Caesars’ Swoon and the WSOP

Noticed earlier this week that Twitter-related flare-up that saw poker pro Matt Glantz tweet a list of suggestions for improving the World Series of Poker, and the initial response from WSOP Tournament Director Jack Effel less than half an hour later to block Glantz. (He’s since been unblocked, Glantz reports.)

Was kind of hilarious to see that playing out on the timeline Monday afternoon in between my reporting on the penultimate day of poker in Peru. Of course, those of us who have followed the WSOP’s various accounts on Twitter have gotten used to this sort of behavior. I’m talking about these seemingly hostile responses (or non-responses) to criticism or even just vague references that something is less than ideal.

Goes without saying this kind of thing doesn’t help at all when it comes to promoting the WSOP as a friendly brand. In fact it almost seems self-sabotaging in a way, although obviously not intentionally.

Was thinking again about this sort of digging-a-hole-even-deeper sort of dynamic yesterday when reading the news about Caesars’ stock falling so fast they had to stop trading for a short while.

Caesars Entertainment Co. has been trying to deal with a nearly $23 billion debt over the last many months. They restructured in the spring of 2014, splitting into three units and moving most of the debt over into one of them, Caesars Entertainment Operating Co. Then this past January the CEOC filed for bankruptcy, which then prompted a bunch of lawsuits from creditors angry about the restructuring and viewing the whole rigmarole as having been rigged to dodge billions’ worth of debt.

Caesars had tried to stop the creditors’ lawsuits from going forward, but a judge in June ruled against those efforts in one case, then another yesterday ruled in favor of the creditors in the others. That’s what spurred the sudden plunge in the CZR stock on NASDAQ, which hit a nadir at $3.30 per share, I believe, amid a crazy surge in trading (causing the brief halt during the afternoon).

If you bought a share of CZR back in late February 2014, it would have cost you almost $26. It closed today at $5.14 just a little while ago.

The WSOP and WSOP.com are not part of the embattled CEOC unit -- they belong to Caesars Interactive. That said, the news on Wednesday that the lawsuits can go forward means that the parent company might also be forced to declare bankruptcy. Which one assumes would ultimately affect the WSOP, perhaps sooner than later.

Gotta be a pressurized place to be right now, I imagine, so like the amiable Glantz I’m inclined to cut Effel and others doing what they can at the WSOP a little slack. Still, curious to see how Caesars can avoid continuing its downward spiral, and what might happen to the WSOP if it cannot.

The U.S. Open, the WSOP, and Player Complaints

The U.S. Open concluded late last night -- late for us on the east coast, I should say, as it was held out in Washington state at the much-talked-about Chambers Bay course in University City -- ending somewhat dramatically with a surprising three-putt by Dustin Johnson on the last hole to give the 21-year-old Jordan Spieth a second straight major title.

It was a stirring finish, but I was fascinated as well by all of the complaints from players (and others) about the Chambers Bay course during the four days of the tournament. If you followed the U.S. Open you likely heard those complaints, too, so I won’t rehearse all of them here. If you haven’t heard about them and are curious, see this story from yesterday on ESPN which collects many of the criticisms, or this one from today in which some of those who played can be found listing all of their issues with the course.

The state of the greens received most of the attention -- that pic of one of the greens was posted to Instagram by the player Ian Poulter (whose frustrations are included in the second article listed above). Comments by other players that it was like putting on broccoli or cauliflower were humorous. And Johnson’s three-putt -- even if not directly consequent to the poor greens -- seemed to put a somehow appropriate punctuation mark on the gripe-filled week.

The complaining reminded me more than once of what has been happening at the WSOP this summer, where a lot of players have been similarly outspoken about various aspects of the series with which they haven’t been satisfied. Such criticisms are not atypical, mind you, but have perhaps been coming with a bit more frequency and volume than has been the case over recent years.

I’m not going to rehearse those complaints, either, which have involved the playing cards, structures, scheduling, communication issues, media coverage, the POY formula, among other issues. Matt Glantz summed up a few of the criticisms in a piece for BLUFF last week the headline for which -- “Matt Glantz Says the World Series of Poker is Losing its Luster” -- indicates the position being advanced.

