2010 WSOP picks

I know poker is not like the NBA or the NFL, in the sense that it’s much more unpredictable, and I also know that there’s not a whole lot of sense in making any kind of picks when it comes to poker, but I’ve got the WSOP fever and it’s all just so much fun, I can’t help myself.
First stop’s first: Phil Ivey. How many bracelets do you reckon he’ll win this year? He may be the best poker player pound for pound, and the interesting thing about him is that unlike some of his high stakes live poker peers (Daniel Negreanu) he’s equally good online. All that does not really guarantee anything though. The WSOP is such a large-scale series of events, featuring such large starting fields that pure skill doesn’t offer any sort of guarantees. Expert opinions run a pretty wide gamut when it comes to predicting the number of bracelets Ivey will pocket. Some say 3, most say 1 and some say none. Just to stay on the safe side, I’ll say one. There are a few high buy-in events to which the access of the public is pretty much restricted by the sums involved. In such events, Ivey may well outshine his peers to score a bracelet. There are several such events which means he gets several shots. I’ll stick with one.

In how many events will Tom Dwan show up? The Full Tilt Poker pro has been at the forefront of the online gambling industry for a couple of years now, although his live poker performance has never quite been on par with his online one. He’s also primarily a cash game player and there’s not much of that at the WSOP. The number of events he’ll play will obviously hinge on way too many variables to accurately predict. If he finds himself a nice cash game which turns out to be profitable for him, he may not show up at the WSOP at all. If he doesn’t find any cash games to capture his interest, he may play in several events. The experts’ opinions are varied on this matter too. Some say he’ll participate in 8 events, other are more cautious with 3. The bottom line is, regardless of how many events he’ll play, Dwan is certainly not among the favorites to walk away with a gold bracelet this year.

Who will be the WSOP player of the year? This guy has to a be a tournament specialist, and a person who knows how to manage his extra curricular activities too, so he’ll be able to come back over and over for more. As far as tournaments runs are concerned, Jason Mercier certainly seems to fit the above description. On second thought, Sorel Mizzi seems to be just as good a pick, too. Mostly known for his online antics in the past, Mizzi seems to have successfully crossed some sort of a line lately, as he’s been winning and cashing deep in one live tournament after the other. He will certainly carry a great deal of momentum into his WSOP run, coming off a few successful European endeavors.

Who will be the biggest disappointment of the series? The queue of likely candidates for this dubious award is longer and more diverse than for any other. Although he said he was a great pick to take down at least a bracelet, Daniel Negreanu may find himself in the squeeze if he fails to deliver in the wake of such a confident statement. The same goes for pretty much any of the greats. Fail to deliver and you’ll find yourself high up on the list of disappointing WSOP performances. Phil Hellmuth is always a ticking time-bomb, and Annie Duke has put herself in a prime spot for failure too, through her reality show presence. The bottom line: if you’re a poker celebrity, you’re walking around with a target on your back. Heavy expectations always carry great potential for failure.

2010 WSOP bursts onto the scene!

2010 marks the 41st edition of the biggest live poker fiesta on the planet, the World Series of Poker, also known as just WSOP for connoisseurs. The event is set to become bigger and better than ever before, with more side events, more interesting action, more “name” players and much bigger prize-pools. Keen on making last year’s Main Event fiasco forgotten (on the last day 1 flight droves of players had their access denied on account of lack of space), tournament officials have already taken all the steps deemed necessary to prevent another such incident. The competition area inside the Main Event venue has been expanded, ready to accept all comers.

With the first few days of the series already behind us, we’re slowly beginning to settle into the grind. After special events like the $50k Players’ Championship event, the $500 Casino Employees event and the first of a newly introduced string of $1,000 NL Holdem events, regular stuff like the $1,500 NL Holdem event and the $1,500 Omaha Hi/Lo 8 or better event are now unfolding.
The $500 Casino Employees event has been used as the official kick-off tournament of the series for a few years now. This year, it was as successful as ever, once again responsible for the giving out of the first bracelet of the series.

