A Bitar Taste

Late yesterday PokerStrategy posted a very brief interview with Ray Bitar, one of Full Tilt Poker’s founders and CEO of Tiltware, the site’s software and marketing company. Or its “shell” company, we might more properly say.

Bitar, of course, has become a much-reviled figure in the poker community thanks to his close involvement in the exceedingly poor management of FTP. Indeed, many single him out as a primary fall guy for the site’s many misdeeds, which include activities resulting in the site becoming the target of an indictment and civil complaint by the U.S. Department of Justice in April, further violations resulting in the loss of its license to operate and full shutdown in late June, and its apparent wasting away of the $350 million or so players thought they had in their accounts when the site went dark.

Amid “the rumble” we’ve lately been hearing several calls for Bitar, Howard Lederer, and/or Chris Ferguson to break their collective silence and say something about what happened to their popular online poker site. While Bitar was listed among those initially targeted by the DOJ’s indictment and civil complaint back in April, Lederer and Ferguson’s names were added as well in September to an amended version of the complaint.

It’s not really clear why those calls for these three to speak have become louder over the last few weeks, although I suspect the nearing of the one-year anniversary of Black Friday has something to do with it. I have said before here how I thought the petitions weren’t likely to be answered, as there seemed no reason now for Bitar, Lederer, or Ferguson to say anything at all given their considerable legal problems.

My initial thought, then, on hearing that Bitar had given an interview was to be surprised. Then I read the piece, another “exclusive” that recalls some of those we saw on PokerStrategy last fall when news of the possible purchase of FTP by Groupe Bernard Tapie first arose. I remember surmising then that perhaps FTP was settling some debts with its biggest affiliate by granting such traffic-heightening pieces.

Sort of feels like the same purpose has been served by this Bitar interview, which offers practically nothing of tangible value to FTP players but does certainly generate a lot of hits over on PokerStrategy, a site whose own CEO, Dominik Kofert, was recently voted as the 12th-most powerful person in poker on BLUFF’s Power 20. No slight to Matt Kaufman (he of the witty though now apparently erstwhile Poker Smell comic) who conducted the interview, but it’s pretty obvious there wasn’t much chance Bitar was going to offer much if anything for us to chew on.

Kaufman appeared on PKRGSSP’s show last night to give a little bit of background about the interview. It sounds like Kaufman had been bugging FTP attorneys (including Jeff Ifrah) to get an interview with Bitar and they’d long refused such requests. But this week they had “a change of heart,” saying “they wanted to do something.”

Kaufman did allude to PokerStrategy’s significant affiliate-relationship with FTP as likely not unrelated to the site landing such “exclusives.” The prominence of the news and strategy site outside of the U.S. likely also encourages Full Tilt’s wish to deliver their messages there, since so many of those who could possibly play on a new version of FTP (if it were ever to be relaunched) are likely familiar with PokerStrategy.

So Ifrah requested the interview and asked for questions to be submitted -- which were then vetted -- and answers were emailed back to Kaufman with no chance for follow-ups (obviously). The questions that were chosen were all of a very general nature, asking Bitar why he hasn’t spoken before, what he’s been doing since Black Friday, and “is there anything you would like to say?” And the answers were all very general as well, stating essentially that Bitar still hoped to get players their money, that he also hoped Full Tilt would somehow survive this mess in some form or another, and that he was sorry.

There is a lot of redundancy, too, among the responses. Even though his three answers only total about 450 words, Bitar managed to repeat the declaration that he is working toward getting players paid and keeping Full Tilt Poker alive no less than six times.

Bitar says that he has “been working every single day since Black Friday to ensure players are repaid,” which he calls his “top priority.” His also says his “primary focus has been and continues to be... the repayment of the players and the survival of the company.” And again, he mentions he is “doing everything possible” to make these things happen.

“I spend a good deal of my time making sure that FTP survives and that the players get paid,” Bitar goes on to say. “I continue to work on these issues, day and night until we resolve them,” he adds. And, in case we missed it before, he once more reminds us his “entire focus is on obtaining a successful resolution for the players.”

Alas, it’s hard not to be cynical and call the Bitar interview a weak echo of one of those FTPDoug “updates” that strung us along last spring and summer. Even the phrasing directly recalls those spoonfuls of poorly-conceived PR applesauce in which the mouthpiece informed us time and again that FTP “has worked tirelessly” and are “absolutely committed” and “we have been working around the clock to get this done” and so on. Recall as well how those updates often concluded with statements -- again, like Bitar’s -- that “it has not been easy to stay silent and watch the damage being done to our company brand.”

