World Series of Poker Main Event Final Table Tips

The 2018 World Series of Poker Main Event is history, with all 78 bracelets having been won. The final table was entertaining from start to finish, although that final night with the marathon heads-up was quite a test for viewers.

Being able to see every hand including hole cards is of course quite educational for poker players. So, too, were these strategy tips reflecting the changing dynamic that occurs as the table goes from nine-headed to heads-up.

Watching #WSOPMainEvent2018 final table intently. Haven't seen either of these yet. pic.twitter.com/2ELXJSLEeM

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 13, 2018

Okay, I mean this is just confusing. #WSOPMainEvent2018 pic.twitter.com/tCsmRE1yHR

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 13, 2018

Now this actually makes sense. #WSOPMainEvent2018 pic.twitter.com/9mO49WtEkC

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 13, 2018

Okay, here we go. Whole new ball game. #WSOPMainEvent2018 pic.twitter.com/GHnm54eMBg

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 14, 2018

“It’s five-handed, so play changes.” #WSOPMainEvent2018 pic.twitter.com/X34XDLAVPa

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 14, 2018

Last time I got to four-handed in a tournament I blanked on both of these. Finished fourth. #WSOPMainEvent2018 pic.twitter.com/MuW4I4k24v

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 14, 2018

Here we go! Truly is a game of adjustments. #WSOP2018MainEvent pic.twitter.com/czlzykAwPQ

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 15, 2018

It all comes down to this. #WSOP2018MainEvent pic.twitter.com/h28ikPTybC

— Short-Stacked Shamus (@hardboiledpoker) July 15, 2018

Nine Years Enough for November Nine

I never liked the November Nine. I got used to it, like everyone else. But I never liked the idea.

The World Series of Poker first introduced the “delayed final table” format for the Main Event in 2008, stopping the tournament at nine players in July and restarting it in November. That was also the first summer I went out to help cover the WSOP.

The announcement came at the beginning of May that year, a couple of weeks after I’d already signed on to go out for PokerNews. I remember being disappointed to learn at that late date that I wouldn’t be seeing the Main Event play to a conclusion. I thought the idea to pause a poker tournament for four months was absurd, wildly distorting whatever “standard” might have been established for tournament poker since its rise in popularity.

It’s a little silly, I know, to speak of poker tournaments as a format unable to withstand too much variation. That’s the beauty of poker, of course -- namely, the way the game can accommodate all sorts of imaginative twists and alterations. And in fact, over the last decade we’ve seen an incredible number of different kinds of poker tournaments developed, both live and online, to challenge all sorts of “traditional” ideas of what a poker tournament is or should be.

Tournaments are like novels in that way -- an incredibly elastic “genre” under which heading a seemingly endless array of different kinds of “narratives” can qualify.

But the idea of playing for a week-and-a-half, then waiting four months, then playing another day or two or three was just too much. Even the most experimental novelist would have difficulty selling the idea of presenting 90 percent of the book all at once, then withholding the last couple of chapters until everyone has forgotten the story and characters.

The WSOP and ESPN did what they could with the idea, and by the last couple of years managed to build it into something that was genuinely interesting to follow. Even so, the disconnect between what happened in the Main Event during the summer and how it ended always made it seem more like two, separate “events” than not.

Today -- at an even later date than in 2008 -- we learned the November Nine is finally being scrapped this year. And that there will be a lot of televised coverage in July on both ESPN and PokerCentral, starting with the Day 1 flights and lasting all of the way through to the end. All welcome news, as far as I’m concerned.

Sure, there will be no more coaching and simulations filling those four months in between to challenge ideas of “integrity” and further shape the Main Event into something barely resembling other poker tournaments. Most importantly, though, the story’s momentum won’t be interrupted, which means the building drama over the first seven days of poker will get to continue into the last three days of the final table.

There is still a delay before the final table, but one lasting just two days. Plenty of time, I think, to get to know the players and build some interest and excitement heading into the finale -- like that extra week before the Super Bowl.

After being away a few summers, I’m also plotting a return to the WSOP this time, meaning if all goes as intended I’ll be there to watch this Main Event play out -- all the way out, that is.

I’ll even get to lend a hand when it comes to telling the story of how the sucker ends, too. Finally. Nine years later.

Talk about a final table delay.

Image: PokerNews.

On the Relative Watchability of Poker (Again)

Just a quick sign-off to the week today to share something unrelated to politics or elections or the like. I mean, it’s a poker blog, you know?

Saw my buddy Tim Fiorvanti -- formerly of BLUFF magazine and now writing for ESPN -- tweeting out today a new article appearing on ESPN in which one of the site’s senior writers Arash Markazi shares a personal reflection of having watched this year’s World Series of Poker Main Event final table.

Markazi isn’t necessarily a “poker guy,” although as he explains at the start of his column he plays now and then and like a lot of people during the 2000s found a lot of enjoyment in watching televised poker.

He shares the not uncommon view that a big reason why he found poker TV compelling back then was “because of the characters I had become connected to while watching all those shows.” He also got a little tired of it all even before Black Friday, and sounds as though he’d drifted away from watching over recent years (again, like many others).

Markazi went to the Rio All-Suite Hotel & Casino this year to watch all three nights of the final table. To summarize his general impression, he wasn’t too entertained, finding it all much too tedious and tame. To be fair, Markazi seems to be applying some of the criteria for what makes a sporting event entertaining to this in-person experience of the final table, which most of us who have spent time watching people play poker know isn’t really the best way to judge.

Even so, he persuasively laments that even after watching players going at it for more than a dozen hours, he “had no real connection to them” and thus couldn’t find a way to be engaged.

He thinks back to Jamie Gold at the 2006 WSOP Main Event final table who helps provide a sharp contrast between a fond poker watching memory and the more recent experience. He talks to Gold as well, who affirms the much-shared point that “you need to have players talking to have heroes and villains.” Since the 2016 WSOP Main Event final table featured relatively little of that, there was necessarily going to be (in Markazi’s estimation) a “disconnect between the viewers and the players at the table.”

Interestingly, Markusi doesn’t mention any of the coverage leading up to the final table, which I have to assume he didn’t see. If he had, he would no doubt have discussed the prominent role William Kassouf played in those shows, cast as he was as a kind of “villain” precisely because of his table talk or so-called “speech play.”

He might also have addressed the WSOP’s somewhat confused handling of Kassouf, which could have been interpreted as representing a position directly opposed to the one Markusi and Gold espouse in the column -- namely, that table talk is a very good thing when it comes to making poker more interesting as a “spectator sport.”

Anyhow, check out Markusi’s article if you’re curious, titled “Poker is lacking the heroes and villains it so desperately needs.”

Image: “Bax's parents watching him play the #mainevent #finaltable #wsop #poker #gojohnnygo #bax,” Dutch Boyd. CC BY 2.0.

Travel Report: EPT13 Malta, Day 6 -- Star Turn

Day 2 of the European Poker Tour Malta Main Event played out today. There were 468 starters in the €5,300 buy-in event (including the few who late regged at the start of play today), and from that group 90 have made it through to Wednesday’s Day 3.

One player who didn’t get to tomorrow was William Kassouf. He started today at the feature table and garnered a bit of time on EPT Live, but busted relatively early in the day in a three-way all-in. Despite the involvement in the hand of another short stack, Vladimir Troyanovskiy, who was in there with pocket deuces, the hand nonetheless uncannily recalled Kassouf’s 17th-place bustout from this summer’s World Series of Poker Main Event, as he once again ran pocket kings into an opponent’s pocket aces (this time Brian Altman was the winner).

I’ve now had a chance to see this week’s ESPN episodes of the WSOP Main Event which carried things down from 21 players to the final nine, setting up the restart that finally comes this Sunday. Many here in Malta have seen them by now, too, or at least the end of Episode 13 featuring Kassouf’s knockout at the hands of Griffin Benger (who went on to make the final nine).

Heard some table talk about the hand and situation surrounding it today, and while it’s all just a tiny anecdotal sampling it does seem as though many are “siding” with Kassouf (if this must be set up as an either/or-type debate, which it shouldn’t be), finding his behavior not nearly as objectionable as that of some of the other players who played with him on that Day 7 this summer, Benger included.

I mentioned a few days ago meeting Kassouf and finding him a friendly, likeable dude. He’s certainly drawn attention to himself in tournaments here with his table talk and gregarious demeanor, but over the course of a long eight- or 10-hour day of poker the “Kassouf experience” it isn’t quite the same as the distilled, highlight reel version shown on ESPN. He’s silent for significant periods when not in hands, and frankly when he does talk it doesn’t seem all that remarkable other than by the contrast he provides with the majority of players who these days choose to remain silent when they play hands.

There was one funny moment late on Day 1b, I recall, when an older French player said to Kassouf that “each ante is... like a movie to you.” The table broke up in laughter, and Kassouf grinningly responded “and you are part of the production!”

Kassouf is obviously very comfortable in the spotlight amid this “star turn” he's found himself taking our strange little poker world. Others have made that observation to me this week, in each case punctuating it with some version of “more power to him” for doing so.

At the start of the ESPN episode that concluded with Kassouf’s knockout and the genuinely startling, emotional eruption by Griffin Benger that preceded it, Lon McEachern and Norman Chad in their introduction once again highlighted Kassouf as the central character of the drama. In fact the show started with a whole montage of Kassouf moments interspersed with an awkward-seeming sit down between him and WSOP Tournament Director Jack Effel.

