When I saw the Day 1A of the WSOP main event on ESPN last week something bothered me. Yeah, sure Norman Chad and the gang were beating on Scotty Nguyen again for his H.O.R.S.E. behavior. Norman (using my worst Chad voice): "That event is over, give it a rest, along with your tired ex-wife, dead-on-arrival, no longer funny, non-jokes."
But it was more than that, something just did not seem right about the "Scotty" aspect of the telecast. So I did some snooping and discovered; lo and behold that ESPN is not simply reporting the World Series of Poker; they are, in fact, creating coverage of events that did not actually happen.
How so you ask?
Well during that episode they have an interview with Scotty, which on its surface appears to be an explanation of his behavior during the $50K H.O.R.S.E. final table. Scotty talks about being pushed around by other players and needing to stand up for himself at the table and fight back or something to that effect. When they cut back to the coverage, Norman Chad says: "That didn't sound like much of an apology."
Well, there is a reason for that. A reason Norman and all the ESPN production staff know but chose not to reveal to the viewers. That particular interview with Scotty Nguyen was shot before the H.O.R.S.E. tournament. Scotty is not talking about his behavior during that event but, in fact, is referring to his play in last year's main event when he imploded and missed the final table. Some judicious and completely prejudicial editing makes it appear that Scotty is talking about the H.O.R.S.E. tournament from this year.
It didn't sound like an apology because it wasn't. Congratulations to ESPN for turning their coverage into something that Jerry Springer would be proud to air, since it fits his show's current tagline so well: "An hour of your life, you will never get back." Or perhaps the ESPN producers just misunderstood the famous Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce line:
"What doesn't happen in Vegas, doesn't have to stay in Vegas when it will sell some beer."
There is a battle coming over player conduct at the poker table. This all started before Scotty Nguyen's drunken performance during the WSOP H.O.R.S.E. event. But I want to go on record right now and say: "Enough is Enough!"
Now you might be thinking, well the Poker Shrink is going to wail on Scotty and Phil and Mike and Sheiky and Hevad for their behavior at the tables. Wrong! I am completely opposed to the politically correct lynch mob that wants to turn poker into a tea party. Don't kid yourself for a moment that is precisely what some moralistic busybodies are trying to do.
Now should Scotty have been reined in by the WSOP staff during the $50K H.O.R.S.E. event; well, of course. But they did nothing and as I have said before that is not the fault of the Assistant Tournament Director running that final table. All evidence in the past at WSOP events is that "some players" get a pass on the rules because quite frankly, it makes for good TV. Right now the WSOP is writing new rules for player conduct. I hope they don't go too far. I have written to Jeffery Pollack, Jack Effel and Ty Stewart with my opinion on this matter but I am sure they are hearing from many sources.
If you want to see what I mean by "going too far" take a few minutes to read the World Poker Association Code of Ethics. Tell me after reading those rules that you don't feel like some romantic poetry or perhaps a long walk on the beach at sunset.
The problem with giving any group of individuals the power to make laws is that they will invariably make laws, whether they are needed or not. Do you want the goody two-shoes of the world running poker? I don't.
Should there be rules for player conduct? Well, of course there should. But the key in my opinion is the enforcement at the tables and that must include a clear, unmistakable warning system. I have suggested that something like the "yellow card" in soccer. You see when the yellow card is shown, the referee requires that the player acknowledge the warning. They know they have been warned. Let my give you a recent example of the current fuzzy rules.
Phil Hellmuth was given a one round penalty at the end of play on Day Five in this year's WSOP main event. As you know that penalty was rescinded before Day Six began. Now, I was there for that incident and I can tell you that no penalty should have been given. Why? Was Phil not out of line? No, he definitely was. However, Phil has been warned many times in the past and never, repeat never given a penalty. Why would he think the warning meant anything different this time. Secondly, when he finally given the penalty, Phil looked at the Tournament Director and said: "You think they put my on the television table to be quiet?" Of all the lines I have ever heard Phil deliver that was the most telling. Phil is a draw, they want him to be Phil and yet at some point they decided it was what? Too much Phil? How is he supposed to know where that line is? So in this case, based on the rules as they now stand, I completely agree with the penalty being rescinded.
You want rules, fine; how about we let poker players decide on what is and is not a good rule. The F-Bomb has been modified and now, in theory, is only, enforced if you direct the expletive at a player or staff person. The old 100% ban was just not well thought out and fortunately has been changed. However, a floor may, at any time, warn a player that their language is out of line and must stop or they will receive a penalty. Either of those clauses could have and should have been invoked in the case of Scotty Nguyen; they were not. So why should Scotty change his behavior, it made for great TV and no one told him to stop.