So while I was surprised Bitar spoke at all, it isn’t that much of a surprise to find him sounding a lot like FTPDoug, since we all knew FTPDoug wasn’t speaking for himself, but just passing along what the higher-ups -- including Bitar -- told him to report. (At least he didn’t repeat another of FTPDoug’s infamous statements -- highlighted by the DOJ in the amended civil complaint in September -- that “your funds remain safe and secure at FTP.”)

Thus, as I say, there’s nothing tangible to take away from Bitar’s bite-sized blurbs. But really, why would we think he’d feed us anything? We already knew the shell game had ended long before. And that there wasn’t a single pea under any of them.

Something for the Short Stacks

Online poker players falling into the “micro” or “low” stakes groups probably noticed a few tourney series happening in March that include events that potentially jibe with our short-stacked budgets.

The one over on the Merge network of sites, called Poker Maximus, started a couple of days ago and features 70 different events over the next three weeks. A lot of these tournaments have small entry fees which encourage those of us with tiny rolls on the sites to participate.

The first Poker Maximus event happened on Sunday, a $10+$1 no-limit hold’em tourney that had a $15,000 guarantee. A total of 5,055 entered, which meant a prize pool of more than $50K, with the winner earning a cool $7,384.85. Looks like there are about 15 more of these $11 buy-in events, as well as a few with smaller buy-ins, too. Meanwhile, other events go as big as $200+$15, with a $500+$30 one at the end.

I’ve mentioned before I do have a little bit of scratch on two Merge sites, Carbon and Hero, having won my rolls there in freebies last year (post-Black Friday). I continue to toil for pennies and nickels on both sites. Occasionally I’ll hover the cursor over my opponents’ avatars to see what countries they are from, and invariably all or nearly all are United States players. Not surprising, given how Americans looking for where to play poker online have so few options.

I’ll probably risk a few bucks here and there to play in a couple of these Poker Maximus events, although I’ll need to be careful not to risk so much as to find myself out on my gluteus maximus should I bust.

Another series even more squarely aimed at the micros is the one recently announced by PokerStars, the MicroMillions (which, sadly, we Yanks cannot play). That one will feature 100 different events with buy-ins ranging from $1 to $22, including a $0.11 rebuy tourney to kick it off.

The Stars series will run from March 15th through March 25th. Here’s the full schedule, if you’re curious. You know they’ll be attracting some monstrous fields -- way, way bigger than the Merge ones -- meaning some decent prize money despite the low buy-ins. There will also be an ongoing leaderboard with the top 100 performers winning additional goodies, including $109 SCOOP tickets (11th-100th), $1,000 SCOOP tickets (2nd-10th), and a full 2013 PCA package for the 1st-place finisher.

This would be the sort of series I would’ve loved to play if it had come around on PokerStars a year earlier. Indeed, just about all of my multi-table tourney play online has been of the low buy-in, big-field variety, which really is one of the cooler things online poker can provide that makes it different from live poker.

Finally, the eighth annual Grand Series of Poker is happening right now over on Betfair Poker, another site unavailable to us Yanks. This one began last week and will be continuing through March 11, and features 18 different events covering a variety of games and buy-ins.

And for the short-stacked types, there is a parallel "Mini-GSOP" happening at the same time in which the same events are playing out in which all of the buy-ins range from $5.50 to $22. My buddy Matthew Pitt is playing all 18 of the events (in both the regular GSOP and the Mini version) and writing about his experiences over on the Betfair Poker blog.

Meanwhile I will have to settle for a few, carefully chosen shots in the Merge series, though, where we Americans play with those additional, vague worries about cashing out should we win. Not to mention the site remaining open to us, period.

Ideas and Execution

Had a most excellent few days with Vera Valmore visiting my father in Florida. Did not play any poker this trip, opting instead to spend time running around with Vera and hanging out with Pop.

I did mostly unplug while we were gone, although I have since managed to catch some of the follow-up regarding last Thursday’s announcement that the Federated Sports + Gaming had declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy and what appear to be much weakened prospects for the Epic Poker League going forward.