“Will Kassouf is the most polarizing player of the 21 remaining,” said McEachern, and in his rejoinder Chad ticked off a list of adjectives to describe the British pro: “Too disruptive, too disrespectful, too distasteful, and too damn slow,” said Chad.

Once again making the disclaimer I’ve made before here that all we get is what we see in these sculpted, abbreviated versions of reality shown in each WSOP episode, I can’t say I agree with Chad’s list. Sure, in certain hands he’s been shown to have played “too damn slow.” Whether his play is “disruptive” or not is debatable -- as I’ve said, watching him perform here in Malta, that does not at all seem to be the case. Meanwhile “disrespectful” and “distasteful” seem even further off-base, although I suppose differing views can exist.

The Benger-Kassouf hand was incredibly interesting to watch, though, particularly because Benger had only briefly been covered at all during any of the episodes -- and never playing with Kassouf -- making his transformation in the hand from a silent statue to a raving maniac all the more astonishing to see. Kassouf’s reaction was fascinating as well, as was both players’ trumpeting before the community cards came that it didn’t matter how the hand ended, each felt as though he’d “won.”

If his pocket aces were to be cracked by Kassouf’s kings, says Benger, “it doesn’t matter -- he’s still miserable, I’m happy.” Meanwhile Kassouf says “you can’t take it... you let it get to you, you’re losing it.” Both knew the cards had essentially played themselves in the hand, but they were continuing on with another, different game in which the result of the hand wasn’t relevant.

If you haven’t seen it, someone has carved it out and posted it on YouTube. Even without having sat through the many weeks’ worth of previous episodes, it’s something to see:

In the end, I think neither of the two deserve much criticism here. It was an unusual moment for sure, and poker would be way too stressful to tolerate were it always played this way. But obviously it isn’t, which is why the hand was remarkable.

Back to business here in Malta for tomorrow’s Day 3. Check your privilege if you like, but also check the PokerStars blog.

Photo: courtesy Neil Stoddart / PokerStars blog.

Like a Boss

Been following those WSOP Main Event shows on ESPN, which have now dwindled down to the last couple of weeks prior to the “November Nine” (which actually starts October 30).

The pair of shows from Sunday (episodes 11 and 12) focused on the first part of Day 7, starting with 27 players and only getting down to 21. A ton of time was spent highlighting William Kassouf’s table talk and tanking, with the last hour in particular dominated by examples as well as the rest of the table getting increasingly upset about his “speech play” and very deliberate pace.

It’s a bit misleading, I think, to watch all of this play out in edited form as we are, although that isn’t preventing many from weighing in on Kassouf, the WSOP staff, and the other players. I will say that ESPN has managed to create a fairly compelling mini-drama out of it all, fashioning a kind of “villain” role for Kassouf (reality TV-style) over whom viewers can get animated as they take sides.

Knowing how things end up going for Kassouf later in the day, it’s hard not to foresee some sort of “karmic” climax to his performance (spoiler alert -- he runs kings into aces to fall in 17th).

The ganging up on Kassouf shown this week at times seemed every bit as bothersome as Kassouf’s own antics, but as I say, it’s hard to judge without having been there. Even being there, it would be hard to know for sure how to assess what was happening, given we can’t see players’ cards and thus can’t say with certainty whether or not they are playing their hands in “acceptable” ways (scare quotes deliberately added).

Nearly 10 minutes of the latter portion of this week’s shows were devoted to a single hand in which Kassouf opened, a player shoved a short-though-not-insignificant stack, and Kassouf had to decide whether or not to call with pocket treys. He correctly assumed he might be racing (the shover had two unpaired overcards), but his contemplation ended up getting interrupted and delayed further by other players’ objections plus a lengthy visit from floor staff.

It seemed a lot like Kassouf had successfully managed to get nearly everyone to crack -- players, staff, and perhaps some of those in attendance, too. Even Lon McEachern and Norman Chad humorously got in on it, with Chad acting as though he was being affected as well.

I’m not saying I’d have enjoyed being part of that scene, but from the outside (and through the heavily blinkered lens of ESPN’s edits) it sure seemed like Kassouf had everyone right where he wanted them, as though he were the one in charge of everything.

You know, like a boss (as Kassouf likes to say of himself). And we know how much poker players prefer to be their own bosses.

Image: “‘Like a Boss’ T-Shirt @Target LOL Spotted by Mike Mozart” (adapted), Mike Mozart. CC BY 2.0.

Helping Hands

I have been keeping up with the 2016 World Series of Poker Main Event coverage on ESPN. I never watch them live, only picking them up on YouTube later -- much better without the commercials.

They’ve been rolling out a couple of episodes every Sunday, having gotten through eight so far. The last one this week finished partway through Day 6 with 51 players remaining.

I marvel at how good Lon McEachern and Norman Chad continue to be with their commentary. They do especially well pitching things in such a way that different kinds of viewers -- from the most casual fans to hardcore strategy-nerds -- can find something to focus on and enjoy. They work in plenty of grins, too, and I find myself genuinely laughing out loud a couple of times per hour either at the more overt jokes or sly “inside baseball” references occasionally snuck into the proceedings.

The first episode this week (Episode 7) began with the start of Day 6 and an interesting situation involving the player Jason McConnon. Returning to a about 25 big blinds, McConnon had brought to the feature table a “cheat sheet” ostensibly offering guidance for when to push or fold a short stack with certain hands in certain spots. You know, kind of a helping hand (pun intended).

Kenny Hallaert was sitting to McConnon’s left and mentioned to McConnon before they started how he wouldn’t be able to use the sheets during a hand. (Hallaert, who went on to make the November Nine, is a tournament director himself, likely to know something about the issue.) Then during the very first hand McConnon picked up ace-queen offsuit and pulled out the sheets to take a look. That led to a visit to the table by Tournament Director Jack Effel and a ruling that McConnon had to put his notes away while playing his hand.

There’s an article over on PokerNews today reviewing the situation and highlighting some of the WSOP’s rules that are pertinent. It actually sounds like a bit of a judgment call, though just stepping back from this particular situation I prefer players not using notes or other helpers during hands. On the broadcast Norman Chad offers a similar take as a humorous rant (made even funnier when his teleprompter “fails” him as he’s trying to finish).

The situation reminds a little of my teaching days when it did happen (rarely, but now and then) that I’d catch students trying to cheat in various ways. I’m vaguely recalling a little joke I’d make whenever passing out exams. I’d say something like, “Put your books away -- all you need is a pencil... and your brain.”

Back when I was teaching full-time, I didn’t have to deal with students being constantly online with smartphones and/or laptops, of course. Now that’s become part of the reality of the classroom, greatly affecting many instructors’ approaches to teaching and testing -- changing the pedagogical “game,” so to speak.

Some teachers ask students to put away all their electronics, kind of reverting back to a more “primitive” or even exotic-seeming situation of just simply talking to one another, perhaps with a book open and a pen and pad nearby for note-taking. I’d kind of like poker to be played that way, too -- with the phones and iPads put away and players interacting minus such interference.

But that’s not our world anymore, so I understand as well those who wouldn’t want to play that way.

Image: “110725-G-EM820-800,” US Coast Guard Academy. Public domain.

Judgment Calls

Been watching the 2016 World Series of Poker Main Event coverage on ESPN again which finally got going a week-and-a-half ago. There have been four episodes thus far, picking up the action on Day 4 (post-bubble) and now already around halfway through Day 5 with just 140 players left.

This week’s episodes featured a ton of table talk, thanks largely to Alex Keating being on the feature table where he was engaging everyone fairly constantly, and William Kassouf drawing the cameras’ attention at other tables.

A bit of buzz this week over Kassouf’s performance, in particular in a couple of hands with Stacy Matuson. Both involved Kassouf pushing all in and putting Matuson to a test for the rest of her stack, and in both cases -- after an avalanche of disorienting chatter from Kassouf -- she folded (once correctly, once after being bluffed).

I remember when these hands happened back in July, in particular the one following which Kassouf was actually given a one-round penalty by WSOP tournament director Jack Effel for “taunting” (as Effel described it).

Following it online at the time over Twitter and then via the hand report on WSOP.com, an admittedly partial view of the affair. Seemed perhaps as though Kassouf must have crossed some not-so-obvious line somewhere with his behavior, but it was hard to say.

The way things were shown on ESPN revealed more of the interaction, but it remains incomplete evidence for those of us who weren’t there. Indeed, even the two hands featured between Kassouf and Matuson are only partially shown, with the action only being picked up postflop when the “speech play” (as Kassouf refers to his table table) began in earnest.

It’s interesting following some of the belated back-and-forthing about it happening thanks to the ESPN coverage finally being shown (here, some two months later). Deservedly or not, Kassouf is clearly being set up to fill the “villain” role for ESPN right through to the final table which starts in late October.

Hard for me to make any profound judgments about those Kassouf-Matuson hands, though, or about how the WSOP staff chose to respond to them. From afar I want to say everything we witnessed is “part of the game” and shouldn’t be proscribed, but who knows, really? Just too much we can’t see or be sure about here -- including a lot of obviously relevant context -- although that doesn’t make the speculating any less interesting.

Kind of like how poker works -- we know what we can see, and have to guess about a lot else.

