The WSOP is over, at least for me. I went out early on Day 3 with AK vs KQ. It’s extremely painful to get knocked out of the ME, and I always say I’m done with poker for a while. Then, after a day or so, I get interested in seeing it play out. I am enjoying watching on ESPN and Pokergo. I like the live broadcasts much better than the edited, delayed versions of past years. I rarely even watched the ESPN canned shows in the fall, but I’m glued to the live play.
In my last blog I posted about one of my favorite stories from the ME. Here’s a link to another. Stories like these are why the buy-in shouldn’t be raised.
The WSOP ME is a poker spectacle. It’s very entertaining for spectators and great exposure for the game. It isn’t designed to identify the best player in the world. It’s hard for any single event to do that, as there’s much luck in tournament poker. The closest thing is the 50k Players Championship, which is too expensive to attract a giant field, and tests the best players in multiple games over five days.
I said in an earlier blog that the switch from the “live stream” of past years to the pay service Pokergo was fine, but as the series went on I changed my opinion. In past years, many more events were shown, including some of the limit and mixed-game events, albeit without hole cards or announcers. This year on Pokergo the selection was limited, not even showing the Poker Players Championship, the final table of which was played on a side table in the Amazon Room. The live stream was one of my favorite things about the WSOP, and I’m saddened to see it go.
The WSOP is 6+ weeks of very long stressful poker. The best part, at least for me, is that it’s the only time of year when I get to play big buy-in events in games other than no-limit hold ’em. With all the stalling and staring and overall stress of the NL events, not to mention that there are hordes of very good NL tournament players now, the off-game and mixed-game events are like a vacation. The games are more fun, there’s a lot more loose conversation, many of the players are closer to my age, and the overall level of skill is much lower.
At age 63, playing a full schedule at the WSOP gets tougher and tougher. It’s a pleasure each year to see players I’ve played against for many years, but the number of my contemporaries shrinks every year. Even with the accelerated structures implemented in the past few years, events routinely last three full days and often require a fourth to finish. The ME is 10 extremely long and hard days. In 2009, when I finished 34th, on both Days 4 and 5, players busted so fast that we were sent home for the day before the dinner break. It was a huge break for me, as I was physically lagging. Those were the days of maniacal pre-flop raising wars, which sped things up. The modern style leans to much less pre-flop aggression in favor of seeing more flops. This means longer hands, and slower bust-outs. This year, on Day 3 it took around 14 hours of play, instead of the scheduled 10, to reach the money. On Days 4 and 5, they played an extra hour to stay on schedule. The ME is a marathon and being young is a big edge.
If it sounds like a form of physical and mental torture to fight the Vegas heat to get to the Rio and play 12+ hours day after day, it is. But, at least for me, the WSOP has been a huge part of my life, and it’s the only thing that still gets my poker juices flowing. Getting deep in a WSOP event is tremendously exciting. A lot of amateur or young players fantasize about making a WSOP final table. I’ve been there 11 times, and I still dream of getting back, not to mention winning another bracelet. There’s nothing like it in poker.
I played very hard during the WSOP and feel like I played well. When I got my chips in, I had the best of it most of the time. But, there’s a lot of luck in tournament poker, and it didn’t go my way this time. I’ve done this for a while, and I understand that bad beats are part of the game. The problem is that I’m approaching the point where I physically won’t be able to do it anymore. That will be the real bad beat.
Never miss another post
I hate to hear that your Main Event run is over. It seems like you had an admirable run in this years series.
It’s just such a shame that CET exploits the allure of the event with their huge rakes out of the tournament pools and also, their general ripoffs associated with the event, like “special WSOP rates” of $349 a night and $7.50 hot dogs in the tournament area. Benny Binion used to put out a free, lavish buffet spread for the tournament players. But he had class. CET doesn’t know the meaning of the concept.
Anyway, condolences on your getting busted out. The only time I ever played, I got knocked out on Day 2 because I had the temerity to try to defeat a mighty Q2 offsuit with a mere pair of Queens. Tournament play is mostly luck (99.8%), and buying 10,000 lottery tickets would be a better deal and would last longer if you scratched them off slowly.
Knocked out with a mighty Q2 offsuit? Wow. Don’t tell me you let him limp in with Q2 offsuit pre-flop when you had QQ. So did you lose to a set of 2’s, a wheel, an unlikely flush, or did he simply straighten you out with a straight to the 6?
Sorry to hear you got knocked out fairly early but it sounds like you still had a great time. I watched the video on the provided link and while it doesn’t change my overall opinion of the main event, it is a beautiful and touching story. If they are going to continue to keep the buy-in very affordable for the masses then of course being able to fulfill those types of dreams is certainly one of the upsides.