To explore the comparison a little further, both the U.S. Open and WSOP enjoy a special place in the respective fields for those participating in each. “If this was a regular PGA tour event lots of players would have withdrawn and gone home on Wednesday, but players won't do that for a major,” wrote Poulter of the U.S. Open. That sounds a lot like players complaining about the WSOP, yet still playing because of its “major” status.

Some have responded to players’ complaints about Chambers Bay with the very logical observation that since everyone plays the same course, all are equally subject to the conditions (good or bad) which means the integrity of the competition is not affected. The fact that Spieth -- who just won the last major at the Masters playing on the immaculate Augusta course -- came out on top again would seem to support that position.

That said, when the deficiency of those conditions rises to the level of potentially affecting the integrity of the competition, that’s the point at which the willingness to accept such problems begins to break down. That’s where the piling on tends to start, too, whether justified or not.

From afar, players’ complaints about the new Modiano cards being used this year are the ones that most directly concern the issue of game integrity. Late last week poker pro and bracelet holder David “Bakes” Baker posted a thorough summary of the problems with the cards and how easily they can be marked.

The WSOP announced plans to replace the decks a few days ago, although I think they weren’t introduced until yesterday (for Day 1 of the $50K PPC, but not for other events). Kind of recalls a similar announcement at the beginning of the 2007 WSOP following the fiasco of the “Poker Peek” cards that trucks carrying new decks were on the way.

In any case, I found the whole analogy regarding players’ complaints at the U.S. Open and the WSOP curious to consider, as well as how both examples offer us a lot to think about with regard to the staging of high-level competitions, issues of game integrity, and the way groups tend to respond to undesirable stressors.

Talking 2014 WSOP (Already)

Saw that announcement yesterday regarding dates for the 2014 World Series of Poker. No schedule of events just yet -- that usually comes later, anyway -- but we did get the word that as usual things will get kicked off at the end of May and run through mid-July (from 5/27 to 7/14 this time), and once more they’ll be back at the Rio All-Suite Hotel and Casino.

Was almost surprising to read in the presser that this will mark the 10th straight year the WSOP will be at the Rio, even though it’s easy enough to recall how it was 2005 that the move first occurred, with only the last couple of days of the Main Event that year (won by Joe Hachem) playing out back at Binion’s as a kind of last hurrah.

Not too much else of note in the announcement. The Main Event will again feature three Day 1 flights. The full slate of “deep stack” tourneys and cash games will be on offer again throughout the summer, with buy-ins as low as $75 for some tourneys. And of course this year will be the first for which players on WSOP.com in both Nevada and New Jersey will be able to satellite into events, a wrinkle that should get more attention throughout the winter and spring.

There are a few hints dropped about what the schedule will contain, including another one of those “Millionaire Maker” events (a $1,500 tourney with a first-prize guaranteed to be at least $1 milly), a second “Big One for One Drop” with the $1 million buy-in (already announced), and another “Little One for One Drop” (with a $1,111 buy-in and unlimited re-entries).

No indication of a total number of events, although there is mention that there will be “60+ official gold bracelet events,” thus suggesting a schedule not too different from years past.

That said, some tweets from WSOP Executive Director Ty Stewart (@wsopSUITd) from about a month ago suggested the so-called “Matt Glantz” plan proposed in a piece appearing in Card Player back in June is getting some consideration. That’s the idea to jettison the mid-range buy-ins ($2,500 and $5,000) and instead have both $1,500 and $10,000 events for all of the major variants, with the latter designated as “championship” events.

“Debate. What are ‘core’ disciplines outside NLHE that merit WSOP championship event? Ten right now on the table (1/2) - Agree?” tweeted Stewart back on November 20, who then followed with “Limit HE, PLHE, PLO, O8OB, 7-Stud, 7-Stud 8OB, Razz, 2-7, 2-7 TD, HORSE. For the much discussed 1500/10k framework. Sked coming 2gether.”

I think I like the $1.5K/$10K idea well enough, although the true test of it will come via those field sizes next summer. Meanwhile, we’ll have to wait and see how the actual schedule ends up shaping up, but it does sound like we might anticipate a lot of $1,500 events, a handful of $10,000 ones (in each of those disciplines), with the non-HE games thus covered in that way and the rest of the schedule again filled with NLHE tourneys of various shapes and sizes.

