Hot of the press in WCOOP Event 5 on PokerStars, the $10,300 NL Holdem event

A very controversial hand just happened, with NoMercy (PokerStars pro Isabelle Mercier) draining her entire 200 second+ timebank before calling.   This led to many accusations of slowrolling, as it looked like a tricky dilemma over whether to call with an Ace, but as it turned out she was sat on set with an apparent much easier (standard) call.

Here is the actual alleged slowroll hand:-
PokerStars Game #20228966474: Tournament #200800005, $10000+$300 Hold’em No Limit - Level VII (400/800) - 2008/09/07 18:22:44 ET
Table ‘200800005 34′ 9-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 2: NoMercy (60280 in chips)
Seat 3: PURPLEPILS99 (20106 in chips)
Seat 4: ocrowe (20750 in chips)
Seat 5: Annette_15 (69670 in chips)
Seat 6: Dariominieri (61756 in chips)
Seat 7: samh133 (28369 in chips)
Seat 8: VBOOS (75840 in chips)
Seat 9: x-13 (27818 in chips)
samh133: posts small blind 400
VBOOS: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
x-13: folds
NoMercy: raises 1400 to 2200
PURPLEPILS99: folds
ocrowe: folds
Annette_15: calls 2200
Dariominieri: calls 2200
samh133: folds
VBOOS: folds
*** FLOP *** [4c 3h 6s]
NoMercy: checks
Annette_15: bets 5450
Dariominieri: folds
NoMercy: calls 5450
*** TURN *** [4c 3h 6s] [Ac]
NoMercy: bets 10000
Annette_15: raises 52020 to 62020 and is all-in
nitbuster is connected
NoMercy: calls 42630 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (9390) returned to Annette_15
*** RIVER *** [4c 3h 6s Ac] [6c]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
NoMercy: shows [3s 3d] (a full house, Threes full of Sixes)
Annette_15: shows [6h 5h] (three of a kind, Sixes)
NoMercy collected 123960 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 123960 | Rake 0
Board [4c 3h 6s Ac 6c]
Seat 2: NoMercy showed [3s 3d] and won (123960) with a full house, Threes full of Sixes
Seat 3: PURPLEPILS99 folded before Flop (didn’t bet)
Seat 4: ocrowe folded before Flop (didn’t bet)
Seat 5: Annette_15 showed [6h 5h] and lost with three of a kind, Sixes
Seat 6: Dariominieri (button) folded on the Flop
Seat 7: samh133 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 8: VBOOS (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 9: x-13 folded before Flop (didn’t bet)

 Here is the chat that followed, which actually got a little heated:-

Annette_15 said, “lol ffs”
Annette_15 said, “no need to be a bitc h and slowroll just because im a better player than u”
PURPLEPILS99 said, “lmfao”
nitbuster said, “lol”
PURPLEPILS99 said, “meow”
nitbuster said, “LOL”
NoMercy said, “!”
Dariominieri: there could be an overset
Dariominieri: on a tight player like her
Dealer: Game #20229163968: x-13 wins pot (2450)
Dariominieri: i think she sould eiother fold
Dariominieri: trust me she has a lot of respect for you
Dariominieri: i swear
Dealer: Game #20229184513: samh133 wins pot (2450)
JOE FRASER [observer]: canadians dont slowroll she was thinkin
ThePokerBody [observer]: Dario… Teach her some more
APerfectGent [observer]: she isn’t slowrolling she’s just an idiot
APerfectGent [observer]: big diff
MazeOrBowie [observer]: LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dariominieri: gent get a life
Boateng [observer]: DAARLIG STEMNING
Dealer: samh133, it’s your turn. You have 15 seconds to act
APerfectGent [observer]: why? isn’t it better to be an idiot than a slowrolling ass? some people are just slower than others
Dealer: Game #20229199642: PURPLEPILS99 wins pot (5272)
APerfectGent [observer]: i was defending her
PURPLEPILS99: <——–super nit
Cashewouten [observer]: looool dario is so cute trying to defend isabelleeeee
Administrator: WCOOP-08: $70 sat to $320 8-Game begins in 5 minutes.  To register see T106596315 under the WCOOP/Cash Satellites tab.
samh133: good to know
Dariominieri: there s no reason to call idiot a person u dont know nolifeguy
Dealer: ocrowe, it’s your turn. You have 15 seconds to act
PURPLEPILS99: lol
LucioMM [observer]: no need to defend your gf dario
Dealer: Game #20229217633: Annette_15 wins pot (4450)
Dealer: samh133, it’s your turn. You have 15 seconds to act
Annette_15: finish what u started then
mkind0516 [observer]: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
misterkoen3 [observer]: ace
Dariominieri: gg
Dealer: Annette_15 has high card Ace
Dealer: Dariominieri has a pair of Queens
Dealer: Game #20229234134: Dariominieri wins pot (28830) with a pair of Queens
Dealer: Annette_15 finished the tournament in 180th place
BCM11 [observer]: sorry mkind
mkind0516 [observer]:
BCM11 [observer]: gh dario
mkind0516 [observer]: gl
Dealer: Game #20229258949: PURPLEPILS99 wins pot (2400)
Dealer: Game #20229269595: x-13 wins pot (1200)
ThePokerBody [observer]: The only girl I respect in this game is Annette15… Girls cant play poker!