The $50k Players’ Championship event has grown into a true pro-based event, which once again attracted a select field of poker professionals. The large buy-in and the extra deep starting stack structure have made this event a true testing ground for professional players. There aren’t that many people in the world who are willing to cough up $50,000 to buy into a poker event, and the Players’ Championship only wants to see those who are fully capable of just that at its tables. The unique 8-game structure is another hurdle in the path of wealthy amateurs: in order to have any sort of chances for triumph in this event, one needs to be a truly well-rounded poker player. The battle for the Chip Reese memorial trophy features Limit Holdem, Omaha 8, Razz, 2-7 Triple Draw, 7-Card Stud, Stud 8, NL Holdem and PLO. It is apparently an evolved version of the $50k HORSE event of recent years, which was equally selective and equally exhaustive as far as the stretching of the participants’ poker skills were concerned.

The final table of the event will be a NL Holdem only one, something that some experts think may offer an advantage to day 3 chip leader Michael Mizrachi, who is currently in pursuit of his brother, Robert, the chip leader of the event heading into the final table. Unfortunately for those who were looking for the emergence of the People’s Champion, Phil Ivey, he’s already out, together with a cast of characters no Hollywood movie about poker could ever put together regardless of the size of its budget.
With so many famous faces in the lime-light, this event will be televised and it will be broadcast on ESPN, in the fall.

The other bright spot of the WSOP’s first day was the $1,00 NL Holdem event. As it is constantly evolving, twisting and turning to meet the needs of as wide an audience as possible, the WSOP has come up with the Stimulus Special last year. The event featuring a more than reasonable buy-in for a WSOP event ($1,000) was hugely successful, surpassing even the wildest expectations of the organizers. This year, the Stimulus events are back, a whole bunch of them actually. The first one has already attracted a more than reasonable starting field over its 2 day 1 flights. How the rest of the $1,000 NL Holdem events will fare remains to be seen, but the size of the buy-in represents a virtual guarantee when it comes to registrant numbers.

WSOP tips

With the WSOP upon us yet again, I reckon it’s safe to say some actual advice about coping with the pressures of the Las Vegas nightlife and the various WSOP events is in high order. I know you’re aching to get there and I know you’re probably not planning to spend any time on anything else than poker once there, but you’re still human after all. Rather than to fight against your condition as a mere human, it’s far better to embrace it and to give Mother Nature what’s hers. Don’t forget to put in some exercise during your stay. The desert heat may not leave much room for outdoors activities, but Las Vegas has got to be the place with the highest number of air conditioned gyms and swimming pools per square mile, so make sure you take advantage of that. Many of the longer WSOP events come down to sheer stamina, and by keeping your body ticking the way it’s supposed to, you’ll make sure you stay on top of your game for longer.

The desert heat also means you shouldn’t leave anything in your car at any time either. Stuff will melt, explode and even catch fire, so when you leave your ride parked in front of the venue, make sure you empty it of all such potentially dangerous items (cigarette lighters are by far the most dangerous on the list).

Register early for the events you intend to play in, especially if you have the cash for the buy-in. Trust me, you do not want to be turned back at the door the way many of last year’s potential Big Dance participants were. There’s nothing wrong with getting started on Day 1A of an event instead of Day 1B. Your odds are the same. Of course, if you’re waiting for someone to stake you or you’re hoping to win a last minute satellite into an event, things are different.

Playing in satellites always makes a lot of sense when it comes to events featuring as large a buy-in as most of the WSOP ones.
There are plenty of single table satellites running for pretty much every WSOP side event, and the buy-ins to these satellites (which carry pretty awesome individual odds by the way) can be as low as $65. Most of the time, you’ll be able to get something going for $125 or $175 though. The best time-frame to get something going satellite-wise is during the 24 hours before the event kicks off. Take a $2,000 NL Holdem event for instance (which is sure to draw tons upon tons of registrants). Most of the satellites running for such an event more than 24 hours prior to it, are $225 direct access ones. To get a $125 table going, you’d best wait some more.
Most of these 10–handed satellites pay out one WSOP side event seat only, but the odds are still pretty good, especially if you’re one of them “better than reasonable” live poker players.

Make sure the temptations Sin City throws your way (and there’ll be more of these than you could possibly expect) don’t get to your bankroll before you hit the poker tables. The Roulette, the Blackjack and the Craps tables are more than adept at sucking you dry of money before you ever realize you’re in trouble. Focus on your objectives and don’t lose sight of them. The same goes if you happen to win or to cash in an event. Vegas is Vegas and as soon as you have the big dough stuffed into your pockets, you become an instant target for a wide range of interests, from legit casino operators to 2-dime pick pockets.