Travel Report: WPT Alpha8 Florida, Day 2 -- Florida Finale

The second and last day of the $100,000 buy-in World Poker Tour Alpha8 Florida event played out in relatively rapid fashion, with play starting a little after noon yesterday and wrapping up around 11 p.m. or thereabouts. Steven Silverman ended up winning the sucker, outlasting current WSOP Main Event chip leader J.C. Tran to take the title after a brief heads-up battle.

That up above is a shot Joe Giron took yesterday for the WPT from up in the bleachers looking down on the playing area I was describing before. Kind of an uncanny-looking scene from that vantage point.

Josh and I arrived and set up late morning, then mostly were behind the laptops entering hands, our day broken up a couple of times by breaks. One came early on after Bill Perkins busted in ninth, at which point the crew took some time setting up to shoot the official eight-handed final table. Then another short dinner break came later after start-of-day leader Matt Glantz busted in fourth for a “min-cash” of $243,180.

During that first break Josh and I took a walk around the Seminole Hard Rock property, taking a look at the modest water fountain show play out (kind of a mini-version of the Bellagio’s) while noting the small lizards positioned in the greenery around the water’s perimeter. With temps in the 80s it’s definitely a pleasant time to be in south Florida, and I can imagine a trip to the Seminole might offer a lot to entertain visitors with its sights, shopping, shows, and of course, the casino.

Following that second break for dinner Jeff Gross went out in third for a $364,770 cash. Silverman led Tran slightly to start heads-up play, and Tran even grabbed an early lead before Silverman earned a big double-up and then finished off Tran shortly thereafter. Tran took away $526,890 while “Zugwat” won $891,660. (Hell of a year playing out for Tran, eh?)

Silverman also won a huge trophy shaped as the number “8” -- not sure what it is made of, but it looks silver, man.

None of the four cashers had re-entered the event, and none of the three players who bought in twice cashed. Isaac Haxton was one of those who’d fired twice, and he unfortunately finished fifth after leading with five to go then experiencing some misfortune to fall on the bubble.

As I was saying earlier in the week, more Alpha8 events are certainly in the works, so it’ll be curious to see how this “super high roller” tour fares and whether it ultimately manages to attract the participation of those who regularly play the six-figure events elsewhere during the year.

After all was done and the final interviews were shot, the whole “WPT family” assembled around the table for a final group picture and before too long we were packing up and heading back to the hotel. Got a reasonable night’s sleep, then this morning was able to meet an old student of mine who lives in the area and had contacted me not long ago. Kind of a highlight of the trip to reunite and catch up with him.

Overall it was a fun few days and I got a kick out of getting to know some of the WPT folks and seeing how a yet another group -- an especially well-seasoned and talented one in this case -- puts on and covers a poker tourney.

Looking forward now to getting home and resting up today and tomorrow before flying to Spain on Friday where I’ll again see a lot of the players and other media folks who were here in Florida this week. I guess this was sort of an end-of-summer bash for a lot of folks, with “school” (or the regular curriculum) about to be back in session starting with the always popular EPT Barcelona stop.

Then again, to paraphrase that Emerson, Lake and Palmer quote on the wall at the Seminole Hard Rock, the traveling circus that is the professional poker tourney circuit is kind of the show that never ends.

PokerNews Introduces My Stack, New Chip-Reporting App

A recent development in the poker tourney reporting world surfaced within the last few days with the introduction of the new “My Stack” smartphone app for both iTunes and the Android. Here’s a link to the iTunes preview page for the app (doesn’t load iTunes, like some links irritatingly do), and here’s the link to a page discussing it for the Android.

The app has been created by the PokerNews folks and is connected to PN’s live reporting. Speaking of apps and PokerNews, the PokerNews app has also been updated considerably over time to include not just live reporting but news, videos, the podcast and so on. The sucker is a lot less buggy, too, than when it first surfaced back in the summer of 2010.

