CasinoGaming.com


	Sundays: Inside Gaming Tuesdays: Video Poker Wednesdays: Off the Shelf Fridays: Richard Eng, Player's Edge Saturdays: Pocket Aces

POCKET ACES

Columns

• Back to Maryann's index

• Back to columnists' index

Maryann Guberman has been a writer and editor with many gaming publications, including Sports Form, Card Player, Poker World, Player's Panorama and Systems and Methods. She also has written and edited numerous books on gambling.

Aug 09, 2008

I'm Sticking to the Union ...

I don't think I've read a more compelling essay on the need for a new vision for TV tournament poker than the recent post by unnamed author (although poker players and members know the author's name) of What's Wrong with Poker on TV (www.wpapoker.org).

First, though, a little of what the politicians call flip-flopping (and what I call changing my mind because I have more information than I did when I made the original statement). When the only TV poker available was the World Poker Tour and, if we were lucky, the final table action of the World Series of Poker, I thought the player demand for a share of TV revenue was ludicrous, particularly since the revenue factor had yet to be solidified. At that time what players talked about was payment for face time, not revenue share, if I recall. No other individual sportsperson gets money just because the camera focuses on him or her -- not the skateboarding fanatics, not the BMX maniacs, not the amateur athletes of the Olympics, not college football players, not even the golf enthusiasts. So, for a poker player to ask for money the way a stagehand might get paid for a few minutes running across the stage to help out a show host just didn't cut it in my book.

Fast forward to today's poker, however, and even before I read the article mentioned in the opening paragraph, I felt in my bones something needed to be changed before it gets even more out of hand. (And to be honest, much of this rethinking became almost solid just after Harrah's revealed the postponement of the final table competition for the 2008 World Series of Poker.)

In the WPA article we see one of my favorite comparison/contrasts with professional golf. The points mentioned are the same ones I've used as examples many times in this space. (With one exception: I don't really care much to watch golf on TV.)

We all know that casino giants such as Harrah's and media giants such as ESPN are reaping beaucoup bucks on the World Series of Poker, including cash from beer sponsors. (Note that Harrah's and the WPT have done what Mike Sexton tried to do so diligently years ago -- obtaining sponsors. Sadly, the sponsor money goes to the people who present the event, not to the participants).

And all the while the money is flowing in to the corporations, poker players still have to put up cash to play -- lots of cash -- in events where the overlay disappears.

To make matters even more questionable, the event coordinators take juice off the top before prize money gets distributed to the winners!

It's likely that many of the young guns of poker don't give a hoot about this facet of their game. For many (not all) of them it's fun; it's a challenge; it's a chance to become famous; it's living that dubious life of a gambler. But the journeymen and women, the professional players who depend on tournaments for their bread and butter money, the lack of wealth-sharing is criminal!

We all know that life isn't really fair. But we also know that we can achieve some measure of equality in those important areas that seem to favor a small segment of an industry. That's why the WPA, in my opinion, should get off the stick and start bombarding the world with its message.

I'd ask every current member and every poker blogger and everyone who has anything to say about poker to end each message with a slogan. Make it short but to the point.

Join the WPA. Protect YOUR buy-in.

Final Score: Corporation $1,000,000 -- Ten Thousands Competitors $0

Look for the WPA Label

Have Money to See the Raise: Join the WPA

WPA: Si, si se puede

Okay, so maybe they are a bit hokey but I'm not a slogan writer. The point is, poker players have to do two things: They have to organize and they have to protest.

And while profit sharing of some sort should be the main goal here, there are other benefits to organizing. Eventually poker players could set up a group health insurance plan; get WPA discounts at the hotels; have special deals on rental cars. Lots of things.

So why is it, then that the total number of players who belong to the WPA hasn't even hit the 1500 mark? Surely it can't be the annual dues, which is less than a buy-in to a big tournament. Do they think they can't overcome? Do they lack the backing? Are they afraid they will miss a chance to win a million if they boycott. Do they think the tournament promoters will ban them if they protest?

Or, do they just not care?

Any thoughts?