Football, Finally

I’ve been guilty more than once here over the last couple of months of grumbling about the relative paucity of televised sports entertainment. It’s my own fault, really. Imprisoned by my own tastes.

Sometimes the whining has come under the heading of pining for more poker on the teevee -- such as during the WSOP Main Event (which still hasn’t begun to be aired on ESPN and won’t start until Sunday). Definitely feel like there’s a valley here in the summer that poker could fill for a certain segment of sports watchers.

I realize there are sports to watch during the couple of months that follow the NBA finals. It’s not that I don’t enjoy watching the occasional tennis match, fourth round of a golf tournament, soccer match, or baseball game. Or even (this year) the panoply of Olympic sports from last month, which I spent some hours enjoying during the first week at least before taking off for Barcelona halfway through the sucker.

But for me the most enjoyable sport to watch on television is football, and I mean professional football. College is an okay diversion, but it ain’t nearly as engaging to me as the pro game.

This year begins uniquely for a Panthers fan like myself, given how Carolina gets to play in tonight’s Thursday kickoff game in a Super Bowl rematch versus the Denver Broncos. It’s not an ideal spot to begin a season -- on the road, on a short week, and versus an above average opponent. But it’ll give us all an early idea how bullish we should be on the team this time around.

Tonight’ll mark the first of 256 attempts at picking winners again as well as I jump back into another Pigskin Pick’em campaign. Hard to have much perspective with tonight’s pick, as we’re pretty well overwhelmed with unreasonable optimism regarding the Panthers around these parts. No Peyton for the Broncos (and an untested fellow in his place behind center) is encouraging many to go with Carolina as well, although I don’t necessarily think the QB situation will hurt Denver all that much.

Ah well... no more fussing over it. Time to make a pick. The second-guessing is just hours away!

Image: “Pigskin,” Eric Kilby. CC BY-SA 2.0.

Passive Viewing

Dipping into the Olympics here, as I imagine you have been doing as well. It appears that between the rack of channels coming in via the dish and the Roku, we can watch practically anything whenever we want, which is nice.

Funny, though, I’m still finding it preferable in the evening simply to tune into the local NBC channel and let the network decide what events to show me and when. I suppose I fall into the large category of “passive” Olympics viewers. I’m referring to those of us who aren’t super enthused about being delivered every moment from every sport, or even that curious about any one sport in particular.

The same is probably true for most of those who end up watching the WSOP Main Event coverage on ESPN. They aren’t hanging on every twist and turn back in July like some of us, and so it’s actually more palatable for them to watch the sucker get strung out over several months however ESPN sees fit.

Vera is interested in the dressage portion of the equestrian events, of course (which don’t really crank up for a couple of days). And I’m dialing up men’s basketball sometimes, too, particularly when the U.S. is playing as they need earlier tonight. But otherwise, we’re content just to let it play as ambient sound-and-image, looking up whenever the announcers’ excitement captures our attention.

Speaking of that men’s basketball game earlier, the U.S. team found itself tied 18-18 with Venezuela after the first 10-minute quarter. Was a sorta-kinda surprising start considering they’d opened up the Olympics beating China by 57 points and were expected to do something similar in their second game tonight. (The matchup with Australia on Wednesday ought to be more competitive, I’d think.)

Even so, it felt an awful lot like a much-outclassed poker player winning a few pots early on in a session, but destined to lose it all back eventually -- and likely sooner than later. Sure enough the U.S. outscored Venezuela 30-8 in the second quarter, ultimately going on to win by 44.

When games go in that direction, they, too, become part of the background as I do other things, only looking up occasionally to check the score and watch another U.S. fast break.

Image: “Play the long ball,” (adapted), Craig Sunter. CC BY-ND 2.0.

The Asynchronous Audience

Over the last few days I’ve gradually been listening to the final PokerNews Podcast of the 2016 World Series of Poker (episode #406) -- of the summer portion of the WSOP, anyway. Kind of just the way things worked out in terms of my listening opportunities, although there wasn’t such an urgency to listen right away as there was with earlier episodes since this one recapped the action as it concluded on that final day when the Main Event played down from 27 to nine.

That’s where the Main Event will remain, of course, for approximately 100 more days until the “November Nine” (which starts at the end of October) finally gets going.

There are a lot of good interviews in this episode -- the ones with Gordon Vayo, Cliff Josephy, and Griffin Benger stand out as especially interesting. Again, I’ve said it before (and recently), but Remko Rinkema is terrific with these.

Along the way Remko and Donnie Peters talk through that last day, recounting highlights and big hands. Which is how most of us will be experiencing that day (and the couple preceding it) once ESPN begins airing its coverage -- not until Sunday, September 11, actually.

In other words, the WSOP shows won’t begin on ESPN until after the NFL has already begun, as the network is obviously once more using poker as a kind of “counterprogramming” to football. Doesn’t matter too much, though, as I imagine many will go the DVR route, watch “on demand” via the WatchESPN app, or view the episodes online in some other fashion when and where they wish. Kind of like the way I’m listening to the PNPod.

If you think about it, those of us who like to follow the WSOP Main Event now experience this particular tournament very much like other “series” people watch on demand -- i.e., dramas, comedies, etc. That delivery method also creates conditions for the same sort of “asynchronous” dialogue about the tournament we often have online via various social media outlets and discussion forums.

All of which means our talk about the tournament so far has been necessarily scattered and strung out. Even when the episodes start airing seven weeks from now, they’ll only serve as vague points of reference for the discussion as it goes forward -- apart, perhaps, from a big hand or two (such as Benger’s aces-over-kings ouster of the talkative William Kassouf in 17th) which might get us all on the same page for a brief moment.

Not saying this is good or bad, just different from most major poker tournaments and sporting events that are covered live (or essentially live), and perhaps more like other facets of entertainment culture that are not collectively experienced at once. At least the final table will give us a chance to witness and respond to the WSOP Main Event as a group.

Meanwhile, if you want to talk about the WSOP Main Event, well, go right ahead. We’ll catch up eventually.

Image: “Scattered Time,” dommylive. CC BY 2.0.

The Summer Slowdown

With the NBA season over and the NFL’s first regular season game not scheduled until September 8, sports fans are facing a long summer.

Baseball, tennis, and golf can occasionally work as a stop-gap. The conclusions of both the Copa America and UEFA European Championships will also provide some diversion for those with an interest. And of course the 2016 Summer Olympics in Brazil, set to play out from August 5-21, will be welcomed by sports fans, too.

But for the majority of sports fans -- in the U.S., at least -- these are the super-slow months, with none of these options necessarily presenting too much that tempts.

Meanwhile the World Series of Poker continues. Poker fans are already following what’s happening out in Las Vegas this summer via updates and the various reporting sites. But once again -- as I’ve thought before right around this time of year -- it seems like there’s an opportunity perhaps being missed.

I mentioned yesterday how I’ve dipped into the live streams now and then on WSOP.com this summer and have been impressed, particularly with the stud games where they’ve discovered a method to handle the graphics in what seems to me a viewer-friendly way.

I don’t really think any of these preliminary events necessarily warrant a larger platform, although I found myself imagining half-hour recaps of key final table moments being shown on one of the many sports networks. WSOP.com is already doing something similar at times when showing highlights/bustout hands from past final tables while waiting for a new stream to begin.

I do think, though, that ESPN could well do something with the Main Event in July to fill a week’s worth of otherwise slow summer nights, sports-wise.

I know there’s the long-standing argument that ESPN wants to avoid potentially affecting viewership negatively for the weekly edited shows -- that tend to air opposite NFL games, actually -- by showing Main Event coverage in July. If memory serves, 2011 was the only year they did try some July shows from the Main Event, to mixed reviews.

Unfortunately, not only won’t there be anything like that on ESPN in July, but there won’t even be any live streaming of the Main Event either. Ah well... there will probably a baseball game on somewhere.

Image: “Blue Skies & Hot Sun” (adapted), Michele Frazier. CC BY 2.0.

An American Nightmare

I have now made it through the five parts of ESPN’s O.J.: Made in America, all seven hours and 44 minutes of it. I suppose watching and playing in poker tournaments -- or maybe it’s all those transatlantic flights I’ve taken -- has made sitting through nearly eight hours of anything seem a lot less remarkable than it was before.

The reviews of the film, directed and produced by Ezra Edelman, have been consistently glowing, and I, too, thought it very good and compelling throughout. Errol Morris (The Thin Blue Line, The Fog of War) is an obvious influence (narrative pace, music, editing, interview format), and as I greatly enjoy Morris’s films and storytelling style that ensured I was hooked from early in the first hour.

I knew a lot about Simpson’s background, though the film presents numerous details that were new to me (and to most viewers, I’d imagine). Much of what was presented concerning the murders and trial was very familiar, while some of the participants’ reflections were interesting to hear articulated for the first time.

The civil case (in which Simpson was found responsible for the murders) was mostly familiar ground as well for those who followed it when it happened. Meanwhile the entire post-trials sequence detailing Simpson’s downward spiral into decadence and his eventual arrest, conviction, and imprisonment in Nevada for a different crime was mostly new to me.

The film clarifies in a comprehensive way how studying the complicated legacy of race relations both in southern California and Los Angeles in particular and in the nation as a whole adds considerably to our understanding of why the trial played out as it did. It also sheds light on Simpson’s own strange, frighteningly-destructive psychological makeup, which helps explain -- as much as is possible, anyway -- how exactly he had become a person able to perpetrate such horrors.