Players who download the free My Stack app onto their phones or iPads can now update their own chip counts as often as they like. I noticed today that a couple of players have already started to use the app at the WSOP Circuit Harrah’s Philadelphia event as well as the EPT Grand Final which has just gotten underway.

From the WSOP-C event, Matt Glantz updated his count a few times yesterday before busting shy of the cash. Meanwhile, Jeff Rossiter updated his count once today during the early going at Monte Carlo before he was eliminated. Just below is a screen shot of what it looks like when a player updates his or her own count, with an icon distinguishing the update from one made by a PN reporter.

Players can also add comments to their updates, which can be seen if you check under the “Player Updates” tab on the PN Live Reporting page. Glantz took advantage of that feature to add some funny comments to a couple of his Day 2 updates yesterday, if you want to see some examples of that.

Am intrigued by this new development, which makes me think back to the first days of seeing players reporting via Twitter and by other means their tourney progress, something that really only started happening a short while after I began reporting from tourneys back in 2008. I’m remembering a post I wrote during the 2009 WSOP titled “Land of 1000 Reporters” in which I believe I reflected for the first time on how it wasn’t just me reporting from these tourneys, but a lot of those participating in the tourneys were reporting as well.

I imagine there will be some issues that will arise with the new app. I am sure there will be some instances of erroneous counts being reported now and then, although the designation that a player entered the new count should help minimize the problems that would ensue from that. There could be other hiccups associated with the app and/or its use that haven’t been considered as yet, too, although my sense is it will be an overall positive when it comes to reporting.

I’d be curious to hear others’ thoughts about the app. I’ll be interested in hearing what those who end up using it think about it, too.

Meanwhile, despite my enthusiasm about the new app, I couldn’t help but post my own invented version of a “chip counting app” on Twitter shortly after the My Stack app was first announced. Felt a little like The Daily Currant guys for a short while as I believe a couple of people might have thought my faux app to have been an actual one.

I’m calling my app the Mickey123. It harnesses the considerable resources of the world’s foremost chip counter to provide an easy point-and-click method of tabulating one’s stack, as demonstrated above.

As Mickey Doft would say, it’s unbelievable.

Travel Report: Sands Bethlehem DeepStack Extravaganza Main Event, Day 1b

As expected, the second Day 1 flight of the Sands Bethlehem DeepStack Extravaganza Main Event saw a larger turnout than did the first. In the end there were 188 entries total into the $2,500 buy-in event (including re-entries), which meant some overlay thanks to the $500,000 guarantee.

Ended up being a longer day for us than was the case on Friday, as things got started a little later and with more players there was a little more end-of-the-night tying up of loose ends needing to be done. The pace during the day also seemed to slow down at times, especially once we crossed out of the late registration period and into the portion of the night where re-entries were no longer an option. The blinds hadn’t quite gotten big enough for players to have to push, so a number of the short-to-medium stacks tightened up so as to try to make their tourney runs last a little longer.

I believe the event had around 50 or so players win their way in via satellites, and while we didn’t necessarily know which players had won their seats and which had not, there were instances during Day 1a and the first half of Day 1b -- when re-entering was still possible -- that the difference between the two categories of players would become apparent. While some were clearly ready and able to buy back into the event should they bust, others were not, and so sometimes that difference would appear to manifest itself in players’ styles. And in other ways, too.

I’m remembering one player, Jason Roth, kind of spelling out the distinction in concrete terms at one point on Friday. Roth is an amiable guy who ended up delivering a few good lines along the way during Day 1a, including a couple that made it into the live blog. He was playing at a table with Chris Klodnicki (who’d end Day 1a as chip leader) and a couple of other poker pros, and I’m assuming Roth was one of those who’d gotten in via a satellite.

“This is just another tournament for you guys,” he said. “But it’s like Christmas for us!”

I know those running the tourney would’ve liked to have had even more satellites and ultimately seen a larger turnout, but I believe the time to do so might have been limited in this case. Still, I think things so far have run well and hopefully this event will inspire more tourneys at what is a very nice and comfortable venue, perhaps helping make the Sands Bethlehem a better known destination for poker players outside of the area.

