LAPT8 Peru, Day 2: A Parade in Peru

Just a couple of quick highlights from yesterday to share that happened along the way while Day 2 of the Latin American Poker Tour Peru Main Event played down from 129 players to 32.

Early on during the day I caught up with Scott Davies, a poker pro who hails from New Jersey and now lives in Vancouver. Davies won the World Series of Poker Asia Pacific Main Event last October, and following that big score has been able to travel the world playing tournaments all over the place.

He’s continued to be successful, too, cashing a lot and winning a few events, too, including most recently picking up a WSOP Circuit ring in my neck of the woods at Harrah’s Cherokee. He’s a really amiable guy, and it was a lot of fun chatting with him and sharing the story of how he got to Peru this week.

Another highlight was that parade I’ve been referring to the last couple of posts, the one that is part of the Fiestas Patrias or national holidays going on for the last part of the month and centered around July 28, Peru’s independence day.

Along with my friend Carlos Monti, the photographer, I climbed up onto one of the casino’s balconies overlooking the street and we watched the parade for awhile, both of us snapping pics as we did. It was indeed a festive scene, with a huge crowd and lots of kids.

We saw a fight break out between a couple of dudes, with police having to intervene, but otherwise it was all pretty jovial. Click here to see some of Carlos’s better pics of what we saw.

Day 3 awaits. Visit the PokerStars blog for more.

Fields and Pools, Big and Small

I’m up late tonight following the Super Tuesday on PokerStars while also looking in occasionally on the WSOP Asia-Pacific coverage down in Melbourne. Was mentioning yesterday the smallish fields the events are attracting during this, the second WSOP APAC, and with the Super Tuesday sitting right in front of me as well, it’s hard not to be making comparisons.

This week’s Super Tuesday drew 590 entrants, thereby creating a prize pool of $590,000. A $1,050 no-limit hold’em tournament that’s been around about five years now, the Super Tuesday has been steadily increasing in size ever since Black Friday when U.S. players were subtracted from the mix.

During the weeks following April 15, 2011, the tourney was drawing fields of about 200 players, though entries began picking up as months went by and by the end of that year it was hitting the 400-plus mark again as it had previously.

The tourney was given a $300K guarantee and during 2012 began averaging close to 450 players, even drawing more than 500 on several occasions. Then last year the Super Tuesday drew more than 600 nearly a dozen times, something that’s been replicated again in 2014. And it even cracked the 700-player milestone once this year, setting an all-time high for the tournament when 711 players participated back on April 1 of this year (no shinola).

Currently the Super Tuesday has a $400K guarantee (the increase happening during the late summer). It has averaged just over 568 players every single week, save during SCOOP and WCOOP when it goes on hiatus, so this week’s turnout of 590 is fairly typical.

Meanwhile the 2014 WSOP APAC has swiftly moved into the second half of its 10-event schedule, with bracelets having already been awarded in four of the events, including Jeff Lisandro picking up a a sixth career WSOP win in the A$1,650 pot-limit Omaha event. Here are the turnouts and prize pools for the first five events:

Event No. 1 (A$1,100 NLHE Accumulator): 611 entries, A$611,000

Event No. 2 (A$2,220 NLHE): 215 entries; A$430,000

Event No. 3 (A$1,650 PLO): 123 entries; A$184,500

Event No. 4 (A$1,650 NLHE Terminator): 250 entries; A$375,000

Event No. 5 (A$5,000 PLO): 80 entries; A$376,000

It’s looking like Event No. 6, the A$1,650 8-Game Dealer’s Choice event, like Event No. 5 is probably going to draw fewer than 100 players, meaning the prize pool is going to be south of A$150,000 and first prize will probably be at most around A$45,000 -- less than what the fourth-place finisher in tonight’s Super Tuesday will earn.

One Australian dollar is currently worth around 88 cents U.S., which means the biggest prize pool thus far at the 2014 WSOP APAC (Event No. 1’s A$611,000) was worth a little under $535,000 USD -- in other words, less than this week’s Super Tuesday prize pool.

While the Super Tuesday has the biggest buy-in of any regular online tourney these days, it isn’t the biggest weekly online tournament. The $215 buy-in Sunday Million usually has a prize pool that is bigger than twice the Super Tuesday’s, and the Sunday Warm-Up (also $215 to play) generally has prize pools that are a little larger, too.

I know we’re talking apples and oranges here, making it a little unfair to compare big online tourneys (especially those on PokerStars) to live events like the ones happening in Melbourne this month. It is interesting, though, in this context to think again about the whole bracelet debate and how these WSOP APAC events have but a fraction of the field and smaller prize pools and buy-ins than events staged on a weekly basis online.

Betting the Under Down Under

Was mentioning on Friday all the tournaments happening this month all over the world. Just realized today the World Poker Tour has an Alpha8 event kicking off in London, too.

Today I’ve been watching the UKIPT Isle of Man Main Event final table on PokerStars.tv, enjoying as always the delayed live stream they provide. I haven’t yet managed to look in on any of the WSOP Asia-Pacific live streaming, nor have I really been able to do much more than read the recaps of the action from Melbourne thus far given the 15-hour time difference.