“There was nothing ever, ever in the past that would indicate would be capable of doing what he’s doing right now” says Al Michaels on air during the Bronco chase, articulating the position of the great majority of the public at the time who thought they knew Simpson but really did not. The film helps make it clear that not only was Simpson capable, but predisposed to commit such acts.

Probably the most affecting part of the entire documentary (for me) was the creeping, mounting, chest-tightening dread that builds toward the end of the second part when all of the many, many instances of abuse and other loud forewarnings build upon each other -- both saddening and maddening. I also was affected during the discussion of the Rodney King beating, trial, and the L.A. riots, as they triggered some anxiety-filled memories of that time. (As well as some trepidation about how such a situation might play out today, nearly a quarter-century later.)

In the end, I appreciated the lengthy exposition (i.e., the first two parts) a bit more than the narrative of the trial and its aftermath, probably because the latter was on the whole both more familiar to me and tended to be overwhelmed at several points by the incredibly sensational aspects of the murders and trial.

As I say, the argument that race relations was a key component to America’s “making” a figure like O.J. was persuasive and thorough. But when it was over I was thinking also about other influences upon attitudes and values -- namely, sports, celebrity, and money/class -- all suggested as well by the film, but not explored as fully. Of course, that might’ve carried the film another couple of hours further, as it didn’t appear there was much included that didn’t seem to belong.

I’ll finish with one last observation about the documentary. Early on it is established how Simpson not only avoided drawing attention to race and the many injustices marking race relations as his personal fame and cultural stature grew, but overtly defended his right to pursue self-interest. The position is uniformly opposed by others in the film, and indeed Simpson’s lack of interest in any larger community is made to appear monstrous -- another piece of evidence presented to explain Simpson’s narcissism and lack of regard for anyone but himself.

As that case was being made, though, I found myself thinking -- how unusual is that position, really? Especially today. We’re surrounded by others adopting the exact same approach to society at large and their place within it, not feeling any responsibility at all to the “community” and appearing exclusively and unembarrassedly motivated by self-improvement.

It’s a not uncommon type, and also -- to an extent -- “made in America.”

Image: ESPN.

Watching the Super High Roller Bowl

I actually had Day 1 of the 2016 Super High Roller Bowl on from start-to-finish yesterday.

Took a little while for the live stream to work out the kinks during the first hour or so, but the PokerCentral channel finally got up to speed and I had it on the teevee via the Roku. Then starting at 7 p.m. ET I switched over to the CBS Sports Network (which I rarely watch but thankfully get) and left it running all night until 3 a.m.

That’s not to say I paid close attention every step of the way, and indeed I think that would have been hard to do even for dedicated televised poker watchers. But I watched a lot, generally enjoying the show and tolerating well enough all of those Dollar Shave Club commercials.

We’ve been listening to Ali Nejad do poker play-by-play for a decade now, and he was solid as usual. Nick Schulman was doing commentary as well. I haven’t heard him do a lot before, but he was an absolute natural (I thought), very funny and quick with Nejad while also giving good analysis, often smartly directed toward a wide audience.

Interestingly, a $300K buy-in “super” high roller doesn’t really provide all that much novelty anymore. Or excitement, even, given how common six-figure buy-in events have become since they first started cropping up in early 2011. But this free-to-play “MVMT Million Dollar Final Table Challenge” game being put on by PokerCentral and MVMT watches has added an extra incentive to follow this one, even if the challenge being presented by the contest is all but impossible to meet.

You probably heard about it. Seven players will cash in this tournament, splitting a $15 million prize pool with $5 milly going to the winner. For those who entered the contest, guessing all seven cashers correctly -- in order -- wins a $1 million prize. (No shinola.) And if no one gets that, the closest to doing so wins $10,000, with the top 25 getting fancy watches.

Sure, as Fedor Holz (one of the players who I’ve picked to make my final table) joked on Twitter yesterday, “Don't miss the 0,000006$ EV and bet the Final Table order in this 300k @PokerCentral #SuperHighRollerBowl #value.” Even so, the game added a bit of fun to watching, and the ability to change your line-up at the end of Day 1 (and jettison those who had already busted) enables that to continue into today for most who are playing along.

Just for fun, I pulled together an article on Friday for PokerNews titled “Finding a Million-Dollar Strategy for Picking the Super High Roller Bowl Winners.” I didn’t really pretend to present a sure-fire strategy for playing what is mostly a lottery-like contest, but rather went through and gave a history of sorts for all 49 players in events with buy-ins of $100K or more. That is to say, I shared how many times each had cashed in such events before (or not, as some never have), not being able to share also how many times the players had entered super high rollers.

I then picked a final table comprised of dudes who’d gotten to the money in these things many times. Two of my original picks -- Scott Seiver and Isaac Haxton -- didn’t make it to today’s second day of play, and so before the window closed to change picks I swapped them out for Timofey Kuznetsov and Daniel Negreanu (both of whom finished Day 1 with big stacks).

Looking at past super high rollers seems as good a way as any to play a game like this. I was just reading this afternoon an ESPN article by Bill Barnwell discussing tonight’s Game 7 between the Golden State Warriors and Oklahoma City Thunder (which is going to interrupt my SHRB viewing for certain). He essentially did something similar, going back through history and looking for examples of teams who like OKC blew Game 6 leads in which they’d have clinched series (both in basketball and baseball), then seeing how they did in Game 7s.

In truth I think the only people who can truly handicap something like this are the players themselves, as they know more than anyone the relative skill level and potential for success of those who are participating.

Anyhow, that’s my card up top. Wish me -- and those seven guys listed above -- luck.

The Futures Is Now, Bro

Was listening today to the new episode of Chad Millman’s Behind the Bet$ podcast for ESPN, a show I tend to enjoy despite not being a huge sports bettor.

The focus of the episode is the upcoming Major League Baseball season, and the conversation between Millman and his guests ranged over several topics although mostly had to do with futures bets, including those “over/under” bets on total games won as well as bets on a team winning their division, league, or World Series.

The conversation began with the Chicago Cubs, who Millman pointed out had opened at 10-to-1 to win the World Series (following last year, I assume) and now had moved all of the way to a kind of ridiculous 4-to-1 (I’m not sure which sportsbook he’s using). As the group pointed out, that’s more of a favorite than the most favored team often tends to be going into the playoffs, let alone to start the season.

The Cubs talk was interesting enough, and I imagine might have disturbed my Cubs-hating uncle who wants nothing more than to see them miss the World Series for a 71st-straight year. But I was intrigued by a point made by Paul Bessire of PredictionMachine about how much these World Series bets tend to favor the house -- indeed by a margin much greater than lots of other bets, including other futures bets.

The example of the Cubs who no one is giving more than a 20% chance of winning the World Series right now (what you’d need to break even on a 4-to-1 bet) is obvious enough. Bessire said after crunching all his numbers he personally had the Cubs at about 15% to win, the best of any team but not close enough to the odds being offered to make that a worthwhile bet to make.

Really, though, there are no good World Series futures bets. “If you dig into the numbers,” Bissere explained, and “look at all the confidence that you would need or at least the break-even points for all of the individual teams on the World Series odds and add them altogether you would get almost 200%, meaning that there’s almost 100% juice built into that.”

Like I say, I’m not a big sports bettor, but the point Bissere is making is one I’ve noticed before when perusing these kinds of futures bets. Offering the Cubs at 4-to-1 suggests they are 20% to win the World Series, if the line weren’t overvaluing the Cubs (which it is). The next biggest favorite is the Los Angeles Dodgers at 9-to-1 (or 10%), followed by the Houston Astros at 10-to-1 (about 9%) and so on down the list. What Bissere is saying is that when you add all 30 teams’ odds up, the total is close to 200%, which means collectively the 30 teams are being overvalued by nearly 100%.

I found a list of World Series futures -- not exactly the ones they had on the show, but close (including having Chicago at 4-to-1) -- and just for fun decided to add up the percentages. They actually only totaled about 125%, so unless I’m missing something, which I could be, the futures list I saw (at VegasInsider) wasn’t as punishing as the one the guys were referencing on the show.

Something similar, actually, usually results from these odds on final tables in poker tournaments such as we’ve seen at the World Series of Poker now and then -- namely, the odds are way too short for everyone. I know I’ve written about this at least a couple of times here before, such as in 2012 when I discussed odds being offered at the Rio Race and Sportsbook on the nine players making that year’s WSOP Main Event final table.

That year you could place bet on chip leader Jesse Sylvia to win at 3-to-2 (no shinola), which if taken at face value would suggest he was 40% to win. The odds for eventual winner Greg Merson (third in chips heading into the final table) were 5-to-2 (about 28.5%). Adding up the nine players, the total was close to 175%, illustrating the same point being made on the show about the exorbitant juice in World Series futures.

The majority of those making these kinds of futures bets are more likely to be seeking entertainment than value, of course, although I know there are some sharps who manage to find bets worth risking among the offerings. If I remember correctly, before the season my Carolina Panthers were something like 40-to-1 to win Super Bowl 50, a game they managed to enter as a heavy favorite. Alas, those who made that bet, like the Panthers, were unable to cash in.

For me, listening to the talk about over/unders and futures works as a good preview of what expectations are for the coming year, something that for me can make watching the actual games a little more interesting -- even without having bet on them.