Speaking of making Bethlehem a destination, there was one interesting side story yesterday involving Andy Frankenberger who got a little misdirected on his way to coming to play Day 1b. As he tweeted about afterwards, he’d mistakenly set his GPS for Matt Glantz’s place in Bensalem, Pennsylvania rather than Bethlehem. That’s over an hour away, and so that detour necessarily made him later in arriving than he’d planned.

As someone with an especially bad sense of direction who relies heavily on GPS to point me in the right direction, I could totally identify with Frankenberger’s plight. I also felt bad for him when he busted fairly quickly after arriving to the event yesterday, although despite what had to be a frustrating day he was in good spirits nonetheless.

Glantz busted a short while after Frankenberger did, and in fact to go back to that distinction between the satellite winners (whom one might assume are mostly amateurs) and the pros, I noticed a lot of players talking afterwards about how friendly Glantz and Frankenberger were. That is to say, I think at least some of the amateurs enjoyed sitting alongside the pros, competing with them while getting to know them a little, too.

All of that helped contribute further to what I was suggesting yesterday regarding the overall atmosphere of the event being quite upbeat and even jovial. People are enjoying themselves so far, and as I’ve remarked before here, when the players are having fun at a tournament that always makes covering these suckers more fun, too.

From the first two Day 1 flights just 70 players will be coming back for today’s Day 2, and I imagine the mood will become increasingly serious as they reach the final 18 and the money, then work their way down to a final table. Check over at PokerNews’ live updates for details where Mickey Doft and I will be writing all about it while Joe Giron provides the pictures (as he did above).

Sexton’s Scolding

The rightly-revered Poker Hall of Famer Mike Sexton posted an op-ed of sorts today over on his PartyPoker blog, titled “Poker Pros -- Wake Up and Smell the Coffee.” The post kind of echoes calls by others to encourage players to act professionally, most obviously a post by Matt Glantz from about three-and-a-half months ago titled “Responsibility in Poker.”

Like Glantz, Sexton is primarily speaking to “poker pros” whose success garners them more attention than most, including securing television spots and other chances to speak out and thus represent poker to large groups.

In Glantz’ post, after carving out a balanced position from which to speak (“I am not here to bash or scold you guys”), he explains to his readers that “how you act or speak out in any public forum or media outlet” has significance, since “the things you say and do reflect on all of us.”

Glantz then speaks broadly about poker’s negative image in mainstream culture and how that fact alone should encourage those given the chance to represent the game to accept the “responsibility” he’s recommending -- that is, “to make a consistent and conscious effort to always do our best to publicly present poker in a positive light.”

I think Sexton essentially shares Glantz’ view and wanted to say something similar in his post. And given Sexton’s influential position in the industry, it doesn’t hurt for him to repeat what another has already said, if only for the fact that the message will undoubtedly reach a wider audience.

That said, Sexton’s post adopts a much different, less balanced tone than Glantz’. Nor does it share Glantz’ broad perspective on the game and its place in the culture, instead focusing much more narrowly on the need for pros to embrace television shows like the World Poker Tour and recognize the financial reward for doing so.

“I’ve been disappointed and, frankly, disgusted by a lack of professionalism by some poker pros,” Sexton begins. He notes that these bad-behaving pros “don’t see the big picture” and “just live in their own little worlds.” Sexton then presents two quick examples of such bad behavior, one being a pro failing to appear for a scheduled WPT interview and the other being players dressing too casually for a televised WPT final table.

As Sexton explains, the player who missed the interview apparently overslept -- he’s “a nice guy who just spaced out” -- and apologized. The slovenly-dressed final tablists consisted of four T-shirt wearers and another in a sweatshirt, the sight of which leads Sexton into a digression about a dress code for poker.

As I say, it is clear enough that Sexton essentially agrees with Glantz, but unfortunately the Ambassador of Poker is himself probably being a little too narrow in his thinking when it comes to finding examples to support the larger point. As a result, the argument is less convincing, since it could sound a bit like the WPT host complaining about players failing to support his show rather than a larger argument about representing poker in a positive light.

The fact that Sexton keeps coming back to sponsorships as a reward for good, conscientious behavior isn’t really that effective either, since for the great majority of players -- even among the top performers -- sponsorships aren’t really a meaningful consideration. Sexton is really talking about sponsors of the WPT show (and other poker shows), and the indirect -- and real -- benefit that has for those who participate in WPT events, but even that is a somewhat narrow point to be making in this context.