As I was saying on Thursday when reflecting briefly about the news, for the EPL to struggle was not unexpected. I think most rational observers felt from the beginning that the league’s chances for success weren’t great. But even the most skeptical seemed to believe the league would at least make it through its initial season of events before talk of closing shop would arise.

I remember early last year when we first heard about the as-yet-unnamed league. I wrote something here titled “A League of Their Own” in which I kind of questioned the whole idea of trying to segregate out poker’s elite to compete exclusively against each other.

I also made a hardly unique comment in that post about the practicality of what the FS+G folks were then describing with regard to the big overlays and $1 million freeroll. “Am wondering a little about the money,” I said, “the securing of which will obviously prove crucial to the league’s survival.”

Yeah, I know. Obvious point is obvious.

The idea of a pro poker league still isn’t necessarily a bad one. Kim over at Infinite Edge has offered what seems to me a smart commentary on how the idea behind the EPL to try to create a professional poker league was in fact a good one -- even “noble” (as he says). But as Kim explains, in this case there existed from the start a disconnect between the theory and the execution.

Rather than create a sports-like league in which players took pride in competing against the best players in the game, the league ended up being all about trying to woo members of a select group into accepting what appeared an opportunity to profit financially (a +EV opportunity). Thus came the big overlays, the $1 million freeroll, and the big buy-ins, too, which would guarantee large prizes to those who succeeded -- all there because it was thought no one would play without such incentives to do so.

Kim suggests how a league might’ve been created with smaller cash prizes, say, with $100K freerolls (no buy-ins) in which the point wasn’t to make a big cash score but to pit the “best against the best... for undisputable honor and a high standing within the poker community.” That is, to play more for the glory, and not so much for the money.

That might not have worked either, of course. Money is, after all, a crucial element to poker -- the game is meaningless without it, some say -- and so it is hard to imagine creating a professional poker league in which money’s significance is somehow diminished (or made meaningless) while still remaining the same game.

So that might’ve struggled or failed, too. But as Kim suggests, it would’ve stayed true to the league’s idea.

Also, it wouldn’t have cost as much.

Power Trip

On a retreat of sorts this weekend, having trucked to Florida with Vera Valmore for a short vacation. Kind of unplugging for a spell, too, if I can manage it. Hoping to recharge the mental battery a bit.

We’ve visited Florida a few times before, usually around this time of year, and have enjoyed ourselves in the past. There’s a dressage competition happening that Vera likes, and during our previous trips I’ve also been able to play some poker in what has become a booming poker state. Now my recently-retired Pop lives down here as well and so we’re staying with him this time.

All of which means I’m mostly off the grid for the next few days, although I did see that new “Power 20” list come trickling over the Twitter transom yesterday via the BLUFF magazine feed.

Last year BLUFF polled more than 100 folks to compile the list which was topped by Full Tilter Howard Lederer (#1) and PokerStars founder Isai Scheinberg (#2). Soon after came the Black Friday indictment and civil complaint, with Lederer having been added to the latter by the U.S. Department of Justice in September. As a result, Lederer has tumbled from this year’s list entirely, while Scheinberg has in fact grabbed the top spot -- just like he’s in the top spot on the DOJ indictment.

This year BLUFF “canvassed 51 poker industry insiders ranging from online operators, casino executives, media, players, agents and other influencers” to vote, asking them to “consider individuals whose influence on the industry and the game is mostly positive.”

That last caveat is kind of curious to consider, actually, with regard to a few of the names who made this year’s list. Indeed, in presenting the list the BLUFF staff can’t resist commenting on U.S. Attorney General Preet Bharara having surprisingly been voted into the fifth spot.

I’ve never been asked to vote for the BLUFF Power 20, although to be honest while I obviously follow the industry and have familiarity with a lot of what’s happening, I don’t feel all that qualified when it comes to judging where “power” in poker truly lies. Indeed, I don’t envy those among my colleagues who have been charged with what is really a difficult task.

It makes sense for such a list to include a preponderance of business execs and “movers and shakers.” And the presence of a few legislators -- and the one law enforcer, mentioned above -- is probably appropriate, too. Interesting, though, to consider there are only three poker players on the list: Daniel Negreanu (#9), Tony G (#11), and Annie Duke (#18).