Photo: “race & sports book” (detail), fictures. CC BY 2.0.

2015 WSOP Main Event Final Table Hole Cards (Complete)

I mentioned yesterday I had something more to share from this week’s 2015 World Series of Poker Main Event final table. Once again I noted hole cards shown during what turned out to be about 11 hours or so worth of coverage on ESPN, and I’m sharing them here for anyone who might be curious.

I’ve done something similar for the last three years. In both 2012 and 2013, I posted the lists here on Hard-Boiled, then over on PokerNews in 2014.

Since PN didn’t do the live updates at the WSOP this year, I decided to post it over here again this time, since part of the point of doing it on PN was to link each hand to the update. I’m not going to go through and link all 184 of these hands to the individual updates on WSOP.com, but you can find them over there if you wish.

In 2012 and 2013, ESPN was only showing hole cards after hands completed. Meanwhile last year and again this year, they would show players’ cards whenever they voluntarily put chips in the middle (and not if they didn’t), with the exception of also showing the big blind’s hand whenever that player folded to raise to end a hand.

At just 184 hands, this was a relatively quick final table, the shortest in the last decade, at least. Here are the totals going back to ’05: 2014 (328 hands), 2013 (261), 2012 (399), 2011 (301), 2010 (262), 2009 (364), 2008 (274), 2007 (205), 2006 (236), 2005 (232).

For those who felt like there seemed to be a lot of premium hands dealt at the final table, well, there were a lot although not necessarily that many more than would be expected. That said, both Joe McKeehen and Neil Blumenfield got more than their share.

McKeehen was dealt all 184 hands, of course. Throwing ace-queen in with the “premiums” -- so, A-A, K-K, Q-Q, A-K, and A-Q -- we saw McKeehen be dealt 16 premium hands (aces three times, kings twice, queens three times, ace-king six times, and ace-queen twice). If my math is right, on average that’s about twice the number of premium hands he’d typically get in 184 hands (just under seven).

Blumenfield got 10 such hands (out of 172), also above the almost 6.5 a player gets on average for that number of hands. Meanwhile the other seven players were right at or a little below the average for getting dealt such hands. Beckley got 5/184 (average would be 6.95, like McKeehen); Steinberg 5/143 (avg. 5.4); Stern 4/121 (4.6); Cannuli 1/74 (2.7); Neuville 3/72 (2.7); Butteroni 0/32 (1.2); and Chan 0/2 (0/1).

I guess Cannuli (who got aces once) and Butteroni (who was dealt none of these hands) might complain a little about their cards at this final table. McKeehen, meanwhile, not only played his big stack well but was steadily dealt plenty of good starting hands, too.

Okay, enough. Here’s the list. An asterisk indicates a bustout hand, and an “X” a card that failed to be read by ESPN. It’s worth noting, too, the slim possibility that ESPN could have reported a card incorrectly, and the greater-than-slim possibility that I could have made a mistake when marking one down.

2015 WSOP MAIN EVENT FINAL TABLE: DAY ONE

Level 35

1. Steinberg Ks Jh, Chan 9h 4c
*2. McKeehen Ad 4h, Chan Ks Qc
3. Stern Ad 10c, Blumenfield Qc 8c
4. Neuville 10s 10d, Blumenfield As Ac
5. Steinberg Ad 10h, Blumenfield Qh Qc
6. Blumenfield As 3s, Beckley 10d 8s
7. Stern 10s 7s, Steinberg 5h 5c
8. Steinberg Kh Qh, Cannuli 9h 5d
9. Cannuli Jd 8s, McKeehen Qs X
10. Beckley Kc Qh, Butteroni 8h 2c
11. Beckley As Qh, Blumenfield Jc 9c
12. Blumenfield As 7c, Stern Kh 2c
13. McKeehen Kh 10d, Blumenfield Ac 10h
14. Stern Ah 5d, Beckley 10d 4s
15. Beckley Kh 4d, Steinberg 5c 2d
16. Neuville Kc Qs, Cannuli 9s 5s

Level 36

17. Beckley 10d 8c, McKeehen 6s 4s
18. Blumenfield 2h 2d, McKeehen Kc 10c
19. Steinberg 8s 8d, McKeehen 8c 7h
20. Blumenfield 8h 2h, Stern 9c 2c
21. Butteroni Qc 9c, Neuville Ah 7h
22. McKeehen Kh Kc, Beckley Ks Jd
23. Neuville As 4s, Steinberg 10s 7c
24. Beckley Ac 8c, Cannuli 6s 3s
25. Blumenfield Kh Qh, McKeehen Ks 3h
26. Beckley Ks 10c, Butteroni Qs 3s
27. Stern Ad 9d, Blumenfield Kc 3d
28. Steinberg Js 4s (accidentally exposed), McKeehen Ah 8c, Blumenfield Ad Ks
29. McKeehen 10s 9s, Neuville Jd 8h
30. Blumenfield As Qs, Stern Kh Jh, Neuville Ah Ac
31. Stern Qs 9h, Neuville 4h 4c
32. Neuville Qs Qc, Cannuli Kh 9h
33. Stern Jh Jc, McKeehen 9c 8h
34. Beckley 9d 8s, Steinberg Ac Kc
*35. McKeehen As Ks, Butteroni Ah Jc
36. Cannuli 6h 6c, McKeehen Kh Jh, Stern 5s 2h
37. Stern As 9h, Neuville 9s 8s
38. Steinberg Ah 7h, Beckley 8c 5c
39. Stern 6s 6c, Steinberg 10c 6d
40. McKeehen Ks 10s, Stern Qs Qd
41. Stern As Jc, McKeehen Ah 8c
42. McKeehen Kc 9d, Blumenfield Js 8h
43. Cannuli 6c 4c, Blumenfield Ac 3s
44. McKeehen Ks 5c, Neuville 10c 2d
45. Stern 6s 3s, Beckley Qd Qc
46. Stern As 6c, Steinberg 5d 2d
47. McKeehen 8s 6s, Cannuli Js 4d
48. Blumenfield 4h 4c, Neuville Ac Kh

Level 37

49. Cannuli Ah Js, Blumenfield 10s 6h
50. Steinberg 10s 10c, Stern Ah 6d
51. McKeehen 10c 9h, Neuville 7h 6c
52. Cannuli Qc Js, Beckley 6c 2s
53. McKeehen Qd Qc, Stern 7s 7d, Steinberg 3s 3c
54. Blumenfield Ad 9c, Cannuli Qc Js
55. Steinberg Qh 8d, McKeehen Ad 5h
56. Stern Ah Kh, McKeehen 8d 8c
57. Stern Qc 8h, Blumenfield Ah 2h
58. Cannuli Kh Qd, Blumenfield Kd Jd, Stern Jh Jc
59. Cannuli As Jd, Beckley Qc 6d
60. McKeehen 5s 5d, Stern As Kc
61. Blumenfield Jc 10c, Beckley Qh Qc
62. Cannuli 9h 5h, McKeehen X X
63. Stern Jh 9c, McKeehen As Ac
64. McKeehen Kc 10c, Stern Ad 3h
65. McKeehen Kd 7c, Blumenfield Ad 9s
66. McKeehen Ac 7d, Beckley, Jh 6s
67. Cannuli Ah Jh, Steinberg 4h 3s
68. Blumenfield Qh Qd, Cannuli 8c 6d
69. Beckley Kd 8d, Cannuli Ad Jc
70. Steinberg Kh 9c, McKeehen 8s 4d
71. McKeehen Kd 7d, Stern Jd 8d
*72. McKeehen Jh 6h, Neuville Ac Jc

2015 WSOP MAIN EVENT FINAL TABLE: DAY TWO

73. McKeehen 9s 9d, Steinberg Kc Jh
*74. Cannuli As Ac, Steinberg 10h 10d
75. Stern Ad 4h, McKeehen Jc 9c
76. Blumenfield Ad 2d, Steinberg Ah Jd
77. Beckley Ac Qc, Stern 7s 2s
78. McKeehen As 2s, Beckley 10h 6s
79. Beckley Ks 10c, Steinberg 9h 2d
80. Steinberg Jd 6s, McKeehen As X
81. Steinberg As 8h, Steinberg Ks 5c
82. McKeehen 9c 7h, Blumenfield As Ks
83. Steinberg Ac Ks, McKeehen Kh Qh
84. McKeehen 7c 4c, Steinberg Jh 6h
85. Stern Ad Ac, McKeehen Ks 4d
86. McKeehen 4d 3d, Blumenfield Jd 7h
87. McKeehen Kd Kc, Stern 9s 8c
88. McKeehen Ks 8s, Beckley Ah 9h
89. McKeehen Qc 6c, Stern 3s 3h, Beckley As Ac
90. Stern Ad Jc, McKeehen Ks 6h
91. Stern Ad 9d, Blumenfield 10d 3c
92. McKeehen Ks 4h, Stern 8d 7c
93. Blumenfield Ah Kd, Beckley 8h 6d

