Kind of a Big Heel

Tweet

Via HardBoiled Poker 

Funny how even without Twitter or FB, the most trivial of poker brouhahas can still find itself on your radar.

Someone sent me a link to this particular part of the 2+2 thread and while I have no way of knowing whether or not it's a photoshopped pic, it sure made me laugh.

Aye, pobrecita...

As Jerry Maguire said, we live in a cynical world. A cynical, cynical world. And it's only getting cynical-er. Not a word, but you know what I mean.

Social media is great, but it is of no help when it comes to defeating cynicism. Instead, it's a great breeder for same. This post is an excellent example. Le sigh.

Point is, there are no heroes in poker. Just as there are no heroes in the real world (or are there?). For under the white hot microscope of the interwebz, we are all burnt up in its searing, probing, privacy invading light.

Crap is King

Tweet

It's easy to throw punches when someone's already down. It's easy to call people names when you know with almost near-certainty they're not going to, or can't, say anything in return. It's easier to point a finger than it is to look in the mirror. KnowImSayn?

I should probably just stop here and link to Jesse May's September 2011 Feel the Shame post, because he, as an insider, says it all so much better. But, I won't, because there are some things I just don't get and, well, yes - it's easy to sit behind a screen and give an opinion that no one gives two shits about.

Also - and let's be clear - I'm not a poker pro and I didn't have anywhere near $35k+ stuck on FullTilt. I did lose money in their tits up fiasco, but I'm just one of thousands of players to which that happened. I guess you could say I'm one of those players all you pros WANT in the online game because, on average, I'm donating money more often than I'm withdrawing it (or I was...). So before you go dogging me for this viewpoint, just recognize that without people like me in the game - all you're doing is shuffling money back and forth between the pros among you.

In reading the back and forth between Matt Glantz, Daniel Negreanu, and Doyle Brunson, I pick up on what I think is a real generational gap between perspectives. But first, let's point out - the only person of these three still wearing a "patch" from/for an online real money poker site is Negreanu.* And while it's certainly fair to say that in the grand scheme of things, PokerStars handled things a kajillion times better than all the rest of the online players, the fact of the matter is that they, too, are still under indictment by the DOJ for their activities in the US pre-Black Friday. Just like American players flocked to FT because of players like Ivey, Durr, and Jesus, they clamored, too, to PokerStars** in part because of players like Negreanu. I know I did.

But back to this generational gap perspective. In Doyle's time out on the road in back alley games, cheats were handled differently than they are today. Poker, and how one made a living at it, was a much different ballgame then than it is today. So while I get Negreanu's anger and his use of language harking back to those old-time methods for handling cheats ("baseball bat to the nuts", etc), it's just rhetoric, because that method cannot fly in today's multi-billion dollar industry. It plays to the justifiably angry masses, but it's just theater and nothing more.

As the epitome of much of what's right in today's industry, after all he's a product of today's game, Negreanu likely gets this better than anyone. Sure, he's the Regent of Real Talk, but he's also an accomplished player and, as he puts it in his most recent vlog, able to cast stones because he is without sin. I hope that will always be the case, but I ain't holding my breath because I'm from Texas and I know it's a long snake that doesn't turn.

A while back, I took Bill Rini to task for his Who's to Blame for Black Friday post, in which he articulately opined that "players, journalists, employees of the poker rooms, site owners, affiliates, regulators, or whatever" (all of us) were to blame because "we didn’t demand better. We didn’t demand more transparency. We didn’t ask the right questions." I argued then that it wasn't fair to lay blame at the players' feet for a multitude of reasons. In looking back, especially in light of these recent questions/vlogs/blogs from Glantz and Doyle and Negreanu, as well as re-reading Rini's post - and May's -  I have to say I now think he's right. I think I made some good points, initially, as to why I didn't think it was fair to blame players - and some of that still holds true - but all of Black Friday and the total FT meltdown has disabused me of any future naivete when it comes to online poker. When it comes back around, I'm going to - we're all going to - have to do our homework if we elect to get back into the game.

And that's what irks me about these bat to the balls vlogs from Negreanu, and some of the posts from others, insiders, piling on the bash FT bandwagon. The derision is absolutely warranted, people, I get that 100%.