Because of that, I’ve found myself mainly interested in the turnouts for the WSOP ASAP events thus far and that WSOP Player of the Year race between Brandon Shack-Harris and George Danzer who are essentially even and also far enough ahead of the pack so as to be only ones still in the running.

The first four of 10 scheduled events have gotten going thus far in Melbourne, with a couple having completed.

Event No. 1, the A$ 1,100 No-Limit Hold’em Accumulator, drew 611 total entries, down more than 43% who played the same event there in the spring of 2013. Event No. 2 (A$ 2,200 NLHE) drew 215 entries; that one wasn’t offered the first time around. Meanwhile Event No. 3, the A$ 1,650 Pot-Limit Omaha, saw 123 enter, again down a little over 28% when compared to the 172 who played that one last year. Event No. 4 is also a new event, the A$ 1,650 NLHE “Terminator” (involving bounties), which drew 250.

So small fields again for the WSOP ASAP -- even smaller than the first time around -- which’ll lead to more talk about the bracelets’ relative value. Will be interesting to see how many play the bigger buy-in events, including the A$ 10,000 Main Event and the A$ 25,000 High Roller. The smallest turnout for any WSOP APAC in 2013 was 81 players for the A$ 2,200 won by Phil Ivey.

All of the rest of the prelims on this year’s 10-tourney schedule are unique when compared to the five played in 2013, so only the Main Event will offer a direct comparison when it comes. Daniel Negreanu won it last year when they drew 405. If that were the line this time, I think most would be betting the under.

Meanwhile on the WSOP POY front, both Shack-Harris and Danzer cashed in Event No. 1, with Danzer’s 22nd-place finish earning him a few more points than the min-cash Shack-Harris got for finishing 53rd. That put Danzer at 762.20, nudging him just ahead of Shack-Harris who has 760.50.

Neither cashed in Event Nos. 2 or 3, but Shack-Harris is in the money in Event No. 4 where the top 27 made the cash (all of whom return tonight/tomorrow). In fact, Shack-Harris knocked out Danzer in that event, collecting a $500 bounty while also ensuring his POY foe wouldn’t be gathering any points from his finish.

If I follow the formula correctly, I think Shack-Harris has assured himself at least 7 points out of Event No. 4, what he would get for finishing anywhere from 19th to 27th. If he wins the sucker, though, he grabs a bigger bounty of 140 points (I think) to assume a commanding lead.

Looks like the WSOP APAC live stream starts at 12:10 p.m. each day Melbourne time, which I believe is just after 9 p.m. my time (ET). One of the these nights I might try to tune in, probably when that Main Event rolls around.

Then again, as I was talking about Friday, the EPT London Main happens then, too, and might use up all my poker-watching attention before the night comes around.

Later This Month: EPT & WSOP Go Heads-Up

So much poker happening around the world this month as pretty much all of the tours crank back up again, including the World Series of Poker Asia-Pacific which has already gotten going down in Melbourne.

There’s the UKIPT stop in the Isle of Man (already begun), to be followed immediately by the UKIPT London and then the EPT London series. That then overlaps with WSOP APAC which goes through Oct. 18th. Even before that ends, the LAPT has another stop in Lima, Peru, where I’ll actually be heading again. And of course there’s a lot happening Stateside, too.

Regarding the WSOP APAC, that WSOP Player of the Year race in which Brandon Shack-Harris and George Danzer are nearly tied adds a little bit of interest when it comes to the 10 bracelet events that are being staged there. Both are playing the series, taking their duel up through the very last event.

I’m with those who think the WSOP POY shouldn’t really bother with the Europe and APAC legs, given how so many who might genuinely be competing for it aren’t traveling to those places to play.

In any case, it will be interesting to see where players go once the EPT London Main Event rolls around. The first of two Day 1 flights for that one happens Sunday, October 12, with the final table Sunday, October 18. Meanwhile the WSOP APAC Main Event also begins on Oct. 12 (also with two Day 1s) and runs through Oct. 18, with the two exactly coinciding.

The EPT London Main Event has a £4,250 buy-in (the equivalent of almost $6,800 USD) while the WSOP APAC Main costs A$10,000 to play (a little under $8,700 USD at present). Last year EPT London drew 604 entrants (with a £5,250 buy-in), while the WSOP APAC Main in the spring of 2013 had 405 players enter (with the same buy-in).

Also relevant to a lot of players is the fact that not only is the UKIPT London stop coming just before EPT London, there are 45 different events happening between the two series; meanwhile, the WSOP APAC has just the 10 bracelet events.

Both the WSOP APAC schedule and the EPT Season 11 schedule (including the London stop) were announced at practically the same time in late April this year -- it might have been the same day, if I am remembering correctly -- and while there was a lot of lamenting at the time by some at the conflict, it sounds like it wasn’t necessarily intended by anyone or could be helped, either.

I know a lot of what affects the scheduling of these is outside the control of the tournament series organizers, and would guess neither the EPT nor the WSOP desired this happenstance.

That said, the situation creates an interesting heads-up match between the two that week. Like I say, though, I’ll be in South America, following all that from Peru.