BLUFF has been compiling Power 20s every year since 2005, and most years around a third of the spots have been occupied by poker pros. Looks like only three players were on the 2009 list, although that year BLUFF included a lot of “entities” like poker sites or “Professional Poker Players” (as a group) on the list. Are players (on the whole) less powerful today than in the past when it comes to having a “mostly positive” influence on the game?

Have a few more thoughts about some of the particular names included of this year’s list -- as well as those left off -- but like I say I’m gonna try to power down myself here, at least for the weekend.

Let’s see now... where’s the off button on this here iPhone?

Epic Limbo

Was set to pen something today regarding what I thought was a well-managed feature in the Village Voice from earlier in the week regarding the plight of full-time American online poker players who’ve found themselves seeking new life paths following Black Friday.

The article by Chris Parker, titled “Online Poker Kings Cashed Out,” stumbles over a few particulars regarding Black Friday and its aftermath, but does a neat job overall profiling several U.S. players who were significantly affected by the shutdown. Probably the most interesting aspect of the article is how most of those to whom Parker spoke don’t really fit the stereotype for online grinders -- i.e., just one is a young (early 20s), unattached male for whom poker replaced college.

There is some discussion in the article, too, about the way Black Friday affected non-players, too, with references to book sellers and those involved with the business of televised poker. No mention in there of the so-called “poker media” and how writers, publishers, website owners, and others were also affected, but the point is nonetheless made that “the feds blew up an entire industry” when they unsealed the indictment and civil complaint last April.

Speaking of the poker media, you no doubt heard yesterday’s news regarding Federated Sports + Gaming, owners of the Epic Poker League, having filed for bankruptcy. That was the news that has sidetracked me from the plan to discuss Parker’s Village Voice in more detail -- let me recommend that article, though, as a relatively good look-in from the mainstream upon our little, struggling poker world.

I’ve mentioned here several times how I’ve been able to contribute to the Epic Poker blog over the last six months or so with a weekly column in which I’ve discussed poker and popular culture, “Community Cards.” Has been great fun to do so, and as others have said with regard to working with the EPL folks I’ve nothing but good things to say about the experience.

Like the league itself, the future of the EPL blog is a bit up in the air at present. While things don’t appear especially rosy right now, the league hasn’t already folded as some of the talk yesterday seemed to suggest. Hard to resist the pull of that “Epic Fail” phrase, though. Heck, I’ve actually got an Epic Fail app on my iPhone that calls up photos from the hilarious website.

In a bit of goofy, grim irony, my last post went up late Tuesday night -- just before the announcement from FS+G -- and was titled “Jeremy Lin, Poker, and the Desire to Be Surprised.”

If you look back at my other CC columns, this last one is a bit more tangential than most when it comes to drawing a connection between poker and popular culture. To be honest I can think of at least a dozen others I like better or would sooner point to as evidence of what the column was about. Can’t help but grin, though, at my having picked up on Chuck Klosterman’s idea that we like surprises -- in fact crave them since so much of our lives seem to be plotted out for us these days.

It was a slight surprise yesterday to hear that FS+G was declaring bankruptcy, although in truth it wasn’t as though the news dropped from the sky like some sort of unexpected bolt of lightning. I think most observers more or less knew the experiment to start a professional poker league with high buy-in events and huge overlays in this uncertain, post-Black Friday world was on shaky ground from the get-go. And the postponement of the fourth Main Event and $1 million freeroll finale (originally scheduled for mid-February) had only increased speculation that the league was far from thriving.

As FS+G Executive Chairman Jeffrey Pollack mentioned in his letter yesterday announcing the Chapter 11 filing, the EPL still plans to stage its fourth tournament series and the championship. Obviously, a failure to stage those events would be grievous given how all who participated in the first three tournament series did so with an expectation of the $1 million freeroll as an additional, potential overlay for them should they qualify for it. Not to mention inspire us all to look back with askance at that disciplinary action delivered by the EPL Standards and Conduct Committee last August against David “Chino” Rheem over his failure to honor his financial obligations.

So once again, we find ourselves in wait-and-see mode, hoping we don't see yet another poker-related story -- like the ones told in that Village Voice feature -- end in disappointment.

Ode to the Middle Man

“Online poker middle man pleads guilty in NYC,” goes the headline. That’s from the Wall Street Journal, reporting on Ryan Lang’s plea in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Lang, of course, was one of the 11 men listed in the DOJ’s “Black Friday” indictment unsealed last April 15, 2011.