But what good does it do us AFTER THE FACT to have blogs asking the indicted to answer questions the answers to which would likely be direct admissions against interest, or encourage bats to the balls?

Instead of piling on the rightfully persecuted (and soon to be prosecuted), why not come with some ideas? Some possible solutions?

Here are some for free -

Instead of bitching at the cowards in hiding, why not band together as insiders and pros and players to demand that the prosecutors (the DOJ) start answering some questions? They started this mess. Does the PPA have any leverage or not? Does the poker industry have any lobbyists or not? Do the pros and players have any balls or not?

Which one of you insiders or long-time paid poker bloggers/journalists or paid poker lobbyists or paid PPA members or sponsored poker pros or poker regulators is drafting - right now - the Poker Player's Bill of Rights (akin to the Patient's Bill of Rights) or creating a Player Advocate Foundation for when online poker comes back around (to the US) to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?...Bueller?...Bueller?

Aren't these the type of questions we should really be asking?

I'm disgusted. We're all disgusted. But it's too easy to sit back, after the fact, and cast stones and bitch and say woulda coulda shoulda.

It's much harder to actually do something...to come with solutions and ideas that actually create change and/or get something done.

I'm not an insider, and I certainly have no clout, but I'm willing to help and would be glad to work with any other like minded individuals on solutions. But if all you're gonna do is sit there and point fingers, call names, throw stones, or ask for answers to questions that no sane indicted person would ever answer, you're not part of the solution. You're part of the problem.

***

* Glantz appears to be a sponsored player of/for Epic Poker but to my knowledge they are not (currently) an online real money poker site.

** It may well be that when all is said and done that PokerStars walks away from the indictments completely unscathed due to their internal accounting, policies, and procedures. I hope that will be the case

Targets

Tweet

Lots of interesting stuff made the rounds this week in the poker world.

Of note was this post by poker professional, Jason Somerville (@JasonSomerville), in which he comes out as a gay man. It won’t be the last time in his life that he comes out, but hopefully it will be one of the sweetest.

I was glad to see Jason get a lot of positive feedback to this information, which is as it should be (imo)! The world, it is a-changing, and I think most people understand that being gay is just one of many things that make up the whole of a person. So, good on you, Jason, the courage it takes to be honest and real is an inspiration and admirable.

Hard-Boiled Poker did a nice job of covering the story and reminds us what a discomfiting thing it can be to play poker. Shamus wrote, “it is a most self-conscious thing to play poker.” To play it seriously, we must be willing to think about “(1) who we really are, (2) who we are perceived to be, and (3) the relationship between the reality and the image.” Quoting Anthony Holden, he further shares:

Whether he likes it or not, a man’s character is stripped bare at the poker table; if the other players read him better than he does, he has only himself to blame. Unless he is both able and prepared to see himself as others do, flaws and all, he will be a loser in cards, as in life.

Matt Glantz also laid out some honesty this week in a post from Saturday, in which he calls on FullTilt Poker to do the right thing by players and break what has become a nearly year-long “black hole of silence.” He didn’t sugar coat things:

Your continued public silence is a disgrace. It is not only irresponsible, but also thoughtlessly unfair to the thousands of players who have money tied up in your ongoing debacle….I am embarrassed for you and I am ashamed of you.

Kid Poker brought his own brand of “real talk” to the fray in a video blog in which he also didn’t mince words:

I don’t think I would have any problem with somebody who had $15,000 dollars of their hard earned money on your site come up to you and bash you in the nuts with a baseball bat.

It should be noted, Negreanu seems careful to be sans any patching or sponsorship logos (I can’t tell if his hat has a logo blocked out with tape or if that’s just the hat) and he does clarify:

I’m not gonna personally do it, ok, and I’m not Charles Manson so I’m not gonna be, like, sending messages to people to go “Hmm! That’s a great idea!” If somebody wants to bash you in the nuts for what you did, they’re gonna bash you in the nuts whether I say so or not. And like I said, for me, that’d be ok.