The Crowded Calendar

As has become traditional for the European Poker Tour, its season is ending with two stops coming in close succession at Sanremo, Italy then just over the border in Monaco (about an hour’s drive away, I believe). This is the seventh straight year the EPT has done it that way, in fact, ending its season with those two stops with only a few days off in between. Many tourney pros arrange their plans to play both stops, taking advantage of the convenience.

Was writing a couple of days ago about the World Poker Tour’s season-ending WPT World Championship also happening at the Borgata right now. Looking back through the ten seasons of the EPT, this is the first time such a conflict has arisen between the two tours’ finales. There were a few years when the WPT’s last event started just a day or two after the EPT Grand Final had ended, but never have they overlapped. (The WPT World Championship final table comes this Saturday, also Day 1a for the EPT’s Main Event.)

While the dates are such that players could play at Sanremo then fly over to Atlantic City, or play and bust the WPT and get to Monaco, the overlapping of the schedule makes it tricky to do so. Thus many are choosing one or the other, either taking part in the conclusion of the EPT’s Season 10 or the conclusion of the WPT’s Season XII.

Speaking of conflicts, yesterday the European Poker Tour its preliminary Season 11 schedule, with a return to London coming October 8-18 of this year. The World Series of Poker also yesterday announced dates for the WSOP Asia Pacific series, with 10 bracelet events coming this time around. Dates for the 2014 WSOP APAC are October 2-18, meaning an overlap with EPT London with the Main Events of both happening just about concurrently.

A few players complained today about having to choose between the EPT and the WSOP APAC this fall. Made me think a little about my own often busy schedule and how as a freelancer I’m forced sometimes to make choices, having occasionally to pass on opportunities because of conflicts. Indeed, this summer is starting to shape up a little differently than past summers for your humble scribbler, with the additional obligations of farm living adding a wrinkle to the usual plan (more to come on that).

Some of the chatter today focused on the different tours needing to coordinate so as to avoid the overlaps, although I know the factors affecting all of them are inordinately complicated, thus making it a lot easier said than done when it comes to picking and choosing among available dates for particular venues.

In any event, a calendar so packed with tourneys all over does further prove the undying popularity of tournament poker. And the likelihood of still more conflicts to come.

WSOP Europe and WSOP Asia Pacific To Alternate Years

The World Series of Poker yesterday announced a change of plans regarding the WSOP Europe and WSOP Asia Pacific events, or at least a move away from the pattern of offering both series on an annual basis.

As you’ve probably heard, both the WSOPE and WSOP APAC will henceforth be staged on an every-other-year basis, alternating back and forth. Thus the WSOPE will be taking a year off in 2014, with the WSOP APAC happening in October of next year (and featuring 10 bracelet events). Then the WSOPE will return in 2015 with the WSOP APAC stepping aside. No word at the moment on how many events will be included at the 2015 WSOPE or when (or where) it will be held.

Numbers at the 2013 WSOPE last month weren’t stellar, with some small fields and the Main Event slipping from 420 entrants to 375, kind of settling back toward where the ME field sizes began at the WSOPE when it began when 362 entered in both 2007 and 2008. The 2013 WSOP APAC in Melbourne (the first year of the series) also featured some events with small turnouts, although a healthy 405 entered the Main.

There was some talk earlier in the year that having the WSOP APAC (in April) come so close on the heels of the Aussie Millions (in January) might have affected turnouts somewhat as some players chose one over the other, with most choosing the Aussie Millions. Having the WSOP APAC in October again puts it within three months of the Aussie Millions (in January), although this time the WSOP series will come first.

Some immediately began talking again about the whole WSOP Player of the Year debate in response to the announcement, an issue of importance only to a very small percentage of players, though nonetheless one that gets an inordinate amount of attention from forum posters and media folks.

The news made me think back to what WSOP Executive Director Ty Stewart said back in May 2012 when the WSOP APAC was first announced, in particular the suggestion of a “goal... to establish the worldwide grand slam of poker.”

That thought seemed to suggest further expansion, with perhaps a fourth location for a WSOP series in the works and a global schedule rivaling other “grand slams” such as the one in tennis with its four “majors” in Australia (the Australian Open), France (the French Open), England (Wimbledon), and the U.S. (the U.S. Open).

Such could still happen, although this week’s announcement suggests if it does it will be later than sooner. Responding to comments on his Twitter feed yesterday, Stewart noted how the WSOP “never desired to be a tour,” but was committed to the idea of the World Series of Poker reflecting how poker is indeed a “Worldwide game.”

Will be interesting to see over the next few years how the WSOP continues to fare as far as bracelet events outside of the U.S. are concerned.

Hellmuth Wants To Draw a Line in the Sand

Been continuing to follow the coverage of the 2013 World Series of Poker Europe on various sites, in particular of the Main Event which today played down to 24 players. A little drama at the end of today as Daniel Negreanu was finally ousted in 25th place for a cash worth €21,750. His knockout today means Matthew Ashton stays in front in the 2013 WSOP Player of the Year race as Negreanu needed to finish seventh or better in the ME to pass him.