The year of the women – Liv Boeree and the others

2010 is the year that will go down in poker history as the year of the women. Women have traditionally been viewed as eye candy in the poker industry. Poker sites would hire female poker players as in-house pros, but trust them with the simplest of tasks only, at the poker tables. That’s right, with a few exceptions, all the women had to do was to look good and to make sure everyone caught a glimpse of the badge they were wearing. In order to break out of that mold, a female poker player would have to achieve something truly phenomenal. Something like winning the largest ever EPT Main Event…but I’m cutting ahead of myself here.

Signs pointing towards 2010 turning into the year of the tigress rather than the tiger had popped up in earnest. In March, Annie Duke, a long-time poker industry presence and acknowledged poker talent, won the NBC Heads-up Poker Championship. Given that it was Annie Duke who did it, the industry wasn’t exactly surprised. It was not like Duke had to prove anything to shake off the mere eye-candy status. Her achievements were honored numerous times and she was indeed one of the few female players the industry viewed as one of the boys.
Things took a serious turn not long after though, when Vanessa Selbst took down the North American Poker Tour’s Mohegan Sun Main Event, in a rather dominant fashion, pocketing the $750k top prize.

The real story of the year – as far as female poker players are concerned – was that of Liv Boeree. The British pro, who is by the way an Astrophysicist and a model, not mention a guitar player for a rock band, got into poker on a reality show. The UltimatePoker Showdown was the perfect setup for her to get in touch with the game. Coached by Ultimate Bet’s Phil Hellmuth and Annie Duke she had the perfect introduction to the poker world. It was Hellmuth and Duke who provided the inspiration for her, and it was their image that prompted her to start thinking seriously about a career in poker.
Fortunately for her, she found someone who would stake her in just about any live event with a buy-in under £2,000. While the limitation had her hands tied as far as high-buy-in events were concerned, she found a way to turn this handicap into an advantage. She started playing in satellites and she began winning seats in events to which she couldn’t have otherwise afforded the buy-in. The EPT’s recent San Remo Main Event – which she won – was no exception. She satellited her way into the poker tournament through a €500 qualifier, and ended up pocketing a return of €1.25 million on that small investment.

Boeree’s poker career started arching upwards when she signed her first sponsorship deal with Absolute Poker. At AP, her role was still that of eye-candy. She was supposed to be an ambassador for the room that would appeal to the young male segment, her actual poker skills forced to take a back seat to that image.
When UB signed her though, it would be an entirely different ballgame. The site would focus on selling her image as that of a real poker player. That new sort of attitude obviously helped her, and now with that spectacular EPT win under her belt, the sky is the limit.
What’s next for Liv? She says she’s looking forward to the WSOP. As the biggest live poker stage of the year, the WSOP would definitely be the right venue for these tigresses of the green felt to make a truly solid statement.

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.

Who will secure a Triple Crown next?

A few days ago, Roland de Wolfe won a special WSOP bracelet: that bracelet made him the second player to secure poker’s “Triple Crown”: a WSOP, a WPT and an EPT title. Gavin Griffin is currently the only other player who managed to achieve this performance. De Wolfe’s recent achievement has started a flurry of speculations in the poker press: how long will it take till a third player joins De Wolfe and Griffin in the “Triple Crown” ranks and who is most likely to become the third “Triple Crown” winner?
According to players’ individual motivations, their willingness to travel to various live events and the depths of their bankrolls, experts have put together a list of those most eligible for the prestigious collection of titles.

Factoring in all the above, Jason Mercier is considered the prime candidate to equal De Wolf’s and Griffin’s “Triple Crowns”.
Mercier has a deep roll and he has been doing extremely well lately on the live circuit. Being as young as he is, he’s also considered to have plenty of motivation and energy, most importantly however, he’s already in possession of two pieces of the “Triple Crown”.