All of which is to say, I’m fine with the position and argument, but feel like Sexton would have been more persuasive had he left off complaining about a few instances of players missing appointments or wearing T-shirts and adopted a broader perspective on improving poker’s place in the culture, generally speaking (as Glantz did). And really, when it comes to bad behavior reflecting poorly on the poker community as a whole, there are a lot more egregious examples to cite.

Moving On

I was writing last week about these conflicting commentaries coming from Daniel Negreanu and Doyle Brunson regarding the Full Tilt Poker fiasco. I noted how I appreciated both sharing their views, even if neither added all that greatly to our understanding of what had happened, was currently happening, or might happen going forward.

On Friday, Matt Glantz came back with a follow-up to his earlier post regarding “The Silence of Full Tilt.” That was the one that kind of started all of the latter back-and-forthing between Negreanu and Brunson.

In the new post, “Whispers from Full Tilt,” Glantz provides some of what he learned after talking with various FTP shareholders regarding both the possibility of the Groupe Bernard Tapie deal ever happening and the reason for the continued silence from those associated with the beleaguered site.

Interestingly, it is the GBT deal -- which sounds as though it is almost certainly doomed to fall through -- which appears to be further encouraging shareholders’ silence. As Glantz puts it, people are keeping mum not “because they are worried about the deal falling apart,” but rather “because they are worried that if they say anything they will eventually be blamed for the deal falling apart.”

Almost all of the “insiders” with whom Glantz has spoken seem to believe the deal is not going to happen. Glantz shares that pessimistic view, advising his readers with money locked up on Full Tilt Poker to let go of the possibility of ever seeing their funds returned.

“I am recommending that these players move on as if their funds are gone,” writes Glantz. “Think of any money you may receive back from the FTP debacle in the future as found money.”

Experienced poker players are generally good at this sort of mind game, tricking themselves into thinking differently about money lost or won so as not to be influenced into subsequently making poor decisions. Kind of a special case, here, of course, representing a greater challenge to do as Glantz suggests and mentally erase whatever figure you had in your FTP account from your poker ledger before going forward.

Go check out Glantz’ post for more, including some speculation about other possible (though unlikely) future scenarios for FTP. As I say, Glantz shares some but not all of what he learned from talking with the shareholders, deciding against naming names as well as not passing along “the dirt” some of the shareholders told him regarding their colleagues.

Reading Glantz’ post caused me to think back over the last 10-and-a-half months to try to pinpoint when it was I had finally begun to consider the money I had on Full Tilt Poker as lost. The fact that it wasn’t a huge amount -- only a little under $300 -- made it easier to do so, of course. But if I am going to be honest it took me awhile to get there.

In early May cashing out seemed quite likely, especially when PokerStars had already sent me my check for a lot more. The May 15th non-announcement announcement from “FTP Doug” was troubling, though not enough to make me give up hope. It was two weeks later, though, when another “FTP Doug” message was delivered that it occurred to most of us that maybe we shouldn’t be so optimistic.

That was the message in which we learned the site was “raising capital to ensure that the US players are paid out in full as quickly as possible.” A day later came the news of Phil Ivey’s lawsuit (subsequently withdrawn) against the site he represented and partly-owned, weirdly delivered via a sequence of posts to his Facebook wall.

Was pretty clear then the shinola had hit the fan. Things only got worse, of course, with the loss of their license to operate and FTP shutting down altogether in late June, the DOJ’s amendment to the civil complaint in September, and this ongoing tease regarding the GBT sale that presently appears as likely as being dealt a suited pocket pair.

I suppose it was probably somewhere around late September -- right after the DOJ made its amendment and that “Ponzi scheme” proclamation -- that I gave up on cashing out from FTP, the whole GBT sale story never really inspiring me much to think otherwise.

Did you see that Ivey is back playing in the U.S. again, having participated in the WPT L.A. Poker Classic Main Event? Remember when he won the same event in 2008? Was hard not to pull for him then. But as I was saying last month when Ivey showed up at the Aussie Millions, it’s kind of hard these days not to feel ambivalent about his winning or losing.