Negreanu immediately hopped into Event No. 8, the High Roller event for which the buy-in of €25,600 was just a bit higher than his take-away from the ME. He could still pass Ashton in the POY race with a high finish in that one, I believe, as long as Ashton doesn’t do better. And while Ashton has the edge there are some other scenarios still in play, too, as Tim Fiorvanti broke down over on BLUFF today.

Negreanu, of course, got a head start in the 2013 WSOP POY race by winning the WSOP Asia Pacific Main Event back in April where he also final tabled another preliminary event. All of the open-bracelet events in the WSOP APAC, the WSOP in Las Vegas, and WSOP Europe count toward the WSOP Player of the Year race.

Speaking of whether or not certain events “count” when it comes to the WSOP, Phil Hellmuth offered some thoughts a few days ago to Thomas Keeling (a.k.a. “SrslySirius”) about whether or not bracelets won at WSOP APAC should “count” or not. Hellmuth, of course, has an obvious interest in that particular tally given that he leads all with 13 total bracelets, including one in the 2012 WSOP Europe Main Event.

In a video made at WSOP Europe, Keeling put the question to Hellmuth directly about the relative value of the WSOP APAC or WSOP Europe bracelets, and the Poker Brat responds initially by saying “There’s two bracelets that no one can argue with, you know... Daniel’s -- he won the Main Event in Australia -- and mine -- I won the Main Event [in Europe in 2012]. So those should count for sure as bracelets.”

Hellmuth is implying, of course, that it might be debatable whether to count bracelets won in preliminary events in Europe or Australia, so Keeling asks him if he thinks Phil Ivey’s ninth bracelet -- won in Event No. 2 at the 2013 WSOP APAC, a $2,200 buy-in (AUD) mixed event in which 81 players took part and Ivey won only a little over $50K -- doesn’t “count.”

In his response Hellmuth kind of talks himself into saying Ivey’s bracelet counts, although it’s pretty obvious he wants to say otherwise. “I mean it was in a field of 80 players, mixed game, small limit,” he begins, then realizing it "probably sounds like sour grapes because he chasing me for the bracelets," admits with some reluctance that Ivey’s bracelet does count.

But Hellmuth has some other thoughts, too.

“I don’t know if the ones in Australia next year should count or not,” he continues. From there he brings up the idea of a “players council” that would decide whether or not the WSOP APAC bracelets counted or not before 2014 rolls around.

“We have to draw a line in the sand somewhere... where bracelets count and don’t count,” insists Hellmuth, his finger extended as though he’s ready to be the one to do the drawing.

I like Keeling’s BLUFF videos, both these “straight” ones and the funny, “Srsly”-styled ones. In fact, I can’t help but view these more straighforward-seeming interview clips through the not-always-serious SrslySirius “lens” now and then, such as in this one when Keeling enthusiastically says “that’s a good idea” to Hellmuth as he gets him to elaborate about his idea for some sort of WSOP Bracelet-Line-Drawing Players Council.

Because, well, it’s a terrible idea, and for obvious reasons. Negreanu says as much in another Keeling video from today. And as for “drawing a line in the sand” about which tournaments award WSOP bracelets and which don’t, well, the WSOP already does that.

Sure, there might be some issues with how many bracelets are being awarded as well as when and where the WSOP is staging its events in which bracelets are the prize. But having the guy with the most be involved with deciding which ones “count” or not would be like letting the chip leader change the rules of the game.

Fled Is That Tourney:----Do I Wake or Sleep?

Utterly swamped at the moment with various assignments, and thus without a lot of time for posting here today, I’m afraid. Indeed, after enjoying a day or two of rest upon my return home from the WSOP, I have been just about as busy during the days since as I was while there.

In fact, it looks like I am going to have a few different trips coming up over the next several weeks, including a return voyage to LAPT Lima a few days from now.

I’ll surely be sharing details about all of those trips here as they come up. All of the many different tours are ramping back up now that the WSOP has finished for the summer, and so suddenly after weeks of focusing on Las Vegas the game goes global once again as events play out all over.

I am still occasionally dreaming about watching and reporting hands. Usually we’re talking mundane stuff -- like most hands in poker tournaments, or like most dreams often go -- although occasionally weird, panicky moments will arise in which something strange happens in the hand or with the reporting, and I’ll wake up glad none of it was real.

As a sports fan, I’m realizing I’m kind of glad still to have poker first and foremost on the agenda here during this relative down time for sports. Am waiting on the NFL to start, still my favorite sport to watch and follow. Basketball will also occupy my attention once it comes back around later in the year, too, but baseball simply doesn’t work for me anymore, with the multitude of scandals having seriously damaged the game beyond a point where this fan cares to go.

The whole A-Rod saga has become a kind of emblem for the sport, bringing together all of the problems related to high salaries, PED use and abuse, and absurd attempts to self-legislate into a single pathetic package.

That’s not to say poker doesn’t have its share of problems, too. But for the most part the game tends to provide plenty of entertainment for those who play and watch. Can’t say I was overly moved by ESPN’s presentation of the WSOP Asia Pacific final table earlier in the week, but that’s probably more a consequence of my being a little overfed with poker of late than the presentation of Daniel Negreanu’s victory not being compelling.