He is currently the only player to possess two EPT titles, one earned in 2008 in San Remo, and another one in the London High Rollers’ event. He’s recently won a WSOP bracelet in the $1,500 PL Omaha event of the 2009 WSOP, where he bested a field of 809 to get to the goods.
Everything considered, Mercier does indeed look like the ideal candidate, but then again there are other players who already possess two of the three crown jewels: Phil Ivey, Scotty Nguyen, Erick Lindgren, Doyle Brunson, Dan Harrington and Joe Hachem are only a few of the best known names. In Mercier’s case though, a more or less unique combination of motivation, youth and bankroll size adds to the odds.

Based on those factors, Bertrand “ElkY” Grospellier can certainly be considered a top candidate as well. He too has already bagged two of the Triple Crown’s jewels: an EPT title won in the PokerStars Caribbean Adventure and a WPT one secured in the Festa al Lago at the Bellagio, both titles scored in 2008.

He is currently in hot pursuit of the WSOP gold, but he’s come up almost empty handed so far, having scored only a cash finish in the $2,500 PL Omaha/Holdem event of the 2009 Series. Still, everything considered, I’m inclined to hold Grospellier the top dog Triple Crown-wise over Mercier. He too is young, has plenty of motivation and his bankroll is equally impressive. On top of all that, the ex-Starcraft champion has a taste for embarking on outrageous record-breaking attempts.

Daniel Negreanu’s name cannot possibly be left off the list. He too is a representative of the younger generation, he too possesses a large enough bankroll and it seems like whenever he sets his mind on achieving something, he gets there. Negreanu has no fewer than 4 WSOP titles and he has two WPT titles too to go with them. The EPT is the only vert where the Canadian has fallen short so far, but that fact may well be due to his few EPT participations. If he decides to chase down that EPT title, sooner or later he will get it.

Sebastian Rutherbeg wouldn’t have been considered a contender at all a little over a year ago. He has picked up a WSOP bracelet as well as an EPT one last year though, in under three months. His WSOP bracelet came in the $5,000 World Championship 7-Card Stud Hi/Lo event, and he earned his EPT title at the Series’ Barcelona stop.

He came close to completing the Triple Crown via a deep-cash in the 2008 North American Poker Championships, but he ran out of steam and finished 31st eventually.
Another guy who came even closer than Ruthenberg to completing the Triple Crown, was Carlos Mortensen. Mortensen has won the WSOP Main Event, and the WPT Championships in 2007 and he came tantalizingly close to winning an EPT title in the Grand Final, finishing in 11th place.

Barry Greenstein has the WSOP and the WPT parts of the Crown covered as well: he has three WSOP bracelets, a WPT one, and he’s definitely no stranger to EPT events.
Other names that may be considered as reasonable candidates are those of David Benyamine, Antonio Esfandiari, Dave Ulliott and Rob Hollink.

Different tournament structures under testing at WSOP

With the growth in popularity poker has seen in recent years, it has become obvious that in order to facilitate the skill factor over the luck one, changes had to be made. It’s not news to those closely following live and online poker events that since the big poker boom of 2003-2004, spearheaded by PokerStars online qualifiers Chris Moneymaker and Greg Raymer, events like the WSOP’s Big Dance haven’t been the same. All sorts of random names popped up on the winners’ list as the true pros slowly but surely disappeared from among the top finishers. There was a distinct feeling that the Main Event was turning into a giant lottery where the lucky would always prevail over the skilled. 2006 was probably the year that rang the alarm bells for the organizers. That year, Jamie Gold bested the largest ever Main Event field, beating several world class pros against all the odds. Gold appeared unstoppable that nigh and strung together entire streaks of extremely lucky hands and draws to knock his opponents out.

I’m not trying to take anything away from Jamie Gold, but all those who have seen the final table action unfold will agree that his luck was borderline insane that day.
Live tournament officials began contemplating ways to change the structure of the events soon after, as it became obvious that while the luck factor did work in favor of beginners, acting as the great equalizer at the green felt and it did convey the message that everyone could make it big at the WSOP, it wasn’t doing much for TV ratings in general. The public was still eager to see the well-known players battle it out in a contest of skill, and that watching a bunch of unknown people play lottery at the final tables of live poker events was not where the future of televised events would be.