In essence, Glantz and Negreanu are saying the same thing – FullTilt’s silence is despicable. I think Negreanu’s brand of “real talk” gets more play, though, because when people get wronged we automatically want to lash out. And right now, there are a lot of people who’d love to take a baseball bat to FullTilt Poker and all associated with them. We like real talk. We want people to tell us how it really is, because by God we can handle the truth. And besides, there's a huge difference between saying you want to kick someone's nuts in - and actually doing it. 

Unfortunately, while bashing somebody in the nuts (or talking about it) might feel good in the moment, it’s not going to bring back the money. Ultimately, all a bashing would do is serve to get the basher a criminal record for assault and battery, a hefty bill for legal fees, and maybe some prison time of his or her own. But, geez...people are crazy, and who knows whether someone will take the bait and apply some knee to the 'nads back alley justice one of these days.

Calling him "the most important voice in poker", Glantz recognizes that the words and actions of poker's top ambassador carry weight, when he tweeted:

But, that's Daniel Negreanu, the royalty of real talk, as we've come to know him and as Somerville coined him in his recent post.


Still, I couldn’t help but be reminded of another high profile person who took some flack for using some questionable rhetoric and propaganda in an altogether different arena. That person was Sarah Palin. And her targets were Democrats. Gabrielle Giffords, who had predicted there could be repercussions for the escalation of violent rhetoric in the media, ended up in the crossfire.

Making the decision to come out publicly, even in a society that is becoming increasingly tolerant and accepting, takes guts. It's real and it's admirable.

Calling a thief a thief, is just the truth (if it is indeed the truth, otherwise, it's just slander). 

Rhetoric from high level representatives that encourages people to "reload and take aim" or incites anger or ill-conceived action in some already well-pissed off people is just noise and nonsense, at best, and irresponsible, at worst.

There were some good take-aways in both Glantz and Negreanu's missives. Namely, their speaking up about an injustice that's impacted a lot of people. That's always a good thing. But instead of a bat to the balls, it's Negreanu's other idea that could, perhaps, better (and without physical injury!) convey his disgust.

Concerted shunning is often more powerful than any word or any weapon could ever be.

Responsible for Black Friday...who me?!

Tweet

On Tuesday, Bill Rini wrote a great piece entitled “Who to Blame for Black Friday?” In it, he illustrates the “**wink, wink, nudge, nudge**” proposition that online poker has allegedly been from its inception and argues that, technically, you and I are to blame for Black Friday and its aftermath “because we didn’t demand better. We didn’t demand more transparency. We didn’t ask the right questions.”

I think that sounds good and is true in the sense that we each have to account for the decisions we make. But, I’m not sure it’s altogether accurate. And here’s why:

I’m a consumer. I’m not a marketing guru or a poker professional. I’m a mother who often makes purchasing decisions for my family on everything from what I buy at the grocery store, to clothes, cleaning products, entertainment decisions, and everything in between.

I’m not an expert and while I have the capability to research every decision I make, I generally trust what my local HEB is selling, as well as what’s marketed to me on the tube or radio, and in the newspapers and magazines I read. Even better, is when I get a recommendation from a friend. If it comes from someone I know, trust, and like, that’s pretty much where my business is going. It might not be the right way to make purchasing decisions, but it’s how I (and a vast majority of the US population) make such decisions. It’s also why marketing – like poker – is a multi-billion dollar industry.

Couple that purchasing behavior with the fact that I didn’t get into online poker in a real (serious) money way until 2009, well after the UIGEA made its big splash in 2006. The way I heard about where to play online poker was from sources like ESPN (marketed as “The Worldwide Leader in Sports”), where I could watch my favorite pros play in the WSOP and then see commercials for sites like PokerStars and Full Tilt. Not only were the ads shown on a respectable news channel, they were endorsed by the faces I’d see in those ads - my favorite pros like Daniel Negreanu and Phil Ivey (among many others).

In the face of the UIGEA, the roster of pro players for those sites only grew, and came to include well respected “regular” people, like Orel Hershiser, Dennis Phillips, and Chris Moneymaker, and well known celebrities, like Jason Alexander and Don Cheadle. As noted by Phil Ivey in his lawsuit against Full Tilt, “the great poker players have become celebrity figures….The celebrity status attributed to these poker players is akin to the celebrity status of professional athletes.” Not surprisingly, such people sell product.