With the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 having essentially targeted the “middle man” when it came to U.S. players getting funds to and from online poker sites, Lang worked from Canada to help the sites get around the obstacle, using made-up companies and falsifying statements to facilitate the processing of payments.

The indictment describes Lang as having worked with all three of the targeted “Poker Companies” (PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker/UB). Lang pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit tax fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering, accepting money in connection to Internet gambling, and violating the UIGEA.

Bradley Franzen, a payment processor, entered a plea agreement back in late May 2011, having bargained with prosecutors to cooperate in order to lessen his punishment. Brent Beckley, one of Absolute Poker’s co-founders who directed payments for the site, pleaded guilty to misleading banks in December 2011. And Ira Rubin, another payment processor, entered a plea agreement last month by admitting to some of the conspiracy counts against him.

Like Lang, those three are now all awaiting their sentences. Meanwhile both Chad Elie (another payment processor) and John Campos (part-owner and Vice Chairman of the Board at the now-closed SunFirst Bank in St. George, Utah) are fighting the charges against them and await trial.

That covers of all of the lower tier folks listed in the original indictment. PokerStars’ Isai Scheinberg (founder) and Paul Tate (payment director) continue to help manage the still-booming site as it serves players from around the world. TiltWare/Full Tilt Poker CEO Ray Bitar has been the frequent object of scorn and scrutiny since last spring, but hasn’t been heard from. Neither has Nelson Burtwick who helped direct payments for both Stars and Tilt nor Absolute Poker co-founder Scott Tom.

Like Bodog’s Calvin Ayre, who yesterday joined the list of American-serving online gambling site operators who have been indicted by the U.S. government, those five will likely never be setting foot in the country or anywhere else where extradition agreements might lead to their arrest.

In other words, while the many particulars of the Black Friday indictment -- and, of course, the civil complaint -- will continue to play out, Lang’s guilty plea kind of provides a bookend as far as the original “dirty 11” go. Will still be interesting to see how far Elie and Campos get with their arguments about poker falling outside the scope “unlawful gambling” as they challenge the UIGEA and try to wiggle out of the other counts against them (which from the outside seem even harder to refute).

I think back to October 2006. We all could readily see from reading the UIGEA what the whole “middle man” strategy was about. And some of us pessimistic types quickly realized how it had the potential to work and wreck our favorite game.

But years passed and we became less and less concerned about the middle man. And so we were surprised when he suddenly disappeared, leaving that big, empty, impassable divide between us. He let us down, the middle man. But we miss him just the same.

Bodog Catcher

Nearly a year after the Black Friday indictments -- and a long, long time since the feds first took an interest in Calvin Ayre and his Bodog gambling website -- Bodog’s dot-com domain was seized yesterday by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. And this morning we have learned that Ayre has been indicted for operating an illegal gambling business offering sports betting and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

News of the domain seizure came last night, about two months after Bodog had shuffled everyone over to its new Bovada.lv site where Americans continue to play anonymous poker and bet on sports unimpeded.

It was just a few hours ago that news of the Ayre indictment being unsealed appeared over on Forbes. According to Nathan Vardi, the U.S. Attorney in Baltimore is charging Ayre with having violated Maryland state law by running (with others) his illegal gambling business “from June 2005 to January 2012.” Vardi explains that the indictment also highlights the moving of funds to and from various international accounts as well as “the hiring of media resellers and advertisers to promote Internet gambling.”

The fact that the feds have finally gotten to the point of acting with regard to Ayre and Bodog is noteworthy. Indeed, for a lot of observers one of the early follow-up thoughts regarding the Black Friday indictment and civil complaint targeting PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute/UB was “What about Bodog?”

The feds had seized funds from accounts being used by Bodog way back in 2008, and of course had been watching the site long before that. And even if Bodog was small scale, poker-wise, there was the sports betting. But it took 10-plus more months for any action against Bodog to arrive.

It will be interesting, of course, to see whether or not these moves will preface further efforts by the U.S. government to deal with Bovada’s continued acceptance of U.S. bets, or if their last-minute move back in December will successfully shield the operation from any interruption of service.

Some are responding to the news about Bodog and Ayre with cries of “Merge is next,” although it seems like the fact that Bodog/Bovada has always offered sports betting makes it a different animal than the other, small poker-only sites continuing to serve Americans. The allegations concerning advertising are interesting, too, perhaps having to do with the continued prominence of Bodog’s sportsbook in the U.S. as well as its popularity among American sports bettors.