Anyhow, back next week with more and like I say I’ll be talking further about the LAPT Lima trip and subsequent adventures soon.

Meanwhile, for those with an interest in hearing people talk about reporting on poker tournaments, check out the latest episode of the Thinking Poker podcast on which Gareth Chantler comes on to talk about his upcoming trip to cover UKIPT Galway for the Full Tilt Poker blog. There is also some interesting talk about that unique situation from the WSOP Main Event involving David “Doc” Sands you might have heard about, namely a strange hand Sands played that has evoked the issue of “the ethics of accepting an unsolicited chip dump” (to employ the Thinking Poker guys’ phrasing).

While you do, I’ll see if I can’t get a little more rest before these trips come up. And if I can keep these poker-related dreams from returning me to consciousness.

To the Victor Go the Spoils

These last two weekends I’ve been away at the World Series of Poker Circuit stops, helping report on the Main Events (at Foxwoods and at Harrah’s Cherokee) for PokerNews. Thus was I mostly distracted from all of the happenings down under at the World Series of Poker Asia Pacific which came to a close on Monday.

We did call up the live stream right at the end of the WSOP APAC Main Event on Monday, seeing Daniel Negreanu finally finish off Daniel Marton to win the title. Kind of uncanny to think of Negreanu and Phil Hellmuth winning the last two non-Vegas WSOP Main Events, although the fact that they did kind of highlights how different those MEs are from the one that plays out at the Rio each summer. So far -- and likely for the foreseeable future -- WSOP Main Events in Europe, Australia, or elsewhere are necessarily going to feature smaller fields and more “name” pros.

I wrote a little last week about “Bracelets and Rings” and the whole debate over trying to discover ways to compare and relate the achievements of those who win WSOP events, wherever they happen to take place.

While at the WSOP-C Main Event at Harrah’s Cherokee, we couldn’t help but make note of the fact that the prize pool there ($1.284 million) exceeded that of each of the first four bracelet events at WSOP APAC. And how the winner John Bowman took away a first prize ($250,380) that was more than what any of those bracelet winners had won, in fact nearly five times what Ivey got for his victory in the $2,200 (AUD) mixed event.

The debate over bracelets -- as well as the WSOP POY race, in which the WSOP APAC results count -- gets amplified a little thanks to Ivey and Negreanu having each succeeded in bringing another one out of Australia. Negreanu picked up his fifth bracelet, and first since 2008. It was also his first no-limit hold’em bracelet, incidentally.

Negreanu’s also already pretty mindful of the POY race, tweeting out a link to the standings yesterday. Greg Mueller tweeted congrats to Negreanu in response, but added “Its kind of blown [sic] being 400 points behind before event #1 at rio.”

Meanwhile Ivey’s racing Hellmuth now, his nine still well behind the Poker Brat’s 13. Kind of weirdly, none of Ivey’s bracelets have come in hold’em events. By the way, F-Train has provided an interesting breakdown of Ivey’s WSOP performances over the years for Flushdraw.

As a fan of tournament poker and someone who at times likes to follow the big tourneys as though they were sporting events, I can’t help but be a little intrigued by the various ways of marking achievements -- bracelets, rings, points, etc. The players are clearly motivated by such extra rewards, too. Bracelets and rings possess some tangible value, while POY points may or may not have any at all. (I’m not even sure the WSOP POY wins anything anymore.)

I’m reminded of a funny exchange at the final table of the WSOP-C Main Event at Harrah’s Cherokee. It came at a point when Kory Kilpatrick and Hugh Henderson were both battling with short stacks while Weaver was leading with more than twice the chips of anyone else.

Kilpatrick asked Weaver what he was going to do with the first-prize money, and Weaver said he’d put it in the bank. Then Henderson asked if he was at least going to buy something nice first, and Weaver said he wasn’t interested in doing so.

“No,” he said, “I just want the ring or the bracelet... whatever they have here.”

That led to some more funny banter, including Kilpatrick and Henderson saying they’d gladly let Weaver have the ring if they could have the money. But that wasn’t really Weaver’s point, I don’t think. He wasn’t saying he only wanted the jewelry and wasn’t interested in the cash, just that he wasn’t eager to spend whatever money he might win on material goods.

It was one of several humorous moments at that final table, some of which frankly stemmed from the not-always-perfect communication happening between the elder Weaver and the others. It kind of highlighted, though, all of the different reasons why people play the tournaments, and how the various rewards more or less figure into everyone’s thinking, although not uniformly so.

No, just as money has different significance to each individual, so, too, do other spoils like rings or bracelets or points or even the intangible benefits of challenging oneself and competing with others all signify differently, depending on the person.

Bracelets and Rings

Got back home in one piece yesterday from my Foxwoods trip, sorta kinda napped a little bit before engaging in some more late night work, then today I’m looking at a full day of handling more business before I drive tomorrow to Cherokee, North Carolina for the next WSOP Circuit Main Event.