Level 38

94. Stern Kc 2d, Steinberg Qs Qh
95. Beckley Qh 7c, McKeehen 10s 3s
96. Steinberg Ks 10c, Blumenfield 9d 7c
97. McKeehen 6h 3h, Stern 8d 6d
98. Stern 10s 9s, Beckley As Ah
99. Blumenfield 8s 6s, Steinberg 5c 2h
100. Stern Kc Qd, McKeehen 9c 3s
101. Stern As 9s, Blumenfield 9h 4c
102. McKeehen 4c 2h, Stern 6h 3h
103. McKeehen 5h 4c, Beckley 8h 8c
104. Beckley Js 6d, Steinberg 4d 2d
105. Blumenfield 3s 3c, McKeehen Ah Ad
106. Beckley Kd 7h, Blumenfield 8h 4h
107. McKeehen Jh 2s, Blumenfield Kc 10c, Stern 9c 3c
108. Stern Qd 3s, Beckley 9s 9h
109. McKeehen Ac Jd, Beckley Ad Js
110: Beckley Kh 5c, McKeehen 8h 2s
111. McKeehen Ad Jh, Blumenfield 4h 3c
112. McKeehen Jc 10d, Stern Qh 9h
113. McKeehen Ac 6h, Beckley 8h 8c
114. Beckley Jc 10h, Steinberg 10s 2s
115. Blumenfield Ac 4c, McKeehen 5c 3c
116. Steinberg Kc 10d, Blumenfield 10c 8c
117. McKeehen Ah 5d, Stern 5s 2h
118. Blumenfield Ad 6c, Beckley Qs 3d
119. Beckley Kh 6s, Steinberg As Qd
120. Steinberg 8c 4h. McKeehen 7d 2d
*121. Stern Ac Jh, Blumenfield As Kc
122. McKeehen Js 10s, Blumenfield Ad 5s
123. Beckley As Jd, Steinberg 10s 6h
124. Blumenfield As Ah, Beckley Ks 9s
125. Steinberg Ac Qh, Blumenfield 4h 2s
126. McKeehen Qs Qd, Beckley Jh Js
127. Blumenfield Qh Qd, Steinberg 3s 2h
128. Steinberg Kd 5h, Steinberg Ac 8d
129. Steinberg 7h 3h, McKeehen Ad Qs
130. McKeehen Kd 4s, Blumenfield Kc Jh, Beckley 8h 5h
131. Beckley 6h 2c, Steinberg 7h 2d
132. McKeehen 8h 8d, Beckley Ac 2h
133. McKeehen Qc 2h, Blumenfield Qd 2c
134. McKeehen Ad Kh, Beckley Ks 8c
135. McKeehen 9h 8s, Beckley Qc 9c
136. Steinberg Ah Jh, McKeehen 5s 4d
137. McKeehen 10h 7s, Blumenfield 10d 2d
138. McKeehen Kh 7d, Beckley 7h 6c
139. Blumenfield Ad 4h, Steinberg 6d 3h
140. Blumenfield 10s 9s, McKeehen 7s 5h

Level 39

141. Beckley Kh 3h, Steinberg Ad 8d
142. McKeehen 10h 9h, Beckley 7h 4h
*143. McKeehen Ad Qc, Steinberg Ah Jd

2015 WSOP MAIN EVENT FINAL TABLE: DAY THREE

144. Beckley Ks 9h, McKeehen 10c 7s
145. Beckley 10h 6h, McKeehen As 9d
146. McKeehen 5c 4d, Beckley As Jd
147. Blumenfield Ad 3c, Beckley Qd Jd
148. McKeehen Ks 10c, Blumenfield Qh 8d
149. McKeehen 9s 3c, Blumenfield As 9h
150. Beckley As 6c, McKeehen Js 7s
151. Beckley Ad 10c, McKeehen 10s 8h
152. McKeehen Jc 10d, Beckley 9h 9d
153. Blumenfield 9s 9h, McKeehen Jd 10c
154. McKeehen Qd 6d, Blumenfield Kc 3c
155. McKeehen Qc 9c, Beckley 7s 2d
156. Beckley Jh 9h, McKeehen 9d 2s
157. McKeehen As Ah, Blumenfield Kd 4s
158. McKeehen Kh 10s, Beckley 5h 3c
159. Beckley Qh 8h, McKeehen 9s 8c
160. Beckley Ks Jc, Blumenfield Ah 7h
161. McKeehen 5c 5s, Beckley As 7c
162. Beckley Ac 6h, McKeehen 10d 8h
163. McKeehen Ac 5s, Blumenfield 9d 4c
164. McKeehen 7h 6s, Beckley Ac 2s
165. Beckley 9h 2c, McKeehen 7h 6s
166. McKeehen Ad Kc, Blumenfield Jd 4d
167. McKeehen Qh 8h, Beckley 10h 2d
168. Beckley Qc 6h, McKeehen X X
169. McKeehen Ac Js, Blumenfield Jd 2s
170. McKeehen Qh 5c, Beckley Kd 9s
171. Blumenfield Qd Jd, McKeehen 7d 6c
*172. Beckley As 7d, McKeehen Qs Qh, Blumenfield 2d 2h
173. McKeehen Ad Ks, Beckley 9h 7h
174. Beckley 10c 6s, McKeehen 10h 7h
175. McKeehen 10s 8c, Beckley Qh 2d
176. Beckley Qc 9c, McKeehen 10d 4d
177. McKeehen 7s 5c, Beckley Kd 4c
178. Beckley Qc 7s, McKeehen Jh 8h
179. McKeehen Qh Jc, Beckley Ks Qs
180. Beckley 9h 4c, McKeehen As Kh
181. McKeehen 8c 5d, Beckley 8s 2s
182. Beckley As 2h, McKeehen 10s 10h
183. McKeehen Ad Kc, Beckley 8s 7h
*184. Beckley 4d 4c, McKeehen Ah 10d

2015 WSOP November Nine, Day 3: Kudos to Joe Cool

Don’t have a heckuva lot to add to last night’s finale at the 2015 World Series of Poker Main Event where Joe McKeehen took care of things with little difficulty. Definitely enjoyed the show last night, although I’ll admit I was a little confused by ESPN’s “What to Look For” tips once they got to heads-up (wink).

Tomorrow I’ll share some nerdy stuff regarding the hands shown during the three nights’ worth of shows, but for today I just wanted to share one quick thought.

I was frankly pulling for McKeehen to win even back in July when Daniel Negreanu was still among those left in the sucker. It goes back to that WSOP Circuit event I covered in early 2013 in which McKeehen similarly entered the final day with the big chip lead and cruised to victory without much resistance, at the time the biggest cash for the Philadelphian.

From that event (at Caesars Atlantic City) I remembered a few things about McKeehen. One was the fact that he had an iPad at the table and was following our coverage, occasionally interacting with us as he reacted to some of the hands being reported. I remember getting the sense that he enjoyed especially whenever we’d include table talk or other details that went beyond the cards (in other words, the stuff I, too, tend to find more interesting a lot of the time).

I also recall how he arrived early for the last day, the first of the 19 players still left in the event to show up. As we didn’t have a photographer for the tournament, I got him to pose for a quick iPhone photo for us to use in the blog. He also did kind of a mock-muscle pose in his winner’s photo, I’m remembering, which produced some grins.

The main thing, though, that I remember about the tournament was how McKeehen seemed not just in control and especially cool at the table, but also how amiable he was with players who were clearly less confident and/or experienced. It wasn’t anything extraordinary, but it was something positive about the guy I ended up taking away from the event.

Watching three-handed last night -- and also some the night before -- you could occasionally see McKeehen being similarly friendly with Blumenfield sitting on his left, and really with everyone. Those exchanges reminded me of how I’d first encountered McKeehen, and like I say made me glad to see him do well this summer and then take it all down this week.

Saw just a few truly dumb responses over Twitter last night to McKeehen’s win and his short post-tourney interview (including a burst of bitter, embarrassingly unfunny heckling from the mostly dormant Wicked Chops Poker account). When asked about being poker’s “ambassador,” McKeehen very reasonably responded “we’ll see,” which to me went right along with his matter-of-fact demeanor and playing style.

All of which is to say I was glad to see McKeehen win, thought Josh Beckley and Blumenfield were pretty likable, too, and on the whole was both entertained, enthused, and even encouraged by the WSOP’s finale.

Fleeting Impressions

Following up on yesterday’s list, here are a few very hasty thoughts about some impressions left by the hands shown during ESPN’s WSOP Main Event coverage involving the November Niners:

Joe McKeehen: Smart and savvy, able to play quietly or match Negreanu’s table talk. Stepped up pressure considerably with big stack at end of Day 7. Especially cool (barely reacted when rivering four-outer to survive with 46 left).

Zvi Stern: Shown bluffing multiple times, giving him the appearance of one willing to take chances, make unorthodox plays.

Neil Blumenfield: Exhibited some characteristic amateur play, including some risky/rash all-ins (getting lucky a couple of times). However did manage to survive multiple hands in which many amateurs would’ve been eliminated (e.g., getting aces cracked).

Pierre Neuville: Often cautious, but more than willing to take chances and go against image with bluffs and/or aggression. Hands shown didn’t fully reveal his craftiness.

Max Steinberg: Along with McKeehen appears the most solid player of the nine. Likes big opening raises and was shown once making big overbet bluff, but obviously good at reading and decision-making postflop.

Tom Cannuli: Held his own during lots of feature table time (much with Negreanu). Has full range of moves available and seemingly good sense of what others are up to.

Josh Beckley: Often was short-stacked and thus without too many options, but was shown making big folds and trying multi-barrel bluffs more than once, too.

Patrick Chan: Barely made the coverage; barely made an impression.

Federico Butteroni: Got a lot of air time. Seemed to play some hands well, some less so.