To top it off, the Poker Players Alliance, whose mission it is to “establish favorable laws that provide poker players with a secure, safe and regulated place to play,” touted in a very straightforward fashion that the UIGEA “does not make it illegal for people to play [poker] on the internet.” (emphasis added).

So what’s a gal like me to do?

Rini argues that players like me “didn’t care.” Even in the face of scandal and fraud, “[n]umbers just keep going up.” He continues, “[a]s the money became more and more staggering in nature the online poker sites began to exert more and more power.” And everybody from the online sites, to the pros, to the television, online and print media in between rode that boom. And they rode it on the backs of people like me.

But here’s the thing – as Hunter Bick points out in this post for Drag the Bar – the UIGEA doesn’t even mention poker players. “It only mentions payment processing for financial institutions. It stipulates that financial institutions cannot lawfully process ‘unlawful internet gambling’ transactions. However, the law never defines what ‘unlawful internet gambling’ is, what games it applies to, nor does it provide any guidance whatsoever for what ‘unlawful internet gambling’ even means.”

I guess what I should have done was get a legal opinion before I played real money poker on the internet. Surely, that's what the PPA and the online sites and the pros (at least the ones with agents) did...right?*

As an attorney I’ve practiced municipal law, which in Texas often deals with open government and how governmental bodies deal with laws like the Texas Open Meetings Act. One important facet of the law deals with how such bodies make decisions. As you might expect, it’s often easier for a school board or city council to make decisions behind closed doors - less questions, and all that. But the law says, no, if it’s a matter of public business, then the public has a right to know about it.** To remain in compliance, the board or the city council will first ask their attorney for a written opinion before going into closed session. I would bet really good money that something very similar happened here for organizations like the PPA, the online sites, and likely many pros.

As just your everyday, average joe poker player, I didn’t know I should’ve been asking for one, too.

I agree that Black Friday will ultimately create a more regulated, and hopefully favorable, online landscape for players in the future. But, please don’t blame me and other players for Black Friday and its aftermath. A law was on the books and it was either not enforced by the Department of Justice, or it was not adhered to by the sites it sought to regulate, as it should’ve been.

Given all that, I believe blaming me for Black Friday is like blaming the mother whose child dies after eating an e-coli laced burger from the Jack and Crack dollar menu, or like blaming the owner of the 2007 Toyota Highlander Hybrid for the car accident on the I-5 when his brakes fail.

I don’t obtain a legal opinion before I buy a burger, much less a car. So please, Mr. Rini, don’t blame me.

If, however, blame must still be apportioned...the lawyers might be a good place to start.***
______________________

[1]* Full disclosure, I looked for news stories, tweets, and/or other resources to support the assertion that sites like Full Tilt and PokerStars (and/or their shills) relied on such opinions from their hired guns. I did not find any. If you think it’s because there aren’t any, please leave your contact info in the comment section below because I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.

[2]** Section 551.144(c) of the Texas Government Code provides that: “[i]t is an affirmative defense to prosecution…that the members of the governmental body acted in reasonable reliance on a…written interpretation of this chapter in an opinion of…the attorney for the governmental body.”

[3]*** To be fair, as I said at the beginning of this piece, we each are accountable for our own actions and the "I didn't think I needed a legal opinion to play" is overly broad/simplistic. The truth is (as most people know), ignorance of the law is no defense. The problem here is that the law does not clearly speak to us as players. It's for that reason that I think Mr. Rini's argument is somewhat misguided. Otherwise, I like and agree with much of what he has to say (particularly his thoughts on player apathy re cheating, collusion, and other player misbehavior).

New Year, New Goals...screw that, just bring on the POKER!

Tweet

This is the obligatory New Year's "serenity" picture

After all this time I bet you guys thought I was never gonna post again!  Blasphemy!