Slowroll or not, the jury is out

Since the airing on television of the 2008 WSOP 50K HORSE event there has been a great degree of controversy over the bevaviour of eventual winner Scotty Nguyen at the final table.

Scotty was seen faily inebriated, demanding more cocktails, and swearing and baiting his opponents.   None of this behaviour is really acceptable, but no action was taken by the tournament director to penalize him.  Erick Lindgren was so incensed that he said at the table that he’ll never be on “Team Scotty”, a reference refering to the fact that he’s not a great fan and wont be cheering him to win.    As he busted out of the event in a very credible 3rd, he was heard saying that he hoped “the kid” wins, a reference to Michael DeMichelle.

At first sight the lack of penalty smells a little of favouritism of a big poker name, but I think some of the media attention following the airing of the event has been slightly sensationalist.  Yes he was a bit over the top, but we all know Scotty talks to get into the heads of opponents more than almost anyone of the top pros, perhaps Tony G notwithstanding.

The network showing the coverage inevitably chases the ratings and they therefore are quite naturally selective over the most dynamic footage.  The effect this can have is that often soundbites are played a little out of context with a lot of “before” and “after” missing.  We cant really criticize the network, as the footage is there to be utilized, but I think it is more likely that the reason the tournament directors didnt take any action is that when seen in context the coffee-housing wasnt really viewed as that much of an issue.

Scotty has apologized following the shown coverage, but really this is a media frenzy gone bananas rather than a true reflection of one of the game’s great eccentrics.

Displine plays such a huge part in poker.  But that doesnt mean an ill-displined player cannot be successful, because they can be…potentially.  It just means they need to make the right choices of what sort of poker to get involved in.

You can be successful in the long term with discipline problems if you play only large field MTTs.  On one day it can all come good, and a hyper aggressive borderline kamikaze approach can pay off with a big win.   All those times where you grew impatient or couldnt be bothered to concentrate become irrelevant.  Getting their once or twice can be enough to float your bankroll for a very long time, even after a chunky withdrawal.

 However on the flip side, SNGs and Cash tables always require discipline.  You are grinding a margin, and exploiting small edges on a consistant basis.  You play volume, and need to be hitting the ball dead-center all the time over that volume.  Regular mistakes/weakneses will kill your bankroll over time.  

If you recognise yourself as having discipline problems (often impatient or reckless) then you are best to avoid the SNGs/Cash tables and concentrate solely on the MTTs.    Good Luck to you.

I find it slightly amusing that, despite the American Banking Association’s declaration that UIGEA is unworkable, several European countries are still endeavouring to following an UIGEA style approach to the restriction of online poker/gambling.  When UIGEA first landed on US doorsteps it didnt take Einstein to understand that it was fundamentally flawed in many regards, and cobbled together no doubt by people with no comprehension of the true nature of the internet.

Without a serious restriction of all cival liberties in a modern age, the internet and business/activity conducted on the internet cannot be controlled by any one country.  It can be policed, but it cannot be controlled.  Policing involves searching out and shutting down unsavourey elements after the fact.  That is possible.  What is not possible is governing peoples behaviour and their online movements.

UIGEA is flawed because it is unable to cope with the fact that privately owned gambling companies are hosted and legislated in countries outside their borders, and that deposits made to those companies cannot be tracked due to numerous levels of 3rd party payment processing. 

Without installing a regime into your country where no citizen is allowed to purchase anything over the internet, then restriction of 3rd party payment processors beyond your borders is not possible without full unilateral worldwide legislation, which is a non-existant concept.

Sure, if some execs of a big payment precessor such as Neteller happen to land on US soil (as they did), you can hit them hard, but the truth of the matter is that there will always be an abundance of new payment processors waiting in the wings (from countries all over the world), ready to take up where the last left off.  The online gambling companies themselves are very quick to facilitate the new deals with new companies, as it is fundmental to their businesses.  The banks themselves are tied in knots over selectively trying to restrict any movement of money which might eventually end up at a payment processor which can fund a gambling/poker account.  It simply isnt possible in a consumer driven freemarket economy.  A fact which the banks themselves readily admit to.  

The motivation behind legislation such as this in both the USA, and European countries such as Germany trying to follow suit, is undoubtably a large proportion to do with tax, and a smaller proportion due to social conscience.   Prohibition was unsuccessful for alcohol (driving it underground), and in the end it was obvious that large tax revenues could be generated if alcohol was allowed but regulated.  The same applies for online gambling.  You can drive it the equivalent of underground and never truely erradicate it, with people still spending money on it, OR you can accept it as a fact and try to impose reasonable regulations which will mean more tax could be generated from it. 

For the European countries which are also embarking on this path, some lessons should be learned and learned quickly by the failure of the legislation in the United States.

Creating a brand is important in any industry, and online poker is no exception.    The name, look and feel of a site are important, as is having deep pockets to market that poker brand to the masses.  

This leads me on to PokerStars, and no fewer than 6 new installation updates recently to get their logo right.   An initial logo change that was made went down like a lead balloon amongst many players.   Eventually after some too-ing and fro-ing we have arrived at a red spade symbol with a white star in the centre.  Much better than the previous attempt at moderisation.

Personally I like the final version, which should be good for at least a few years….we shall see!