This sort of thing reminds me of the story of the blind men and the elephant. You’ve heard of it, yes? Several blind men gather around an elephant, each touching a different part (the trunk, a leg, a tusk, etc.), then discuss what the animal was and discover they are in complete disagreement.

We saw only a tiny fraction of the hands played by these nine players. Even if we had seen all of them, we still would have imperfect knowledge of how each play. Still, it’s interesting to think about the impressions such imperfect chronicling has created, and whether or not such impressions could influence what happens once play resumes Sunday night.

(EDIT [added 11/8/15]: For more November Nine-related conjecture -- including from your humble scribbler -- check out the “PokerNews Staff Predictions for the World Series of Poker November Nine.”)

Compiling the November Niners’ Hands Shown on ESPN

Okay, folks... this is going to seem a little obsessive. But I took all these notes and ended up deciding not to use them for anything else, and so I’m going to share it all here rather than just keep them to myself.

A couple of days ago I mentioned again how I’d been watching the ESPN coverage of the WSOP Main Event fairly closely this year, pulling out interesting hands for “what-would-you-do?”-type strategy articles over on PokerNews. That meant I watched every hand from all 16 episodes, taking notes as I did.

I had an idea this week that it might be interesting to pull out the hands involving the November Niners -- Joseph McKeehen, Zvi Stern, Neil Blumenfield, Pierre Neuville, Max Steinberg, Tom Cannuli, Josh Beckley, Patrick Chan, and Federico Butteroni -- and find out what perhaps could be gleaned from the hands that were shown. I already had notes from each episode which to work, and so initially thought it might be a reasonable task, but eventually I got kind of bogged down with it all and the idea got aborted.

There were 284 hands (including partial hands) shown in the coverage. Of those about half of them involved November Niners, although about 20 or so of those hands were just them folding preflop. Still that left 121 hands in which we could actually talk about meaningful strategic decisions involving these players. These would be the hands, I’d imagine, that the players themselves focused on if they chose to study the ESPN shows at all when preparing for the final table.

Like I say, I didn’t want to do all of this and just toss it in the circular file, so I’m going to leave it here if only to remind me not to give myself such a ridiculous task again. What follows are short-hand notes of those 121 hands -- my actual notes for each hand are much, much more detailed, but they are also very messy and inconsistent. That’s not to say what appears below isn’t also messy and inconsistent, but at least the entries are short and easy enough to scan.

The numbers represent the episode (1 through 16) and the hand on that episode, so “1.10” means show #1, hand #10. An asterisk before the number means a November Niner was at risk of elimination in the hand. Most of them were shown in that spot at least once (including McKeehen with 46 left), Chan was twice, Butteroni three times, Blumenfield five times, and Beckley six times. In fact the only remaining player not shown all in and at risk at least once is Pierre Neuville.

McKeehen unsurprisingly got the most exposure in these hands among the nine (30 hands total, I believe), while Chan got the least by far (just five hands).

Tomorrow I’ll come back with a short post summarizing some thoughts about what I got from these hands insofar as they suggest anything meaningful about each player. Meanwhile I hope the list is understandable enough, for those who are curious.

1.10 McKeehen -- 535 left, gets Costello to make bad river call (knocks out Costello)

2.11 Butteroni -- 428 left, successfully bluffs Ron Ilani

4.13 Beckley -- ~285 left, successfully bluffs Schwartz

5.13 Steinberg -- 186 left, wins three-way hand with Bonomo (overcalls)
5.16 Steinberg -- 171 left, wins J-J vs. A-Q to knock out Jae Kim
5.19 Blumenfield -- 168 left, wins A-A vs. K-K to knock out Esfandiari

6.1 McKeehen -- 162 left, wins A-K vs. Q-Q to knock out Racener
6.6 McKeehen-Stern -- ~160 left, Stern bluffs river with air vs. McKeehen’s full house
6.8 Butteroni -- 138 left, wins A-A vs. 8-8 to knock out Lily Newhouse

7.3 Neuville -- 109 left, gets shoved on river, calls w/flush, knocks out Divella
7.10 Blumenfield -- ~100 left, wins with A-A w/o showdown vs. De Silva
7.11 Steinberg -- ~100 left, wins w/K-K w/o a showdown (gets value) vs. Bonomo (A-K)
7.15 Blumenfield -- ~100 left, wins multi-way hand calling down with flopped top pair
*7.20 Stern -- ~100 left, luckily survives AI Ac-9c vs. Diveglia’s Qs-Qc (rivers straight)
*7.21 Butteroni -- ~90 left, wins AI with K-K vs. Bonomo’s 10-10

8.1 Neuville -- ~90 left, wins with A-A vs. K-Q, knocks out Barabino
8.3 Blumenfield -- ~85 left, loses with J-J vs. Negreanu’s A-A (perhaps lucky to survive)
8.7 Neuville -- ~85 left, wins w/Q-7 vs. Morgenstern’s J-9 latter double-barrels, folds
8.8 Cannuli -- 83 left, wins with A-A vs. A-10, knocks out Diana Svensk
8.16 Blumenfield -- ~80 left, loses big (73% stack) w/K-K vs. Jarvis’s 6-6 (set)

*9.3 Beckley -- 69 left, gets AI after flopping set (three-way hand), survives
*9.4 Blumenfield -- ~69 left, luckily survives with K-J vs. Hastings’s A-3
9.6 Cannuli -- 63 left, wins A-K vs. KK, knocks out Mackoff
9.7 Steinberg -- ~63 left, 3-way vs. Negreanu/Anand; flops middle pair, c-r, wins
9.10 Beckley -- ~60 left, gets value vs. Jarvis calling down, then rivering flush
9.15 Butteroni-Neuville -- ~60 left, b-v.-b hand, Butteroni turns two pair, gets value
9.16 Cannuli -- ~60 left, wins smallish hand vs. Toole (and Berman who folds flop)
9.18 Beckley -- 58 left, tries to bluff Morfe and Morfe calls him down
*9.19 Blumenfield -- 58 left, AI on turn w/queen-high, luckily draws out vs. Hastings
9.20 Neuville-Butteroni -- ~58 left, 3-way hand, Neuville successfully bluffs pot
9.21 Cannuli-Steinberg -- ~58 left, four-way hand, smallish pot
9.25 Cannuli -- ~57 left, 3-way small hand with Minkin and Negreanu

10.3 Steinberg -- ~55 left, 3-way, Steinberg folds top pair to Schwartz turn bluff
*10.5 Beckley-Chan -- huge 3-way hand in which both Beckley & Chan AI, Chan wins
10.6 Beckley -- 53 left, knocks out Lewis after making tough call on turn
10.7 Cannuli -- ~52 left, 3-bets Schwartz from BB w/Q-7, flops two pair/folds to S flush
10.8 Steinberg -- ~50 left, wins small pot with J-J
10.12 Cannuli -- 49 left, wins one vs. Schwartz after drawing out two pair
10.15 Stern -- ~49 left, raises river w/second pair after Power’s bluff, gets fold
*10.16 Beckley -- ~46 left, 4 limp, Beckley r BB w/A-A, wins vs. Buckenmayer AI w/K-Q

*11.1 McKeehen-Beckley -- 46 left, M luckily wins AI A-Q vs. B’s A-K; rivers straight
11.4 Butteroni -- 44 left, loses hand to Clinger
11.5 Cannuli -- 43 left, raises over Steinberg/Schwartz limp w/Q-J, flops straight
11.8 Steinberg-Cannuli -- 41 left, multi-way pot; Cannuli loses to Negreanu w/trip J
11.9 Butteroni -- ~40 left, raises, then folds 9-9 after Turyansky AI
11.10 Chan-McKeehen -- 39 left, 3-way, M AI Q-Q, Chan f A-Q, Buckenmayer out A-K
11.13 Cannuli-Blumenfield -- 36 left, C raises K-6, Blum calls BB 10-9; Blum wins
11.15 Cannuli -- 35 left, loses small three-way pot
*11.17 Butteroni -- 34 left, luckily doubles with 6-6 vs. Brand’s 10-10 (flops quads)
11.18 Steinberg-Cannuli -- 34 left, S r K-K, C calls 9-9; C folds flop, S KOs Toole
11.20 Blumenfield -- ~34 left, makes ballsy AI bluff w/queen-high on river v. Ahmar
11.21 Stern -- 33 left, folds pocket nines after raise, call, reraise

12.2 Steinberg -- 31 left, opens w/9-9 and ends up getting value vs. Ahmar
12.3 Blumenfield -- 31 left, loses big to DNegs w/A-K vs. DN 6-3 (DN better str8)
12.4 Neuville -- 31 left, raises 5-5 then folds to a three-bet
12.5 Beckley-Neuville -- 31 left, Beckley triple-barrels, gets PN to fold better
12.8 Blumenfield -- 31 left, raises with J-J, AI on six-high flop, wins
12.9 Steinberg-Blumenfield -- 31 left, 3-way, Blum calls raise, wins decent pot (DN)
12.11 Blumenfield-Steinberg -- 31 left, Blum folds 9-9 to AI, Stein calls/loses w/7-7
12.14 Blumenfield -- 30 left, Blum calls BB w/Q-9, lets Schwartz bluff him out
12.15 Stern -- ~30 left, four-bets with 10-10, then folds to a big shove
12.16 Cannuli-Steinberg -- 30 left, C calls r w/J-J, S calls w/K-7, DN rr, both fold
12.17 Butteroni -- 29 left, limps SB with Q-10, flops trip 10s and knocks out Minkin
12.19 McKeehen -- 28 left, wins with A-Q vs. A-10, knocks out Moreno