So...we went to Germany for the holidays and stayed with family for 16 whole days...ahem...therefore, while Germany was wonderful, you can imagine how we all got on each other's nerves.  Thank God we're family and hopefully everyone can recuperate by summertime so we can do it all over again (insert evil laugh and grin here my BFF SIL).*

 All I know is I go away for a few weeks and everything changes in the poker world.  Annie and Phil have left UB.  We're about to find out who Isildur1 is (whatever, can't even be bothered to figure out how to spell that).  Sebock** (maybe?  maybe not?  Either way, not too shabby, hombre) is sharing the pleasures of manscaping.  Harry Reid still can't get legislation passed.  Daniel Negreanu is judging yet another person about their life choices.  Wait a minute...ok, maybe some things haven't changed.

At any rate, here's hoping that 2011 will be a banner year for everyone.  What are your goals for the new year?  What are you doing to achieve those goals?  If you're planning to fly by the seat of your pants, I wish you well.  I generally do that, too, but am still working on my discipline which shall, forthwith, include, but shall in no manner be limited to, the following:

1. The continued blogging of  my travails (poker and otherwise) as the year progresses;
2. The persistent study of the game of NLHE poker via videos, books, regular play, @thewaxslinger***, and maybe a course with The Maven;
3. Testing the limits of stake-age and higher limit MTTs (with my pahdna @thewaxslinger)
4. Participation in live events, with at least one "travel out of town" tournament a month til the WSOP;
5. Oh my gosh I've gotta go on a diet;
6. Two weeks at this year's WSOP because I'm playing the ME baby (when I sat into it or sell enough pieces, that is); and last, but not least,
7. Love.  Love.  Love.  Love. Crazy Love.  CanNOT forget that.

My daughter's currently in a Hip Hop dance class (JAZZ HANDS!), Basketball, and Tumbling, and she rocks at all of it.  Plus, the day job and my Bahbee must receive fair recompense.  So...it's gonna be a great year people.  I hope for you, too!

Tell me what you're doing to improve your game, your life, your...sandwich?  I love hearing your comments and really appreciate that you take the time to write them.

Until next time, good luck at the tables, amigos.  And - Happy New Year!

* If you are reading this my BFF SIL, leave a comment. Luz you!
** Please, did you really think I would link to that??  My mom reads this blog!!
*** You really should start following her on twitter already.

Social Media and the Sin of Detraction

Tweet

I've had more traffic to my blog in the past couple of days as a result of my "Open Letter" to PokerStars that I put on tweet blast last Friday but I think that's finally starting to subside.  For that reason, I wanted to wait a bit before posting again.

How do I know I'm getting less traffic? Because  my comments are drying up (Apparently, comments are a big deal to bloggers.  Just ask @DeputySD. Check out his blog while you're at it, and leave a dadgum comment already!).  I've only been blogging here since June.

Prior to Saturday, I was lucky if I'd get one comment after a post.  Said comment was usually always from my dad and usually always supportive and humorous (to me, anyway) about whatever it was I'd written. After Saturday, and my Open Letter post, that changed.

It would be disingenuous for me to say that when I wrote the post - and then tweeted about it - that I didn't think it would be read.  But, like @Mark_Gahagan, I was surprised at some of the folks who did end up reading it.  Mark has a terrific blog, by the way, which you can find here.

Because of the extra traffic, and the accompanying comments, to my posts, it all really got me to thinking. 

First of all, who the hell am I to go calling out Negreanu for a comment he made about Annie Duke, on or off the record?  Don't I have better things to do with my time and how can I be so presumptious as to speak out on behalf of all women, especially when (as I've learned) the c-word is not offensive to all women?

Good questions, and the short answer(s) is that of course I can't and don't speak for all women and definitely I am no better than Negreanu or anyone else when it comes to sticking my foot in my mouth.  I was just trying to make a point that Mark and Tony G made much better in their blogs - that as one of the biggest ambassadors of poker, Negreanu, whether he likes it, knows it, or not, is in a public position that carries responsibility and people/fans are watching (so don't go giving a beat down on the womens with what some consider to be the gender equivalent of the n-word).  I mean, come on...is poker really a sport and ready for primetime or not?

Second of all, though - and this is the real point of this post - in what way did I aid in "the culture of personal destruction" and commit the "sin of detraction," as one commenter slammed in my face?   Ouch.  While the guy did a nice job of slamming women in general, which I of course disagree with, that comment really got me thinking, having been raised Catholic and all (but this ain't a post about faith/religion).

