the finish creeps closer though, I believe we’re in for a serious sprint.
I really hope I’m right about this. Unless I am, there probably won’t be another challenge series involving Ivey or Benyamine.

WSOP – November Nine antics

The way the November Nine keep pushing forth, finishing high in various events and generally man-handling the opposition after their Big Dance final table seats were secured, has puzzled poker experts since last year. In 2008, several members of the November Nine logged high money finishes in various events prior to their November showdown. Ylon Schwartz, Ivan Demidov, Peter Eastgate and Dennis Phillips have all had deep runs, as experts looked on puzzled unable to find a reasonable explanation.
To make matters even more interesting, this year, Kevin Schaffel has already logged a second place finish in the WPT Legends of Poker as fellow November Nine member Steven Begleiter finished 9th in that same event.
Is there a logical explanation to why these final tablists who already have a consistent amount of WSOP Main Event money in the bag so to speak, perform so well in other events? Poker fans always like to speculate about such things, so here’s a list of possible reasons that would explain the strange phenomena.

According to some, due to the fact that November Nine members become instant celebrities in the poker world, they become instant targets too in any tournament in which they participate. There’s always a certain satisfaction in knocking a highly rated player out, so according to the theory, people try just a little harder to defeat these guys than their regular no-name opponents. That leads to more mistakes committed which in turn offers the November Nine guys the opportunity to lift easy money off their opponents.

Another theory is that because their WSOP final tablist status offers them a certain financial security, these guys no longer play on scared money in any of the events they participate in. They’re simply not afraid to lose money, and that attitude has been proven to be an almost indispensable component in the poker success recipe. Phil Ivey plays like that, Daniel Negreanu plays like that, so it may just be one of the reasons why they keep popping up among the top finishers all the time. Playing on scared money is known to have serious adverse effects on players’ performances, and the November Nine are obviously no longer confronted by that problem.

Long term financial security comes with other benefits as well. These guys no longer have to worry about petty stuff like college tuition for their kids or rent. They’re free of the day-by-day problems to which most people remain slaves all their lives. Such a status doesn’t just offer peace of mind, but obviously an increased capability to focus as well.
Having reached the pinnacles of the WSOP Main Event, these players may rightfully conclude that they are indeed the 9 best poker players in the world, at least for the time being. Such high confidence levels have been known to be beneficial for players who are no longer reluctant to do things they would otherwise have shied away from. Being part of the November Nine does create expectations after all, and it’s only fitting that those expectations be met one way or another.

The final reason would be that these guys are on fire. The WSOP’s final day lit them up and they continue to blaze winning marginal hand after marginal hand and marching forth in whatever tourney they play in. If you ask me though, I’d dismiss this final reason. I suspect that the continued success of the November Nine is owed to a combination of the previously listed factors. Of course, there is a luck element in poker, but making the WSOP final table doesn’t grant anyone the capability to tamper with luck. The other, above mentioned aspects of play can be influenced by the player and his/her state of mind though, so looking for an explanation there would indeed make much more logical sense.

Live poker events abundance

It couldn’t possibly have escaped your attention that lately, we’ve been dealing with more and more live poker tours all over the world. I reckon it’s safe to say we have a poker tour explosion on our hands. While only a few years back we only had the WSOP, the WPT and the EPT which was struggling to get rolling, nowadays we have all these tours plus the likes of the APT, the APPT and the LAPT. Add to that a series of other less-known live tours and you’ll see that the current live poker scene is indeed a far cry from anything we have seen before. While it’s obvious that the multitude of live poker tours creates a multitude of opportunities for players all over the world and at any time of the year, the question inevitably rears its head: are these live events hurting the game as a whole or are they helping it?
Let’s take a look at the pros and cons of having so many poker tours running all year round and try to draw a conclusion.

First of all, there’s the globalization aspect. There’s no denying the fact that all the various poker tours that have sprung up overseas have already contributed to the globalization of the game, and in doing so have already delivered thousands upon thousands of new players to the live tables as well as to the virtual ones. The interesting thing about this poker globalization is that its igniting factors can be traced back to the UIGEA. Had it not been for the UIGEA, the entities that sponsor these overseas tours would’ve focused more on the US market and would probably have neglected the international market.
Due to the fact however that the organization of such tours on American soil has been made pretty damn difficult by the infamous 2006 UIGEA, the attention and the financial resources of the sponsors were directed into the overseas markets, where given the pristine nature of the “soil”, a much more spectacular progress could be achieved within a much shorter time.
The clearest example in this sense is the PokerStars sponsored EPT. The EPT has achieved an almost exponential growth in recent years and it’s managed to successfully break into the Eastern European poker market, where it continues to yield amazing numbers. PokerStars is of course also responsible for the APT, and the LAPT, other such regional tours which are likely to yield increasing player numbers in the years to come. From this angle, the multitude of poker tours available is certainly beneficial for the game.
Other benefits provided by the poker tour explosion are the availability of a wider range of buy-ins for high prize-pool live events and a greater range of choices for players.
For a recreational player or a semi professional one, the location of the poker event he/she plans to attend is important. When playing on a limited budget, a poker tour which doubles as a nice vacation close to home is the definition of an ideal poker destination for such players.
The buy-in size comes into the equation as well. A person who shies away from coughing up $10,000 for a single event buy-in, will often gladly pay $2,500 – $5,000 for an event which still retains all the challenges and possibilities of a high prize-pool international tournament.

Now for the cons: because of their abundance, poker tours find it harder and harder to attract top class players. A few years ago, watching no-name amateurs rise from among the ranks to snatch the top prize from the pros was the thing, but it was only interesting because the pros were there too. Nowadays, obscure poker tours which do not attract any noteworthy talent yield final tables nobody is keen to watch. From this angle, the poker tour explosion may be taking away from the game rather than adding to it.
Because the various poker tours tend to compete with one another throughout the year, their prize-pools take a hit. Participation falls as potential participants are divided among the events, and thus the prize-pools become smaller as well.
There has been a lot of speculation that the shrinking prize-pools should be written off to the bad economy and to the global recession. That doesn’t seem to be the case though as events like the WSOP’s Big Dance and the EPT’s Grand Final clearly suggest. Both these events have yielded a far higher than expected participation, and in the case of the WSOP’s Main Event, only an organizer’s glitch prevented it from easily surpassing last year’s registrant numbers.
By getting rid of some of the existing poker tours, or by consolidating them into a couple of top-class series and a few lower class ones, the prize-pools could once again soar and player participation would reach new heights every time.

Another often neglected aspect of having a whole bunch of poker tours around is one that concerns the structure. Each of these tours feature a structure of their own, and players swinging back and forth among them may find themselves surprised the unpleasant way.
By creating an “A-league” of poker tours, featuring a unified structure and payout system, all the jostling for nailing the right kind of strategy for the given structure would disappear and players would be able to solely focus on taking the skill aspect of the game to the next level.