As I was up late last night, I followed along with the PokerListings hand-for-hand coverage of that WSOP Asia Pacific Event No. 3 final table (the 8-game mixed event) featuring both Daniel Negreanu and Phil Ivey, with Ivey eventually winning his ninth bracelet. Even dipped into the live stream from time to time, although since I was doing other things I couldn’t really follow it that closely, particularly during the non-flop games.

Ivey and Brandon Wong ended up playing a heads-up for quite some time -- 180 hands, if my math is correct -- before Ivey finally won the sucker. All of this happened in the wee hours over here in America, of course, since Melbourne is 14 hours ahead of those of us on the east coast (I believe).

Event No. 3 was a $2,200 buy-in event (AUD, which is worth just a little more than USD right now), and only 81 players took part. Ivey’s win will certainly once again spur debates about the relative value of WSOP bracelets, reprising the arguments about (1) non-Vegas WSOP events vs. those won elsewhere; (2) the ballooning number of bracelets (75 total this year); and (3) bracelets won in low buy-in and/or small field events vs. others. The fact that Ivey has won all nine of his bracelets in events other than no-limit hold’em will also inspire some discussion, too, I imagine.

I might have begun to be affected somewhat by hanging around the WSOP Circuit more lately, but I’m becoming less and less bothered by the preponderance of bracelets and the whole “devaluing” argument.

There are 20 WSOP-C stops this year with a dozen events at each, with the winners all getting a ring along with their first place prizes. That’s 240 rings going out in a single year, and thus there are many who play who have multiple rings. Right now Alex Masek has the all-time lead in that race with six.

Comparing bracelets and rating their relative value has always been the equivalent of sports-bar type arguments over the ranking of players or teams from different eras. Of course, even within the same WSOP, no two events are really the equivalent of each other, even if they feature the same buy-in and game.

The debates, though, can still be interesting and even constructive when it comes to producing new ideas about valuing players’ abilities. And I think the added layer of competition that comes with chasing bracelets (or rings) clearly motivates many players and adds another level of entertainment to those who follow these things.

It’s obvious at every WSOP-C stop that many are mindful of both the number of rings players have won as well as the WSOP-C points standings that land players spots in the year-end National Championship as well as determine the “Casino Champion” at each stop. Some might want to argue the extra incentives are mainly there to exploit the players, but I think on the whole most who play like having them.

Here Comes the Accumulator

Event No. 1 at World Series of Poker Asia Pacific got underway today. Or yesterday. Or tomorrow. Lotsa time zones to deal with to pin that down.

The first event a the WSOP APAC is this $1,100 “No-Limit Hold’em Accumulator” event which features a novel format never employed before for a WSOP bracelet event. Nor have I heard of it being used anywhere, although I’m sure it has somewhere before.

Looking in over on PokerListings, I see that 329 players participated in today’s first Day 1 flight, with Dan “djk123” Kelly having ended the day with the most chips among the 50 or so players surviving the eight one-hour levels.

Kelly spun his starting stack of 3,000 chips up to 66,250 by night’s end to lead all of those making it to the bagging. Like everyone else who played today -- survivors and bustouts -- Kelly can come back for tomorrow’s Day 1b and/or Saturday’s Day 1c and play again. And if he were to survive either or both of those flights, he’d then be able to add whatever additional chips he wins to his overall stack, combining all to begin Sunday’s Day 2.

Thus... the “Accumulator.” Sounds a little like some sort of materialistic superhero. Or champion collector of stuff! A relation, perhaps, of the Comic Book Guy’s alter ego from The Simpsons, the Collector (pictured above).

The “accumulator” presents another variation on the whole rebuy/re-entry/multi-entry tourney twisting that has been pursued both online and live in various ways over recent years.

Rebuys have remained part of the tourney landscape even after the WSOP decided to jettison them following the 2008 Series. I remember at the time gossip going around about funny business with prize pools and the collecting of cash for rebuys, but a lot of the debate seemed focused more on ideas of fairness and “level playing fields” and suggestions that there was something wrong with players with deep pockets being able to “buy” bracelets in these straightforward rebuy events.

As I wrote about in late 2008, no one really could buy a bracelet in these events, although a player able to afford dozens of rebuys in a given event obviously had more options available to him or her than did the player only able to buy in once or twice.

In any case, the rebuys did fade a bit from the scene, soon to be replaced by the “re-entry” tournament that usually introduced some kind of restriction on how many times a busted player could buy back into an event while also not allowing players to do any rebuying unless they had busted altogether. Nowadays re-entries have become somewhat commonplace.

The World Poker Tour main events are often re-entry tournaments. This weekend I’m off to Foxwoods for the WSOP Circuit $1,675 buy-in Main Event which like every WSOP-C ME will also be a re-entry tournament.

There will be two Day 1 flights (both played Saturday, actually), with players eliminated from “Day 1a” (lasting nine 40-minute levels) unable to buy back into that flight, but able to buy in to Day 1b on Saturday evening.

Then -- if I’m not mistaken -- when Day 2 begins players who only played one of the Day 1 flights and busted can if they wish buy in a second time just before play resumes on Sunday. But those who’ve bought in and busted twice already don’t get a third chance. Covering these events before, I don’t recall that many coming to buy in at the start of Day 2 (either for a first or second time), but a few generally do.