Just what is twitter and facebook and blogs and all of social media?  Are we all of us so busy shouting into a vast echo chamber, as Leo Laporte suggests (via @nikiblack), that we're missing the point? 

I don't know.  But I do believe that words matter.  I also happen to think that social media is fun and can be  edifying, even if the only people truly listening are your mom and dad.

With that, though, I would like to take the time to apologize - not for my belief in the importance of gender equality - but for my role in all of this.  There's no way to recapture the feathers that have been let loose from the bell tower, but maybe this is a start.

In the meantime, peeps, good luck at the tables.

The Line of Least Resistance

Tweet

"Too many girls follow the line of least resistance -- but a good line is hard to resist"                                                                                                                          Mae West

It took some time (no, not UB HH time and no I'm not equating these two issues), but I did finally get a response from PokerStars regarding my email to them about Negreanu's recent comments about Annie Duke.  I received it yesterday evening and I waited to blog about it because I wanted to give PokerStars the courtesy of having time to tell me whether they would oppose my linking to the email exchange here.

After another 24 hours or so, I got that permission.(Full disclosure, I initially published this post - with some different content - moments before I got PokerStars' follow up email)

Here's PokerStars' secondary email to me (from the initial exchange I blogged about in an earlier post); my response; and, their follow up email.   

And that's pretty much the end of it.  

On that note, we now return to our regularly scheduled program.  For me that will entail grinding microstakes, building my bankroll, and working on getting better at poker...I've definitely got a lot of work to do in that regard.  

I think FullTilt's got some kind of Twitter Poker Tour Tournament going on. Maybe Doyle Brunson's room, too.

Later peeps and good luck at the tables.

Mouthy, Spouty

Tweet

The terms "mouthy, spouty" are words my family uses for someone who has a big mouth, knows it all, and is generally argumentative.  Not surprisingly, I am often known as the mouthy, spouty one in my family.  If you've happened upon this blog within the past few days, I bet you're not surprised. (I think I come by it honestly, though.  Plus, I've been trained to argue - it's what I do in my job, after all).


Until a few short days ago, I think members of my family (um, usually just my dad) and maybe one or two people from twitter were the only ones who read my blog.  That changed when I got angry Friday night after reading Daniel Negreanu's comment about Annie Duke.


Acting in haste on my anger and using my fairly anonymous blog - where I'm typically writing about my quest to become a better, more disciplined poker player - I vented my personal anger at what I felt were Daniel's inappropriate comments.  I did that here and here.  Mouthy, spouty that I am, I came home from dinner/drinks with family and made a poll about it, that I'm not sure I'm very proud of, which you can take here.


I got a few ugly things thrown my way, I think mainly because I find comparable the ugly offensiveness of the use of  the "c" word toward a woman to the ugly offensiveness of the use of the "n" word toward anyone.


All I can say in response is that I come at this with my own filter and life experience.  I find them both reprehensible.  I find them both wrong.  I'm not from Europe.  I am a woman; I am not, however, a person of color.  Does that negate my right to find them equally ugly?  Does it make me wrong for making the comparison?  Does it make me overly sensitive and a soon to be member of the *gasp* PC police?  I don't think so, but some people do.  I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the subject because I can certainly stand to learn a thing or two.

As of yet, I guess I'm still cogitating over what, if anything, I've learned.  I can tell you that I didn't even start blogging here until a month or so ago.  And the impetus to do so was the controversy that came about regarding the 2010 WSOP Ladies' Event (don't go assuming my position on the subject, just read about it here if you're so inclined).  That should make it clear that I am passionate about my gender.


Annie Duke certainly doesn't need (much less want) me to side with her or fight her battles.  She's perfectly capable of doing that on her own.  I'm equally a fan of hers as I am of many poker players, male and female.  That some of them have beef with each other - that's their thing, not mine. I took offense to what I read and I voiced my opinion about it.  That's probably never going to change.