The first change, meant to further incite public interest and to provide new opportunities for parties interested in televising live poker events was the postponement of the Main Event final table till November, first implemented in 2008. The move apparently did deliver for the organizers and interested parties because the $10,000 Main Event final table will be pushed back all the way to November once again.
This move however did little more than to create additional buzz about the event and additional advertising opportunities. In order to limit the impact of the luck factor in various live events, some organizers resorted to providing the players with deeper starting stacks. This way, the decision over the fate of a player would be spread over more hands than in short-stacked scenarios, which would offer more opportunities for truly skilled players to assert the edges their experience and knowledge of game subtleties offered them.
An extremely interesting approach to tournament structuring was the experiment implemented in the $40,000 anniversary event, in the 2009 WSOP. The restrictive buy-in alone made certain that no lucky floaters would even get to register for the event, but the structure adopted made some serious waves indeed negative and positive ones as well.
Players started the event on 120,000 chip stacks, and the first blinds level would feature 200/400 chips and 50 chip antes. Most of the professionals involved were pleased with the changes although how pleased one was seemed to be a direct function of how high or low he’d finished on the provisional chip leaderboard on day 1 of the event. Take Chris Moneymaker for example, who finished second behind chip leader Bruno Fitoussi on Day 1. The PokerStars pro was definitely pleased with the structure and with how things were generally progressing. He said that in his view antes were a must, given that a tournament would only really gather momentum once the ante stage was reached. Greg Raymer who has most of his tournament buy-ins paid by PokerStars didn’t find anything wrong with the new structure either.
Mike Matusow on the other hand, was pronouncedly displeased and he didn’t refrain from calling the inventor of the new structure “a moron”. Of course his not exactly jubilant mood could also have been own to the fact that he finished Day 1 on a short-stack.
Due to the stepped up pace of action, out of the 201 initial entrants only 89 survived to do battle on Day 2.

WSOP Champions invitational

One of the most prestigious events of the summer, the WSOP Champions invitational is bound to be a great photo opportunity for enthusiasts. I know what you’re thinking (“how much is the buy-in and where can I sign up?), but you may as well forget about it. This event doesn’t feature a buy-in. It’s a freeroll. And if you’re not one of the 33 all-time WSOP Main Event winners (25 who are still alive), you won’t get to play. Period.
The Invitational is an invitations-based event (sarcasm) and it’s also one of only four WSOP events which ESPN shall broadcast.

There is no prize-pool, but the winner will not go home empty handed: he will get a Binion trophy (named so after Benny Binion, the father of the Series), as well as a 1970 Corvette, restored and fully pimped. Despite the lack of a conventional prize-pool, Nolan Dalla, the WSOP’s media director is not worried about the interest the event will raise. As a matter of fact, he estimates that interest-wise only the Main Event itself shall surpass the 2009 WSOP Champions Invitational.

Will the big poker stars used to playing for millions buy into the idea of a memorial freeroll? You bet they will. 8 of the people concerned are already deceased, among them Stu Ungar and Johnny Moss, so they won’t be present physically, although they will definitely be present in the hearts and minds of not just the participants but the railbirds as well. Bobby Baldwin, who won the Big Dance in 1978, will not participate either and he’s already announced the organizers about it. The rest of the WSOP’s best though is itching to belly up to the table and to log some valuable time in front of the TV cameras: a superb opportunity for each of them to push their agenda a bit, whatever it may be.

Phil Hellmuth, 11-times WSOP bracelet winner and 1989 Main Event Champion is delighted about the event and about the TV opportunity.

Greg Raymer, 2004 Champion and one of the people directly responsible for the online poker boom, will be at the tables as well. The Fossilman says he’s suggested this sort of a promotional event several times in the past to commissioner Jeffrey Pollack, and that he will definitely take part.

The Newest Main Event champion, Denmark’s Peter Eastgate, far from being content with having taken down the second largest WSOP Main Event prize ever, is nurturing plans of proving himself in this illustrious field. He says that having bested the second largest WSOP Main Event field ever makes him the prime candidate for a WSOP Champions Invitational win. Of course, if one is to follow that logic, Jamie Gold would have to be recognized as the best player of them all, simply on account of the fact that in 2006 he survived a much larger starting field than Eastgate did last year and we all know that would be at least awkward when we’re talking about people like Doyle Brunson, Johnny Chan and Phil Hellmuth.
The young Dane does admit though that players like these have proven themselves far beyond the WSOP Main Event titles they’d won back in the day.