Merge’s days in the U.S. may well be numbered, especially if any of the cashout procedures being used by the network’s sites make them vulnerable to those conspiracy to commit money laundering and/or bank fraud charges. Recall that alarm sounded Subject:Poker last September that the “DOJ Plans Action Against Merge.” While nothing ever came of that, those whispers that were then loudly relayed apparently emanated from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland, too.

Since this Ayre indictment specifically references sports betting, the only form of online gambling unequivocally covered by the Federal Wire Act according to the DOJ’s revised opinion back in December, I don’t necessarily think this news has too much to do with the current prospects for Merge or other U.S.-facing poker sites. Other than to indicate in a general way what we already knew, namely, that the policing of online gambling continues to be of interest to prosecutors. (For more on the Ayre indictment, see Michael Gentile’s analysis over on PokerFuse.)

Still, even if the status of Merge and the other sites hasn’t changed, it remains tenuous. Maybe Bovada will post a line for us to bet on how long the remaining sites’ will last.

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.

To Sum Up

Among the writing assignments I have today is one involving the novel I’m working on, the first draft of which I have completed.

There’s still a way to go on this sucker, with much revising to do as well as a few additional scenes to include. But I’ve written the first version of the last chapter, which is satisfying in its own right.

My assignment today is to write a 50-word synopsis of the book, a “pitch” such as I might include in a query letter soliciting an agent or in other contexts. Not an easy thing to do, although I think I have a good idea of how I’m going to say it. My first novel, Same Difference, was just over 100,000 words long. This one will be shorter, but getting it all down to two or three sentences remains a challenge.

I’m unsure at the moment how I plan to go about publishing this one. I may not even get to the stage of trying to get an agent -- I didn’t use one for the first novel -- and even if I do, I may or may not be trying to get one via the query letter route. But I think it’s still a good exercise to try to boil it all down to a quick, understandable synopsis. In fact, I can tell already it will be a useful exercise when it comes to the revising, having focused my thoughts a bit more sharply regarding what the novel is really about.

When it comes to writing well, summarizing is often an underrated skill. Just about every kind of writing requires a least some form of summary, and a lot of times it takes more creative muscle to grasp the “gist” of something that has already been written than to write something wholly new or original.

A lot of people reading this site probably frequent other poker-related sites where summaries of the day’s news are regularly posted. You know, like PokerNews’ “Nightly Turbo,” the “Daily Rewind” at PokerStrategy, BLUFF Magazine’s “The Week That Was” and the like. Michael Gentile’s “This Week in Poker Podcasts” for PokerFuse can be listed, too, as an another example of the form.

Barry Carter recently wrote about these “news in brief”-type articles amid that series of posts about poker media I was recommending a while back. Such articles may appear relatively simple to pull together, but often require a lot of effort to be done effectively, with some of the hardest decisions being of the editorial variety where one has to be judicious when selecting what to include and what to leave out.

Of course, summarizing your own stuff presents a different challenge, too, since even great writers often have occasional blind spots when it comes to reading and evaluating their own work. But like I say, it can be a useful -- even enlightening -- exercise for a writer.

Here... for practice I’ll try boiling down this 500-word post to 10:

While summarizing his novel, Shamus procrastinates by writing about summarizing.

Daniel Damns, Doyle Defends

One of the topics Jeff “PKRGSSP” Walsh and I discussed briefly on his podcast Tuesday night was the recent spate of commentary from top pros regarding Full Tilt Poker, specifically Daniel Negreanu’s video blog from last week (which I wrote briefly about here) and Doyle Brunson’s response-slash-commentary posted on his blog on Monday (see the 2/20/12 entry). Since then Negreanu has posted another video blog in which he talks further about FTP as well as Brunson’s post.

I’m not going to summarize all of the back-and-forthing going on, nor am I going to rehearse the short conversation PKRGSSP and I had about it. But I did want to chime in with a few thoughts both about Brunson’s post and Negreanu’s rejoinder.