As an attorney, I defend companies where such behavior for non-public figures often costs them money and causes offenders to lose their job.  It's my experience that juries and/or judges (fact finders) don't like it when they see, in print, words like "c***" or "n*****" or "b****", etc.  When faced with such facts in evidence, it makes my job extremely difficult to defend a non-discriminatory position because juries are made up of people of all colors, all backgrounds, all filters and personal biases.  And as you likely already know, there's no guarantee how 12 people on a jury are going to respond to such evidence - much less upwards of 100s of people on twitter.


Here, we're not in court and this ain't no capital offense. The poker community is, however, on center stage at the moment.  As a poker player, this kind of publicity is not what I want certain members of Congress or the Senate considering before a vote on whether to make on-line poker legal. 

I'll give you this - if I'd spent even half the time on my pokers as I did on this craziness this past weekend, maybe I'd have won some damn money at the tables.  On that note, I'll say goodnight - my daughter's got her first day of school in the morning!


Um, I also love Brandi Carlile and have not taken time to say near enough about her, as she deserves!


With that - good luck at the tables, peeps.

PokerStars Responds

Tweet

I probably should've put more thought into writing a blog post about the Negreanu controversy.  I've been told to lighten up...that my involvement is unbecoming and beneath me, which I think - but am not sure - is a polite way of saying "shut up because I don't care to hear about this anymore."

I stand by my statement - just as I don't think it's ok for anyone to call another person a "n*****," I don't think it's ok for anyone to call a woman a "c***"  (and I find it wrong and demeaning to women that a radio personality, politician, public figure, or anyone really, can lose their job or be publicly excoriated for the use of a racial epithet but someone can use an equally reprehensible word toward a woman with no consequences).

Then again - I. Am. A. Woman.  As a woman, I think it's wrong.

Do my feelings on the subject make me an emotionally unstable, overly sensitive individual? Does the fact that I chose to vocalize those feelings make me a strident, harpy bitch?

(for some idea how some people might answer those questions, see comments to this blog)

Whatever you may believe, it's my heartfelt belief that my feeling/opinion and my expression of that feeling/opinion merely makes me an individual with a personal standard.  Period.

My all-time favorite poker players are Kathy Liebert,  Maria Mayrinck, Kara Scott, Vanessa Selbst, Victoria Coren and Jena Delk so it's not like I'm trying to promote a Team Danny/Team Annie agenda, although I do wonder if there would be any money in t-shirts with such slogans...hmm...I digress.

No, I am not going to go play at Ultimate Bet.  As much as I am a fan of Joe Sebock, I don't believe they ever adequately addressed the cheating scandal and so I may just end up going back to Bodog or FullTilt...we'll see.

So, go on witcha bad selves and have some fun today. It's Saturday.  Be nice to each other and to all you men, please be especially kind to your wives, mothers, daughters and sisters.  For as much as we get on your nerves, you love us even if you can't admit it (here's a secret - we love you, too).

PokerStars' response to my email is below.  Again, if you feel as I do and/or want to express your opinion to PokerStars - and I hope you will - please just email them at support@pokerstars.com.

Pokerstars' response to my initial email:

From: PokerStars Support
To:
Subject: PokerStars Support - Daniel
Sent: Aug 21, 2010 12:49 AM

Hello ________,

Thank you for your email.

We are glad to hear that you are enjoying the Women's Poker League and value
very much as one of our loyal female poker players.

Daniel and Annie are both passionate about poker, and both aren't afraid to
speak their mind. I think this is a fact people like and appreciate about
both players. When you have two people that are similar in that regard,
there's bound to be friction somewhere along the line.

Although Daniel Negreanu is a Team PokerStarsPro, he is an entity to himself
and as such will always be encouraged to express his views and speak his
mind as he would otherwise do so, PokerStars Pro or not.

I hope you will still enjoy watching both Daniel and Annie play as both are
fantastic poker players and an enrichment, on one way or another, for the
poker world.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any further questions and
thank you for choosing PokerStars.

Regards,

Katja
PokerStars Support Team

And my response:

I get that and appreciate that he is an individual unto himself. But his comment re: Annie Duke, a woman, and calling her a "cunt" is exactly on par with calling an African American person a "n*****," it is completely and utterly unacceptable.

I appreciate your response and would likely be placated if PokerStars were to make public a statement like you provided me.

If that's not going to happen, please let me know because I will cash out and commence playing elsewhere.