As it happened, Ivey went out on the stone-cold bubble yesterday, finishing 55th when 54 pay. But like I say, it’s hard to care much about that. Because when we think of Ivey, we think of Full Tilt Poker. And when we think of Full Tilt Poker, well, it looks like we all bubbled that one.

Kid Poker Not Kidding Around

Many noticed the always forthright Daniel Negreanu made a short video blog this week in which he comments on various items, including the continued silence from those three Full Tilt Poker principals, Howard Lederer, Chris Ferguson, and Ray Bitar.

I said something on Monday about how I thought we’d probably hear other pros comment on FTP in the wake of Matt Glantz’ thoughtful post concerning “The Silence of Full Tilt,” so it wasn’t too surprising to see Negreanu’s video come when it did.

I still think as I did a few days ago that such petitions aren’t that likely to encourage anyone from Full Tilt to step forward and suddenly start communicating anything of significance to the rest of us. But as I said on Monday, I support those who insist on making sure we all don’t just forget about the hundreds of millions of dollars of players’ funds that remain inaccessible more than 10 months after Black Friday.

The level of vitriol in Negreanu’s statements captured some notice, something I think PokerLawyer did a nice job addressing in her post from yesterday, titled “Targets.” I think most are familiar enough with the context to understand what inspired Negreanu’s comments -- and frustration -- but it’s also worth pointing out the relationship between words and actions as PokerLawyer does.

I do believe that Negreanu is dead on, though, when he points out how those responsible at FTP “have no respect for our community.” The damage they’ve done to poker’s place in the culture, generally speaking, goes well beyond the theft of players’ funds.

It’ll be curious to see how everything develops with regard to the Full Tilt Poker saga as we get closer to the one-year anniversary of Black Friday, assuming that nothing happens with regard to the still-pending Groupe Bernard Tapie deal and players are still without their funds.

Even if something does happen and the deal somehow gets done before then, the logistics of players getting paid -- particularly for American players for whom the DOJ would be involved in facilitating such payments -- will mean a lot of time will necessarily have to pass before anyone actually gets their money back.

But even that slight ray of hope is pretty dim at present. And so the many who played on Full Tilt Poker -- and even those who didn’t but who have strong feelings about the game and the way it is perceived (and often proscribed) by the larger culture -- will continue to be frustrated. And justifiably so.

A Glantz-ing Blow: Making Noise About Full Tilt’s Silence

Over the weekend, pro player Matt Glantz published another somewhat provocative post on his blog, this one titled “The Silence of Full Tilt.”

Glantz has kind of stepped forward over the last few weeks as one of the few high-stakes pros willing to speak out on various issues of significance to the poker community. Besides writing posts himself over on his blog, he’s also inviting others to write guest posts, with Matt Savage, David Bach, and Dan O’Brien among those who have taken him up on the offer.

In his most recent post, Glantz discusses the “black hole of silence” that has mostly characterized Full Tilt Poker over the 10 months that have passed since Black Friday, then petitions players and others associated with FTP -- some of whom he considers friends -- to come forward and finally begin communicating to the many players who still await the return of their funds.

“Friendships aside, I feel it would be disingenuous to defend the persons involved any longer,” writes Glantz. “At this point, there is nothing short of full disclosure regarding player funds that would change this opinion.”

Glantz goes on to outline how the lack of “concrete guidance” from Full Tilt Poker for players still hoping (perhaps in vain) for their money has made a bad situation much, much worse. He acknowledges that while most of those with information to share are likely withholding such on the advice of legal counsel, he nonetheless hopes that someone will consider “breaking ranks” and step forward to give players some idea what to expect going forward.

I recently mentioned how I like and appreciate players like Glantz and others who are willing to speak their minds where many will not. And while I also appreciate the message Glantz is conveying in his recent post -- and share the frustration he expresses, too -- it feels like we’ve reached a point in the Full Tilt saga where any “breaking ranks” by anyone of consequence is highly unlikely.