I read this morning an article online about a poker player who is charged with murder winning over $100,000 in the main event. In the article it was mentioned that the $10,000 buy-in will be deducted from his winnings. The obvious implication being that he did not post the buy-in ahead of time. Is this possible or was it simply a poor and inaccurate choice of words by the author?
Few non-gambling writers understand how gambling works. Nobody plays w/o posting the 10k.
I just saw something that defines why the WSOP Main Event is so great for good players:
With 15 players left, the English amateur, 64-year-old John Hesp flopped a set of jacks vs the chips leader’s AJ. On the river, with a board of something like J8642, where a straight was almost impossible, Hesp checked the river last to act!
I saw things like this all the way through:
-On Day 1, two amateurs were in a pot, with a board of T842J. The player in 1st position had QQ and bet all streets. His opponent, with a set of tens, just called every street!
-Same players, 1st had KK this time. The board read J6789. 2nd had tens again and just called the river!
-On Day 2, on a board of Q864 rainbow, a player check called the turn with 7-5, and checked the river on a blank.
In every case, the player who could have won a huge pot was very happy to drag a small one. Gotta love the ME!
No, he raised preflop, I reraised, then he went all in. At that point, I was pot-committed, so even though I thought I might be up against AA or KK, I had to call. Imagine my relief when he turned over Q2. Imagine my horror when the flop came K22.
That’s why the WSOP is a farce. I paid $1500 (I think; it was something like that) to ultimately lose as an 11-1 favorite to a complete moron. Blair mentions some of the ridiculous things he saw during the ME. They’re not so amusing when Kentucky Chuckie from Trump Land calls a raise with 96 SOOOTED and cracks your Aces. Tournament poker is NOT a game of skill. If you think it is, well…Jerry Yang and Jamie Gold. I rest my case.
Your mistake is that you overvalued your hand in the first place. Queens is not that great a hand and should be treated as any other pocket pair that is not kings or aces. Would you have reraised with pocket 9’s or 7’s? Probably not.
Ironically, if you would have simply called his initial raise then, while you wouldn’t have thought much of the two deuces, the king would have slowed you down and probably made you fold if he showed any aggression. You would have had to put him on a AK or better at that point.
Ultimately, you would have made right decision albeit for the wrong reason. Then he would have complained that he didn’t get paid off because you got lucky by seeing a king on the flop.
QQ is a reraising hand in almost any context. The first raiser’s range is usually something like 99-AA, KQ, AJ/AQ/AK. QQ is beating roughly 80% of that range. Cold-calling a raise with QQ is silly. It can also get you snapped off when someone at the lower end of the range, who would have folded to your reraise, catches an A or K on the flop. You’re making a fundamental error in equating QQ with lower pairs. It is a hand that unlike the smaller pairs, can often win without improvement. Also, if you wait until you have KK or AA to make a three-bet, you will be transparently readable.
Live by the book; die by the book. Critical thinking, my friend, that’s what wins tournaments.
I was in a tournament in early position with QQ and put in a reasonable raise only to get reraised by a player who in turn got reraised by someone who went all-in. Sure I sensed I might have been ahead at that point but I also knew that one or both of those players had an ace or a king or with five cards to come even a ragged bluff hand could easily hit. When considering the luck that so many players like to talk about, I decided not to risk my whole stack so I folded. One guy had JJ and the other, who went all-in first, had an ace. Sure enough, Greenstein’s proverbial played out (ace on the river) and JJ was out of tourney. I ignored the math and in turn decided that trying to “manage” the luck made much more sense.
A few more points:
Tony Gee has talked about QQ being a mediocre hand and most players overvalue it.
Angel Largay in his book No Limit Texas Hold’em: A Complete Course recommends QQ being played like any other lower pocket pair.
Jennifer Harmon and Phil Ivey both have talked about how though it’s important to know the math they attribute their success to having a strong feel for the game.
I’m pulling for old man Hesp to win, but at the same time I would also like to see that odd ball Dan Ott win. I would like to see a perceived underdog win. While Hesp should have bet that set of jacks on the river, his opponent would have more than likely called a bet that was at least half the pot size or 3/4 of the pot. AJ had enough showdown value to call and Hesp should have fired off a bet, big mistake.
It’s funny that you posted those examples of a few hands that you seen get played out at the ME. The other day I seen a guy miss play pocket AA pre-flop in the worst way possible. I had pocket tens in early position and raised to $300, player to my left calls, pocket AA just called, player to his immediate left raised to $800, lady to his left calls, I call, player to my left calls 800, and the guy with pocket AA just calls!!! Pocket AA bet the flop to where it was him and the $800 raiser heads up, they fire off small bets in relation to the pot size until the river and then pocket AA goes all-in, his opponent folded and the winner flipped over pocket AA like he did a smart thing. The way Mr. Pocket AA played the hand I realized that when he picks up a big pocket pair, he wants as many people in the pot with him that are willing to play. The guy is an idiot.