Now, wait you say, why shouldn't we have stricter rules to keep the poker table civil and friendly. The simple reason is that people making rules just don't know when to stop. Don't believe me. Here is another "rule" from the World Poker Association. WPA Rule #13. TV Final Table Clothing: Collared shirts and/or sports jackets are required for men; smart casual clothing for women. And let's make sure everyone has a manicure, you know all those close up shots of a player's hands; heaven forbid someone has excess cuticle.
 ESPN showed the 2008 WSOP $50K H.O.R.S.E. event for the first time yesterday. If you haven't seen it, there is a lot of controversy about the conduct of several of the players at this prestigious final table; most notable the talk is about eventual champion Scotty Nguyen. Here are just a few points to be considered when watching the event on television or pondering the state of poker as viewed through the lens of this tournament.
Most of the conversation centers around whether Scotty Nguyen was drunk, abusive and/or an ambassador for poker and a role model for the kids. Quite frankly, it is the opinion of this writer that anyone who pays $50,000 to enter a poker tournament can act any way they want. But beyond that there are some real issues:
ESPN gets to present the "facts" of any final table in any way their editing capabilities allow. This final table lasted nearly 15 hours and ended at 5 A.M. ESPN chose to focus on the bad behavior of several players at the final table. Their choice, they paid for the television rights.
PokerNews.com, who have the exclusive rights to get in close and report all of the WSOP final tables, made a decision to not report any of the player interaction in their live internet reporting. Again, a decision based on access.
Was Scotty drunk? I don't know, I couldn't get close enough to get a blood sample.
Does Scotty use his "alleged" drinking to verbally abuse players and put them on tilt? Duh! Yes and if Michael DeMichelle did not know that before the final table, he was simply unprepared to play at this level.
Did DeMichelle get out of line with this celebration after winning some early hands? Yes, but nearly everyone blamed that on his youth. Seems the poker world has agreed that "kids" get to be jerks until they are 25.
Did Scotty use Demichelle's behavior to try and tilt him? Again, yes; this is poker folks, if you can get an edge you do it.
Was Erick Lindgren the hero for his good behavior when they got down to the nasty stuff with three players remaining? No, that was his way of taking advantage of the situation. Any edge, any time; again its poker.
Should the WSOP staff have done something to modify Scotty's behavior? Look what happened a few weeks later when they tried to reign in Phil Hellmuth, the penalty was overruled by higher ups. The floor staff know which players get a 'bye' when it comes to rule enforcement.
It is clear that this was good television. Good for poker? Who knows? But it was good TV and afterall, despite all of the lip service to etiquette and good manners; eyeballs on the tube are what poker needs these days.
 First and foremost, congratulations to Scotty Nguyen for taking down the $50,000 H.O.R.S.E. and being the first player to hold the Chip Reese trophy. Scotty has an amazing track record over nearly 20 years of playing poker. His record, of course, includes the 1998 World Series of Poker main event championship and tournament earnings approaching Ten Million Dollars. Now Scotty adds to his legend, taking down the most prestigious tournament in professional poker.
But like so many great careers there is a dark side to Scotty's, one episode of which took place last summer at the 2007 WSOP main event. With twelve players remaining in the hunt for the final table nine, Scotty Nguyen was the chipleader and, as we all know, he did not make the final table. That crash and burn troubled Scotty for many months and will probably never be forgotten in poker lore.
Fast forward to this summer, the very next World Series of Poker main event and add to the mixture: the delayed final table. Combine these two events and I offered to you the "Scotty Nguyen Syndrome".
Syndrome: a predictable, characteristic pattern of behavior, action, etc., that tends to occur under certain circumstances
I don't know when it will hit and it will not affect all players at the same moment but somewhere around 18 players or 27 players; maybe even as high as 36 or even 45 players for some, it will appear. This is not just the World Series of Poker Final Table, no this is the "November Nine", the "Fall Final".
And as sure as it will be 108 degrees in Las Vegas, each an every player who survives to Day Six on July 13th and certainly to Day Seven on July 14th, each of those players will experience the "Scotty Nguyen Syndrome".
To get that close to four months of publicity and interviews and endorsements and fame and potential fortune and who knows what else... The "SNS" is going to massively effect play whenever it sets in. Players will get tight, really tight; decisions will take longer, a lot longer; tempers will shorten, in some cases really, really shorten; table talk, hand winning celebrations and anything resembling angle shooting will be scrutinized, analyzed and penalized? Floor decisions will be magnified out of all proportion, imagine giving a player a two round penalty on the bubble!
The final table bubble itself will be much bigger, extending out to at least 27 players. The media coverage will be more intense and more critical than ever before. And the players...? Well the players will not be themselves because they will be playing under the influence of the "Scotty Nguyen Syndrome".
Rumor has it that Corona will lessen but not alleviate the symptoms of the syndrome but there is a rebound effect if you excede a twelve pak in less than two full tournament levels. Perhaps Harrah's should supply extra massage staff for the final four tables or just rig cold showers above the tables like they do in hazardous material labs. And people say poker is not a sport.....
|
|