Look forward to hearing from you.

And PokerStars' response:

From: PokerStars Support

To: 

Cc:

Date: Saturday, August 21 2010 1:13 AM

Subject: PokerStars Support - Forwarded to Supervisor

Hello __________,

Thank you for your reply.

I have forwarded your email to a Support Supervisor for their review and
response. You will receive a reply as soon as possible.

Your patience is appreciated.

Regards,

Katja
PokerStars Support Team

 That was 12 hours ago.  

Good luck at the tables, peeps.

An Open Letter to Daniel Negreanu and PokerStars

Tweet

(EDIT - If people are still reading this, you guys should really take the poll.)

So I woke up this morning, checked into to all things social media and was disappointed to read this quote from Daniel Negreanu regarding Annie Duke.

Listen, I'm a lawyer and pretty much fight for a living.  Believe me, it gets old. And it's been my experience that the side with the weakest position, the weakest arguments, the weakest facts nearly always resorts to ad hominem attack when they have nothing else on which to rely.  An ad hominem attack is just a fancy way to describe what we did in kindergarten (i.e., name calling or attempting to win support for an otherwise weak position by obscuring the real issues involved). 

As a woman, his comment just pissed me off.  Make your argument, Daniel.  Explain why you think she's wrong.  Agree to disagree, whatever.  In using the word "cunt" to describe Annie Duke, however, you didn't just disrespect her, you disrespected all women.  As a spokesperson for PokerStars and poker in general, that's just not acceptable.

Like I said in a tweet - I'm not trying to censor anyone and I am the last to play PC police.  Nor do I believe I'm being overly sensitive about a simple word - I've heard worse and been called worse, I'm not gonna wither and die from an insult. I highly doubt Annie Duke will either.

But here's the thing...when you use that kind of language, your multitude of male fans think it's ok and so the next person who's at the end of such an insult might be your assistant playing in a nice live game where she gives some guy a bad break and his final retort to her before leaving the table is "Nice hand, cunt."  Acceptable? No. It happens, dude.  Believe it. (because of my avatar on-line, I often get the nice "bitch" in chat from the now-observer I just busted)

So for all your talk about about being on the side of women, you just negated your position by your reprehensible comment regarding Duke.  I hope you can see that.  And I hope you'll make a comment, maybe, hopefully apologizing.  If not, oh well, that's your right and I know you won't miss me as your one-time fan.

But if you really believe in your position (what exactly is the beef between you two poker players anyway?  If anyone knows, please do tell.), then man up and articulate it intelligently and in such a manner that you don't alienate half the population.  If you can't do that, then please shut the hell up about Annie Duke.

Dang, I really got worked up writing this.  As for the open letter to PokerStars, I just really felt the need to voice my disappointment and anger about Daniel's comments.  If you feel the same, and I hope you do, I think PokerStars needs to know and I hope you'll express your opinion by contacting them (just send an email to support@pokerstars.com).  Here's what I sent them:

My email to PokerStars:

Hi guys, I know I'm just one of your many, many, MANY players. And I know I'm just one of your female players, of which I'm sure you have plenty.

I really appreciate the Women's League and the LIPS satellites you've been running recently.

As soon as I got started playing online seriously, I've made PokerStars my online poker home. While I've dabbled at Bodog, Cake and FullTilt, I am a loyalist and want PokerStars to be my gaming choice when I can't play live.

I know I'm not your best customer, but I've deposited plenty over the years and support you guys every chance I get (see my PS twibbon on my twitter account: http://www.twitter.com/PokerLawyer).

That's why I really hope you all will be coming out with a statement very soon about Daniel Negreanu's extremely offensive comments toward Annie Duke.

If none is forthcoming, please just let me know. While I feel I've got my routine and my 'home' with PokerStars and would hate to go elsewhere, his comment was offensive, insulting, and just plain wrong and I can't, in good conscience, support a site that would condone or remain silent about his actions.

The thing is, not only do I love PokerStars, I've always been a big fan of Daniel. That's why his comment was so disappointing.

So, with that said, I really hope to hear something from you guys soon - hopefully very publicly. It'll go a long way.

 Well, that's all for tonight gang.  Good luck at the tables.