If you’ve read Brunson’s post you saw him acknowledging those who ran FTP to be guilty of “gross negligence and terrible mismanagement,” though ultimately defending Howard Lederer and Chris Ferguson against the charge that they knowingly committed fraudulent actions. Instead Brunson -- who interestingly includes scans of the handwritten pages from which his posts are transcribed (a latter-day testament to the authority of the written word?) -- mostly blames CEO Ray Bitar for all that has happened. Brunson refers to Bitar as “an unknown person to the poker world,” kind of like an outsider who wandered into an Old West town and was given an unreasonable amount of authority regarding those who call it home.

There’s a lot of imprecision in Brunson’s post regarding the facts of the case. “Exactly how FT lost their cash is not clear to me,” he says. “Something about processors, electronic checks they couldn’t cash, etc.” This despite earlier professing some inside knowledge thanks his close relationship with Jack Binion who for a time was considering buying the beleaguered site.

These hand-waving, vague allusions to the “something” that happened at Full Tilt Poker don’t do much to bolster Brunson’s credibility on the matter, but they do fall in line with his general defense of Lederer and Ferguson as being out of their element as businessmen. “The bottom line was they were poker players, not corporate executives,” says Brunson, suggesting that as such they might be forgiven for transgressions occurring under their watch.

I can’t help but recall the succession of stories Brunson tells regarding his own failed business ventures in The Godfather of Poker, a few of which saw him and the late David “Chip” Reese losing money time and again on what Brunson calls “crazy schemes.” In other words, while his defense of Lederer and Ferguson partly stems from his friendships with the two (especially Lederer), I think it also comes from the fact that Brunson has been in a similar situation many times -- that is, being a poker player who found himself in over his head when trying to prevent a business venture from failing.

Of course, none of those “crazy schemes” Brunson describes in his book appear to have hurt others like the one Full Tilt Poker did. Significantly.

In his video response to Brunson’s post, Negreanu draws an interesting parallel between Brunson’s defense of Lederer/Ferguson and Barry Greenstein’s statements about Russ Hamilton during the early days of the UltimateBet scandal back in the summer of 2008. In that case, Hamilton had already apparently been advised by lawyers not to speak (or so he said), but had a two-hour meeting with Greenstein which the latter then reported in summary fashion on the old PokerRoad podcast.

I don’t believe Greenstein went as far as to say he thought Hamilton was innocent. Nor do I recall any suggestion that the now-disgraced 1994 WSOP Main Event champion looked Greenstein “dead in the eye” and said he wasn’t aware of the cheating or any other wrongdoing (as Lederer apparently did with Brunson when asked “about the financial problems”). But Greenstein did say he wanted to believe Hamilton, and also in an indirect way indicated he thought Hamilton perhaps wasn’t as guilty as some believed by saying he thought Hamilton knew the guilty party or parties. (See here for more on that Greenstein-Hamilton meeting.)

I think it is safe to say now that Greenstein was somewhat off-the-mark in his assessment of Hamilton. And while the parallel isn’t perfect I think Negreanu’s reference to it makes some sense in this context, especially given how Brunson’s defense similarly evokes the relative knowledge of the accused.

Negreanu also correctly brings up how the site continued to accept deposits from non-U.S. players after Black Friday (up until the end of June when the Alderney Gambling Control Commission suspended their license to operate). In the Department of Justice’s September 2011 amendment to the civil complaint, we see how Lederer was reporting “to others at Full Tilt Poker that there was only approximately $6 million left, and therefore no realistic ability to repay its new depositors.” In other words, Negreanu appears correct to point out that Lederer certainly knew something “about the financial problems” post-Black Friday (and of course likely knew things weren’t hunky dory before April 15, too).

To this point I would add what the amended complaint also alleges, namely how Full Tilt Poker continued right through the summer -- even after the site went down -- to claim repeatedly to all who asked that their “funds were safe and secure.” This, too, should go into the category of the numerous ethical failures on the part of Lederer et al., namely, to have allowed such reassurances to have been made when they certainly were false.

Brunson has already indicated he intends to follow up his post with more on the matter, so the dialogue between him and Negreanu will no doubt continue. As I said on PKRGSSP’s show, I think it is generally a good thing that these two are letting us know their thoughts on the issue given the prominent standing of both in the poker community. Their opinions matter, and will influence how others among us think about the situation going forward.

Ultimately, though, we’re still just dealing with the court of public opinion here, where the only real consequence is going to be the affecting of attitudes. We can and should keep talking about all this. But as far as resolution or reparation goes, for that we remain reliant on others.