Like I say, now these re-entry events have become somewhat standard, thus making it possible for the WSOP to try yet another variation on the theme at the Crown Melbourne this week.

I’m curious to see what kind of statistics emerge regarding participation in WSOP APAC Event No. 1. I’m sure many who busted will be back to fire another $1,100, but I wonder whether many of those who survived today will think it worth coming back again to try to accumulate more chips.

I suppose people could once more argue that those with deep pockets stand better chances to win these re-entry and “accumulator” tournies. That said, it’s already true that those with the ability to play more tournaments necessarily have more opportunities to win them.

Not everyone is a fan of the way re-entry tourneys are taking over, of course. For more on the debate over re-entry tournaments, here’s a Card Player piece from a year-and-a-half ago which includes several players’ offering thoughtful observations about the pros and cons.

World Series of Poker Asia Pacific Kicks Off Thursday

Finding myself pressed for time today, thus leaving little time for scribbling. Have a few different deadlines to meet, plus I am trying to get my act together before traveling this Friday to Foxwoods for the upcoming World Series of Poker Circuit Main Event which I’ll be helping cover for PokerNews starting on Saturday.

Of course, most of the poker world’s attention starting tomorrow is going to be focused more than 10,000 miles away from Connecticut as the first ever WSOP Asia Pacific series finally gets underway.

There will be five bracelets awarded at the Crown Melbourne over the next couple of weeks -- the first of 75 (!) that will be won in Australia, New Orleans, Las Vegas, and Paris during 2013. There’s also a High Roller event (AUD $50,000, with re-entries) as well as another installment of the Caesars Cup that will be grabbing some attention toward the latter part of the schedule.

As I say, I don’t have a lot of time today to write much here about the WSOP APAC, although I have written a couple of items about it lately and so can point to them instead.

One is a preview written for Betfair Poker that includes the schedule and a few other bits of information about what’s to come. The other is a post for Flushdraw in which I again cover the schedule while also sharing some of what I learned after speaking with a couple of folks who will be involved with covering the WSOP APAC.

I talked to Matthew Showell, Editor-in-Chief at PokerListings, and he offered some details of PL’s plan as the “exclusive live reporting partner” for the WSOP APAC. It’s a bit of a change-up, actually, as PokerNews has filled that role at the WSOP since 2007 and at WSOP Europe over recent years as well.

I also spoke with Heath Chick of Poker Asia Pacific, with whom PokerListings is partnering to provide their live updates, chip counts, and photos from the different events. Heath is someone I’ve worked alongside in the past as a reporter, and he and his team down under are well positioned, I think, to help PL out and ensure good reporting.

Anyhow, for now check out those pieces and also look in over at PokerListings and Poker Asia Pacific over the coming days for more from the WSOP APAC. PokerNews and BLUFF will also have daily reports and features, and the WSOP site will be a good place to go as well for specifics and other information.

Meanwhile, off I go to take care of more business, including my own upcoming travel plans. At least I get to stay in my own time zone.

The WSOP Invites You to Australia

“Opportunities are available in all walks of life in Australia!”

So sang the Kinks at the start of “Australia,” the tune closing out the first side of their 1969 LP Arthur (Or the Decline and Fall of the British Empire), one of the records in that collection I was writing about yesterday. Another of their concept LPs, the song alludes to the intentions of the title character’s son whose family is about to emigrate to the continent down under.

As that first line suggests, Australia represents a kind of highly-desirable utopia from the perspective of the down-trodden characters who populate Arthur’s story. It's a place thought to have “no class distinction” and “no drug addiction,” where “everyone walks around with a perpetual smile across their face.”

Like in that other Kinks song “Shangri-La,” though, there's some tongue-in-cheek involved here, too, with little chance that reality is going to match the imagined ideal.

I was reminded of that tune when earlier this week the World Series of Poker announced the schedule of events for the first ever WSOP Asia Pacific series coming up in April, including the five bracelet events that will play out at the Crown Melbourne. Here’s the line-up (all $ are AUD, close to equivalent to USD):

Event No. 1: $1,100 No-Limit Hold’em Accumulator

Event No. 2: $1,650 Pot-Limit Omaha

Event No. 3: $2,200 Mixed Event

Event No. 4: $5,000 Six-Handed No-Limit Hold’em

Event No. 5: $10,000 No-Limit Hold’em (Main Event)

A couple of things jump out from the schedule, one being the inclusion of a “mixed event.” The press release doesn’t spell it out, but I did notice WSOP VP of Communications Seth Palansky tweeting that it will be an “8-game” event such as has happened at the WSOP in Las Vegas in recent years. Thus unlike has been the case at WSOP Europe, there will be at least some non-hold’em or Omaha played at WSOP APAC.

The first event’s designation as an “accumulator” event also draws the eye, and the press release does explain what that signifies. The event will have three starting days, and in fact players will be able to buy in each of those days if so desired, regardless of whether they happen to bust. In each case, the player buying in to play a given Day 1 flight will begin with the same starting stack, then whatever they end the day with will be bagged as usual. However, if the player plays and survives multiple Day 1 flights, he or she will get to begin Day 2 with those stacks added together.