Jamie Gold hailed what he called a “once in a lifetime” opportunity to play poker against people who represent 40 years of poker history. He and Greg Raymer both agreed that it was an honor to share the felt with this select group and to play in the 2009 WSOP Champions Invitational.
According to Dalla, the primary goal behind the 2009 WSOP Champions invitational is to cater for the everyday poker fan. As poker became more and more popular, familiar faces slowly but surely disappeared from most final tables all over the world. Even though these guys still compete at the highest level, you’ll seldom see them facing each other, something that the regular poker fan definitely fancies. This event will bring all the familiar faces together, and the public will see the legends in action.

The 2009 WSOP Champions invitational starts on May 31st and it will be on ESPN on August 4th. You can railbird the action in person if you so wish though or you can check out our poker news section for details as they unfold. Whoever wins this one, will surely be thought of as the champion of champions in the future.

Most successful WSOP players of all time

There are several ways to measure WSOP success and determining success based on the amount of money won may not be the most accurate of skill and talent indicators. By winning a single Main Event, Jamie Gold is probably the biggest money–earner in the Series’ history, but people would generally agree that he isn’t the most skilled and talented player by a longshot.
One way to determine success based on skill and talent is to take a look at the number of WSOP bracelets people have won, and the number of bracelets they managed to take down during the same Series.

Believe it or not, since 2000, there has been at least one multiple WSOP bracelet winner each year. Let take a closer look at the folks who managed to score multiple bracelets over the years and try to assess their skill level and overall importance in the poker industry.
Denmark’s Jesper Hougaard is one of the multiple bracelets winners. He scored both his WSOP bracelets in 2008, one of them in the $1,500 NL Holdem event of the WSOP series, where he beat 2,447 players to the title and to the $610,304 prize. He scored his second bracelet later that year, in the WSOPE London’s £1,500 event.
Hougaard may not be among the best known poker players out there, but he’s certainly no push-over either. He plays well online too, proof to which is the fact that he’s won the PokerStars Sunday Million twice.

In 2006, it was Jeff Madsen who took the Player of the Year honors at that year’s WSOP, and deservedly too. He first won the $2,000 NL Holdem event, where he bested a field of 1,579 players. Then, he won the $5,000 Short handed NL Holdem event for his second bracelet, besting none other than Erick Lindgren heads-up for the title. Back then, Madsen was the youngest ever WSOP bracelet winner, and to add some icing to the cake, he finished 3rd in the $2,000 Omaha Hi/Lo event.

1995 was Dan Harrington’s year. I suppose there’s no point in debating whether or not Harrington has a knack for the game. His theories are wide spread today and he’s recognized as one of the forefathers of modern poker theory. In 1995, he won a bracelet in the $2,500 NL Holdem event, and then went on to win the Main Event too. Back then, the top prize in the big dance was a “mere” $1 million, but then again, money had a different value back then too.
Harrington went on to rank near the top in several other WSOP events in years that followed, and he scored a WPT title in 2007, when he won the Legends of Poker, taking home about $1.6 million.

In 2002, Phil Ivey won no fewer than 3 WSOP bracelets in 18 days’ time. None of these bracelets were his first though: he’d won his first WSOP bracelet back in 2000. In 2002, he won the $1,500 7-Card Stud event, the $2,500 Stud Hi/Lo event and the $2,000 SHOE event. Who could ever say after such a run that poker wasn’t a game of skill?
One of the top Full Tilt pros, Phil Ivey is a regular presence on the high stakes cash circuit to this day.

This list would definitely be incomplete without Phil Hellmuth. The Poker Brat first won multiple bracelets in 1993. He scored no fewer than three of them back then, within a 13 day span. He won a $1,500 NL Holdem event, a $2,500 NL Holdem one and a $5,000 Limit Holdem one.

Then years later, in 2003, he won two bracelets again, one in the $2,500 Limit Holdem event and one in the $3,000 NL Holdem one.
Hellmuth is one of the “faces” of the online poker site Ultimate Bet these days and his spree of high WSOP event finishes continues.