*13.2 Butteroni -- 27 left, luckily wins with Q-Q vs. A-K, ace on flop, queen on turn
13.5 Butteroni -- 27 left, calls raise w/A-5, bluffs at flop, gives up on river (vs. DN)
13.4 Blumenfield -- 27 left, ends up earning some value vs. a bluffy Morgenstern
13.5 Neuville-Beckley -- 27 left, B flops top pair, but N runner-runner deuces
*13.6 Steinberg -- 27 left, doubles up with A-A vs. Negreanu’s 8-8
13.7 Neuville -- 27 left, calls raise with 5-4 suited, then folds to an all-in
*13.8 Chan-Beckley -- 27 left, Beckley (J-J) doubles through Chan (6-6)
13.12 Cannuli -- 24 left, wins with 10-8 vs. 3-3 to knock out Brand
13.13 Cannuli -- 23 left, DN raises, B folds 6-6, C reraises A-K, DN calls; C wins
13.16 Blumenfield -- 23 left, loses a lot with A-A vs. Hinds who rivers nut flush
13.17 McKeehen -- 23 left, wins big pot with K-K vs. Kearney’s 10-10, takes lead again
*13.18 Beckley -- 22 left, triples up with K-K (Neuville c/f K-Q pre)
13.19 Butteroni-Steinberg -- 22 left, table talk, Stein bluffs Butteroni out on river
*13.20 Blumenfield -- 21 left, AI with K-K and doubles through Hinds’s A-K
*13.21 Blumenfield -- 21 left, very next hand AI w/A-A, doubles through Hinds’s 10-10
13.22 Neuville -- 21 left, knocks out Sequiera in very interesting K-6 vs. Q-Q hand

14.1 Cannuli -- 19 left, battles with DNegs over small pot
14.2 Steinberg -- 19 left, a nothing hand
14.3 Butteroni -- 19 left, has J-J, to river w/Schwartz before S bluffs him out
14.7 McKeehen -- 18 left, battles with DNegs
14.8 Steinberg -- 18 left, wins with A-K vs. A-Q, knocks out Kramer
14.10 McKeehen -- 16 left, has A-A and five-bets DNegs who tank-folds A-K
14.11 McKeehen -- 16 left, calls Guan raise w/6-6, makes set, then quads, value
14.12 Neuville -- 16 left, wins with 8-8 vs. A-K, knocks out Stefanski
*14.13 Neuville-Cannuli -- 15 left, Cannuli (A-K) doubles through Neuville (A-9)

*15.1 Beckley -- 15 left, B calls BB 10-8 flops str8, AI flop/doubles thru Turyansky
15.2 McKeehen-Butteroni -- 15 left, both battle DNegs for pot, McKeehen wins
15.3 Cannuli -- 15 left, wins with A-10 vs. Q-Q, knocks out Kearney
15.4 Butteroni -- 14 left, calls BB w/8-5 suited, c-r flop w/mid-pair, Schwartz folds
15.5 McKeehen -- 14 left, set over set to knock out Schwartz
15.6 McKeehen -- 13 left, K-K gets value vs. DNegs with Q-J and top pair on flop
15.7 Cannuli-Chan -- 13 left, Cannuli 4-bets AI w/Q-Q, Chan folds J-7 after 3-bet
15.8 Cannuli-Stern -- 13 left, C (7-6) beats Stern (A-K); turns trips, Stern kings
15.9 Cannuli-Neuville -- 13 left, C raises with 10-5, bluffs N off hand on turn
15.10 McKeehen -- 13 left, DNegs doubles through with 4-4 vs. M’s A-7
15.11 Steinberg-Stern -- 13 left, Stein wins w/K-J vs. Stern A-Q; Stern b-f river
15.12 McKeehen-Beckley -- small hand
*15.13 Chan-Neuville -- 13 left, Chan survives with A-Q v. N’s J-J (flops flush)
15.14 Stern-Cannuli -- 13 left, Stern r/c 3-bet (A-K) w/Q-8; raise flop w/air, wins
15.16 McKeehen-Butteroni -- 13 left, w/Turyansky... Butteroni wins
15.17 McKeehen -- 13 left, raises with 8-7, then folds to a DNegs AI
15.18 McKeehen-Butteroni -- Butteroni wins with A-A vs. Q-Q, KOs Guan out 13th
15.19 Stern -- 12 left, raises w/10s8s, 4-bets AI, wins vs. Q-Q, McDonald 12th

16.1 McKeehen-Beckley -- 11 left, McK raise 6-6, Beck 3-bets A-J, McKeehen fold
16.2 McKeehen -- 11 left, raises/folds to a DN AI
16.3 Blumenfield-Stern -- 11 left, Stern AI on turn w/air v. Blum flush/doubles
16.4 Beckley-McKeehen-Butteroni -- 11 left, M 3-bets 7-6, Bu folds 8-8; Be folds pair
16.5 McKeehen -- 11 left, loses small one to DNegs
16.6 McKeehen -- 11 left, loses another small one to DNegs
16.7 McKeehen-Beckley -- 11 left, M rivers straight, goes AI, Beckley folds top pair
16.9 McKeehen -- 11 left, KOs DN after raising with J-3, DN just call BB w/A-4
16.10 Steinberg-McKeehen -- 10 left, S raise A-K, M 3-bets w/7-6, S 4-bets, M folds
*16.11 Beckley-McKeehen -- 10 left, B doubles w/A-Q vs. M’s 9-9 (Cannuli folded 9-9)
16.12 McKeehen -- 10 left, Turyansky luckily survives with A-J vs. M’s A-K
16.13 McKeehen-Neuville -- 10 left, Neuville flops set with J-J & wins big one vs. McK
16.14 Blumenfield-Neuville -- 10 left, Neuv wins 9-9 vs. Blum’s 8-8, Blum folds river
16.15 McKeehen -- 10 left, wins with Q-Q vs. A-K, knocks out Turyansky in 10th

2015 WSOP Main Event: The Finale, Finally

The last of ESPN’s pre-November Nine episodes from the 2015 World Series of Poker Main Event have now aired, and now everyone’s attention turns to the final table -- finally! -- which will begin this coming Sunday.

I ended up watching all 16 of the episodes which altogether added up to 19-and-a-half hours’ worth of shows on the ESPN networks. That counts commercials, of course, which I skipped through like most. I didn’t watch a single one of these shows live, choosing the NFL instead (usually) as just about every one of the premieres went up against football.

The coverage started with the beginning of Day 4 (after the money bubble had already burst on Day 3) and carried through the end of Day 7, taking viewers from 661 players down to nine. I enjoyed most of the shows, especially from Day 7. Daniel Negreanu’s deep run definitely helped -- he was a huge part of all of the episodes right up until the last half-hour of the last one.

It’s been at least a couple of years, perhaps three or four, since I actually sat down and watched every episode of ESPN’s WSOP Main Event coverage like this. Again, I can’t say they have done too much to alter the formula, which is probably on the whole a good thing even if one would like to think there are better ways of doing this sort of thing.

Seven years later, the final table delay still irks me. Negreanu’s desperate hanging on with the short stack before finally getting knocked out in 11th -- on a river card, too -- would have been utterly electric to watch live (or on a slight delay). But seeing it three-and-a-half months later was nowhere close to as exciting. (Even a far cry from the “Twitter rail” from that night in July.)

That other World Series wrapping up earlier this week got me thinking about how I experienced baseball as a kid. The first World Series I can remember watching was in 1977 when the Yankees beat the Dodgers in six games and Reggie Jackson hit five home runs -- three in the final game. What a thrilling series that was between two incredible teams full of characters and stars. And many of the games and plays remain etched in my memory, even decades later.

Meanwhile I was a Cincinnati Reds fan as a kid, and so I only indirectly was able to enjoy the Big Red Machine’s two wins in ’75 and ’76 after the fact via highlights, reading books and magazine articles, and so on. While I obviously can recall the image of Carlton Fisk urging his game-winner in Game 6 in ’75 to stay fair, I don’t remember much of anything else from those two series given the indirect way I originally “experienced” them.

It’s this latter way that we now experience nearly all of the World Series of Poker Main Event, save the final table. It’s a highlight show, and with such a huge distance between it happening and our getting to see anything it tends to pack the same, generally weak punch of seeing a few plays the morning after on SportsCenter. If that.

That said, I’ll confess watching all the shows definitely has me ready for Sunday night. I might even have to turn off the football for once.

By the way, if you want to play along with my series of "what-would-you-do?"-type strategy articles over on PokerNews stemming from the ESPN coverage (with poll questions about decision points), here are all of them:

“Watching Phil Hellmuth or ‘The Master at Work’”

”Daniel Negreanu Turns the Nuts -- Call or Reraise?”

”How Would You Respond to Negreanu’s Check-Raises?”

”Flopping Huge Versus Fedor -- Play Fast or Slow?”

”Pick Your Spots and Play Along with Max Steinberg”

”Negreanu and November Niners Playing Trouble Hands”

”Nearing the November Nine, What Would You Do?”

”Leader Joe McKeehen Pressures, How Do You Respond?”