It sounds like yet another variation on the “rebuy” format that was jettisoned from the WSOP following the 2008 Series, as well as another variation on the “re-entry” format that has become the standard for Main Events on the WSOP Circuit and has been turning up more and more frequently elsewhere, too. I assume there will be a decent number of players who bust on Day 1a who’ll come back to try again, and perhaps a third time should they bust 1b. But I’ll be curious to see how many will see value in re-entering after surviving an earlier Day 1 flight.

Sort of intriguing, also, to consider how the buy-ins for the five events gradually increase as the Series goes along (not counting the possibility of entering Event No. 1 three times).

The timing for the announcement of the WSOP APAC schedule is also interesting. Kind of a last-minute deal, actually, as I think most assumed the WSOP APAC would be announced prior to the start of the Aussie Millions so as to give players a chance to size up both tournament line-ups in order to decide whether to attend one or both. The Aussie Millions began today, in fact, with the first of 26 events having already gotten underway.

Neither the WSOP nor the WSOP Europe schedules for this year have been announced as yet. Last year the WSOP awarded 61 gold bracelets, plus one more to the WSOP National Champion, while the WSOPE saw seven bracelets won. If the 2013 schedules are similar, then, a total of 74 bracelets will be awarded in 2013. Also, the WSOP APAC will count toward the 2013 WSOP Player of the Year race, the story of which has grabbed increasing attention over the last couple of years due in part to Phil Hellmuth’s successive challenges for POY honors. (He’s finished twice each of the last two years.)

Turnouts were down at the 2012 WSOPE -- significantly so -- and thus folks will be watching to see what happens at the WSOP APAC in April, including how many players decide to participate in both the Aussie Millions and WSOP APAC events.

I’m sure there will be plenty of Aussies and others from that part of the world who are there for both. But it’s such a long trip for those from the Americas or Europe, one has to believe a lot of those players will be choosing one or the other, with most likely opting for the Aussie Millions both for its familiarity and longer, more varied schedule of events (including multiple mixed-game events and Chinese poker).

Then again, come spring, “if you’re young and you’re healthy, why not get a boat and come to Australia...?”

WSOP Asia Pacific Adds More Bracelets

This week the World Series of Poker announced that a new series of gold bracelet events will be happening at the Crown Casino in Melbourne, Australia. The first installment of the WSOP Asia Pacific series will take place April 4-15, 2013, where five bracelets will be awarded.

Most seem pretty excited about the news, including many players. The Crown has a decade’s worth of history hosting the successful Aussie Millions, and it sounds like at least some pros might make a return trip down under for the WSOP APAC. (That’s the sorta awkward acronym it appears we’ll be using to refer to the WSOP Asia Pacific series.)

Shortly after the announcement, Lance Bradley of BLUFF Magazine tweeted “Coming Soon: arguments amongst poker media about whether or not WSOP APAC bracelets count as WSOP bracelets or not,” adding a hash tag clarifying his position in advance: “#TheyCount.”

Bradley is, of course, alluding to debates over whether or not WSOP Europe bracelets are “real.” By now those arguments appear to have mostly settled into a general acceptance of WSOPE bracelets being more or less equivalent in status to the ones awarded in Vegas. The WSOPE started in 2007 and has expanded over its five years with its new home in Cannes, France appearing to suit many.

The schedule for this fall’s WSOPE has already been announced, and like last year seven bracelets will be awarded. Meanwhile there will be a record 61 events at this year’s WSOP in Las Vegas, plus one more bracelet given for the WSOP National Championship. So 69 bracelets total will be won in 2012, which means if the WSOP and WSOPE stick with similar schedules in 2013 we’ll likely see at least 74 bracelets awarded.

Bracelets weren’t awarded at the first few WSOPs -- last year’s media guide lists 1976 as the first year they were -- although the WSOP still classifies those who won events in prior years as “bracelet winners.” If I follow the WSOP’s numbers correctly, there have been 954 WSOP events from 1970-2011, although there are actually 959 “bracelet winners” since five of those were mixed doubles events (in the late ’70s and early ’80s).

That means somewhere along the way this summer we’ll be commemorating the awarding of the 1,000th WSOP bracelet. When that 1,000th WSOP bracelet is awarded -- around Event No. 41, I suppose (a $3,000 no-limit hold’em event) -- I believe that will mark the 470th bracelet won since Chris Moneymaker grabbed his at the 2003 WSOP Main Event.

By the end of the 2012 WSOPE, the overall total number of WSOP events during its history will be up to 1,028, with more than half (533) having been contested during the last decade (2003-2012).

In the presser about the WSOP APAC, WSOP Executive Director Ty Stewart mentions a desire eventually “to establish the worldwide grand slam of poker,” a statement that suggests the WSOP is already eyeing a fourth destination at which to stage another series of bracelet events.

Took 43 years to get to 1,000 bracelets. At the current clip it’ll take a little over 13 years to get to 2,000, although we may well get there sooner.