Chris Ferguson, another Full Tilt Poker in-house pro, has also had two multiple-bracelet runs. One in 2000, when he won the $2,500 7-Card Stud event shortly before taking down the first prize at the Big Dance.
The other run occurred in 2003, when he won the $2,000 Omaha Hi/Lo event and the $2000 Holdem/7-Card Stud event.
Ferguson is one of the active contributors at Full Tilt Poker, meaning that he is actively involved in updating and continuously developing the poker room’s software.

Another notable name on this list is that of Ted Forrest. He won three bracelets in 1993 (in the $1,500 Razz, $1,500 Omaha 8 or better and the $5,000 7-Card Stud events).
He won two bracelets in 2004, when he struck gold in the $1,500 7-Card Stud and $1,500 NL Holdem events.

WSOP 2009 preview

With the WSOP’s start just two days away, the question on every poker enthusiast’s mind is whether it will exceed last year’s series, attendance as well as prize-pool wise. Take a look at the following YouTube vid:

Get a scoop on the predictions first hand from WSOP commissioner Jeffrey Pollack.
The interview in the flick happened two weeks before the start of the event, and according to Pollack, based on the actual event pre-registrations and the WSOP-related hotel bookings, the turnout had already been shaping up nicely then.

The recession and probably the UIGEA as well, will make their effects felt though. While he doesn’t openly admit it, Pollack hints at the fact that the organizers would be happy to have as many players show up as last year (the exact number was 58,720 I believe) which means that he doesn’t exactly expect a year like 2006 when all previous records were shattered.
In the interview, he also talks about the $1,000 Stimulus Special, an event which is a first timer on the WSOP schedule, and the fact that the final table will again be delayed till November, like last year.

Even if increases in participant numbers and prize-pool sizes are not likely, the World Series of Poker is considered a recession-proof event by many. How can something like the WSOP withstand recession while another – previously recession-proof considered – industry, gambling is struggling? The answer to that is simple: poker is not gambling. Like it or not, because of the skill element involved, poker can be considered a sport rather than a game of chance. Pollack says that it’s considered the “Stanley Cup of poker”, and that’s exactly the reason why the recession will fail to put a dent into its popularity.
Gambling is a different matter altogether. While there are some beginners who fail to grasp the basic concepts that make casino games tick, the vast majority of the players are well aware that they’re going up against adverse odds.

Most people are even well aware that the house edge is the least of their worries: it’s the house drop they’re going to deal with, and while the house edge is often a minuscule 1-2% quantity, the house drop is a much heftier, approximately 30% one. This is why gamblers usually take their disposable funds to the gambling tables. Sure, you can get lucky and hit a big-time jackpot, but it’s much more likely that you’ll just end up losing your money. Money that you spend in a casino is basically money invested into fun. That’s the way most players view it and that’s how you too should consider it too.

Poker on the other hand, is a game where it is possible to secure positive expected value (EV) and where the house doesn’t play a role: people go up against other players just like themselves. While it’s true that the majority of players play with negative EV, as long as they consider they’re playing with EV+ they won’t think twice about viewing the whole thing as an investment. Whether or not one is able to secure EV+ depends solely on his/her talent, skills and time spent studying the game, so even those who play on EV- have none else to blame but themselves for the outcome.

The problem with gambling is, disposable income is among the first victims of recession, and while poker players don’t bring their disposable money to the WSOP tables (well, at least those who play in the WSOP don’t) recession won’t really affect attendance.
Another interesting note that Pollack strikes in the interview is about the TV popularity of the event. Televised WSOP bits don’t just provide a great action-filled storyline for the viewers, they possess a lot of re-run value because they can be used for education too by those interested in taking up the game or in improving their game.

About the WSOP Main Event prize pool, Pollack didn’t venture into stating anything concrete. He basically ducked the question by going into how the prize-pool was dependant on the attendance, however, if one pays attention to the 2006, 2007 and 2008 prize-pools a trend will become apparent: while the drop from the $12.1 million first prize that Jamie Gold pocketed in 2006 to the $8.3 million that Jerry Yang took home in 2007 is obvious, one cannot help noticing that in 2008 the first prize rebounded to $9.2 million. If that trend holds out, we’re likely to see the winner take home around $10.1 this year.

« Previous Page — Next Page »