“Tournament poker is NOT a game of skill.”
I hope you know that’s nonsense. The proportion of amateurs that make it to the final tables is small compared to their presence in the tournaments.
Well Kevin just remember this, it isn’t over until the last card is dealt. I don’t know where you or your opponent were chip stack wise or what the blinds were but for someone to raise you all-in with Q2 offsuit I would have to guess that your chip stack wasn’t that big for someone to push you around like that. I still believe that it takes a degree of skill to win at tournament poker and think you are wrong in your assessment of tournament poker.
You said you paid $1500? $1500 for what? You were alluding to in your initial response that you entered the ME, so did you or did you not enter the ME in the past?
The WSOP is just a corporation. I don’t like some of the WSOP’s rules. Some of the rules they should change.
This year the percentage is roughly 12%. Do you think more than 12% were in the tournament overall?
In order to justify coughing up a 12% rake, you have to anticipate (logically) a ROI of 12% on your 10K investment. That would in turn imply that your EV is +(1.12 x entry fee) on that bet (the entry fee). Even at that point, it would be a matter of indifference whether you entered the event or not. Add in the overhead–transportation, overpriced rooms and food, etc.–and your actual investment is much greater The only way you could justify fading that amount would be if you were truly and meaningfully superior to the average player in the field. I doubt that that is the case for the majority of players who bleat about all that dead money out there.
Plus, whatever +EV a player might have is drowned in variance. Consider that 80% of the players who prove their above-averageness by results (i.e., surviving until 50% of the field is eliminated) don’t win a dime. And proving yourself better than 90% of the entrants gets you—your money back, basically. So the only way you actually realize that +EV that you believe you have is to finish in the top, say, 0.5% of entrants. Along the way, you have to win coin flips–over and over–without losing one, or at least not a significant one.
If tournament poker was a game of skill, you’d see the same few names at the final table over and over, given that the length of the event should theoretically smooth out the skill factor. Similarly, you would never have seen Jamie Gold or Jerry Yang–or Chris Moneymaker for that matter–win the ME if it was a game of skill. Sheer blind, dumb, random, capricious luck determines the results. Sure, skill is a TINY factor, to the extent that, say, a runner’s brand of socks affects how well he does in a track meet. But in the long run, we’d all save time if everybody threw their $10K in the pot, CET took its piece, and then everybody drew marbles for the rest. In that way, tournament poker is very much like bingo.
On day 2 of the Main Event final table late in the game Scott Blumstein and Dan Ott got into a hand where Ott had a straight to the King when the river card was dealt (I believe there was a strait to the King on the board), Blumstein had the Ace to give him a broadway straight and the nut. Blumstein bet $18.6 million on the river to where Ott thinks about it for awhile. After Blumstein bet that $18.6 million I was watching Benjamin Pollack and he made a gesture like he was getting tired of Ott wasting time because it seemed like Pollack knew Blumstein was betting the nut straight with the Ace on the river. During that moment Benjamin Pollack nonchalantly flipped Ott the bird with his left hand. I seen it! I believe Pollack was getting frustrated with the slow play and Hollywood as Esfandiari likes to call it. It was a routine fold by Ott, which of course he did not call Blumstein’s bet. Pollack flipped Ott the bird and I don’t think Ott caught it. That was the first time that I’ve seen a player flip the bird to another player on TV. Pollack tried to be slick about it but I seen it.
Funny how this year they decided to continually highlight the quality of the dealers; interviewing supposedly the best dealer of the group and then having the announcers bring up more than a few times how the best of the best are chosen for the main event. Ironically, twice there was a payoff discrepancy, and chips had to be recounted, and another time the dealer pushed the pot to the wrong player.
Blair, now that the Main Event has concluded do you have any thoughts to share about how this years final table played out?
Wow. Final table being played with glacial slowness. People getting eliminated by three- and four-outers. Everyone going into the tank for five minutes even when the decision is trivial. This final table made for great TV–like watching someone iron a t-shirt. Or a burial insurance commercial.
It’s ridiculous how top-heavy the prize structure is. The winner gets eight times the amount the #9 player does, even though the two players have outlasted virtually the same number of people. For that matter, finishing in the top 10% should get you more than your money back + a pittance. But of course, CET has to trumpet the big big big big big first prize–the only number people notice. But the top-heavy and unfair prize structure reinforces the fact that the Main Event is not a game of skill.
Working on a blog on it. BTW, the rake on the ME is 6%—4.2% to the house and 1.8% to the staff. You can check the rake on any event by going to wsop.com, click on the schedule, then click on the structure for the event in question.
Where is everyone getting 12%? The structure sheet says 6% for the ME — “4.2% of total entry pool withheld for entry fees. 1.8% withheld for tournament dealers & staff.” Blair played it and agrees.