I remember in the week or two following Black Friday talking with friends who knew a little more about Full Tilt’s situation than I did already telling me that the site was in deep, deep trouble. I was willing to cut FTP some slack at first -- this was even before PokerStars had successfully cashed out U.S. players -- and like many took that initial promise from Full Tilt of a May 15th statement at face value.

But as we know, the statement on 5/15/11 was the first of several empty promises serving to delay ever really communicating anything of substance. They were working “tirelessly,” dealing with “numerous hurdles and challenges,” and would “update our US players when [they had] more specific information to provide.”

Looking back, we can see how that last bit was kinda sorta truthful. They never did have more specific information to provide, and so they never did update us further.

Oh, there were a few more messages, but those stopped once the site was shut down in late June. And when the U.S. Department of Justice amended its civil complaint in September to add numerous new allegations against FTP -- as well as some names -- we all pretty much knew then that we were essentially drawing dead when it came to receiving any “concrete guidance” from the site.

So I don’t really think Glantz’ post will have much influence on the “friends at FTP” to whom it is addressed. But it will likely energize other, non-Full Tilt Poker folks -- including other high-stakes pros -- to start speaking out. Which again probably won’t have any tangible effect on what happens next, but will perhaps help prevent complacency from settling in among the players. And complacency, as we know, can easily lead to acceptance.

And that’s a good thing, I think. Because it would be unfortunate if the ultimate response to the “silence of Full Tilt” was to be silent in return.

Speaking Out

The Aussie Millions is underway, which means tennis’ Australian Open -- also in Melbourne -- has begun as well.

I was intrigued this morning to read about a bit of a rift having occurred between Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer regarding the latter’s unwillingness to pipe up about certain undesirable tour conditions -- including an overloaded schedule.

It sounds like various issues have arisen over recent months regarding the ATP, including discontent surrounding the scheduling of Davis Cup matches in February right on the heels of the Australian Open. Apparently the pro tennis schedule is especially packed this year thanks in part to the 2012 Olympics.

Nadal has spoken out about the problems in recent months, as has the Scottish player Andy Murray. Meanwhile, Roger Federer has kept mostly mum, something Nadal alluded to when asked at a pre-Australian Open news conference about the scheduling issues.

Nadal was asked specifically about Federer’s not speaking out and whether he took that to indicate that Federer believed it wasn’t good for tennis’ image to have players complaining. “For him it’s good to say nothing,” said the Spanish player somewhat facetiously (via a translator). “‘It’s all well and good for me, I look like a gentleman,’ [says Federer] and the rest can burn themselves.”

The press may be blowing up this story more than is really warranted. Both Nadal and Federer have a long tradition of being great examples of sportsmanship and highly respectful of each other’s games. Even so, it does appear that there are a few problems being faced by professional tennis at the moment, including the problem of being willing to acknowledge such problems in a public forum.

The story reminded me a little of some of the considerable problems in poker -- live and online -- and the way some players and media are more than willing to address them while others are not.

I’m thinking of writers like Jesse May speaking out last summer and fall about the sorry circumstance created by the Full Tilt fiasco and other related matters. Or Daniel Negreanu’s “Being Real” blog post from last October in which he addressed a host of different concerns, some more personal than others.

I also thought about Matt Glantz’ post on the Epic Poker blog from a couple of weeks ago titled “Responsibility in Poker” in which he addressed poker’s image in mainstream culture and suggested ways in which current pros could help improve it.

Finally, I was reminded of a lengthy blog post penned just yesterday by Phil Galfond titled “Let’s Make Some Changes” in which he addresses all sorts of problems currently plaguing online poker, including various examples of “angle shooting” and other sorta-tolerated-but-ethically-sketchy practices he believes are hurting the game.

There’s always some element of risk associated with putting oneself out there and taking positions regarding issues over which there exist legitimate debate -- i.e., over which reasonable people disagree. Particularly when doing so could in some way negatively affect one’s own bottom line in some fashion, either directly or indirectly.

Not going to suggest some trite comparison between reforms in tennis and/or poker and other, more serious reforms which a holiday like MLK day invites us to contemplate. Nor do I mean to suggest I necessarily agree with all of the reforms proposed by those mentioned above. But it does seem an appropriate day to note the need to talk about problems when they arise. And, even more importantly, to be willing to listen, too.