This is my third attempt at a poker blog in as many years. The one's that preceded it withered away into the background of my life behind other areas of my twenty something existence such as binge drinking, deciding to become a teacher then backing out last minute and well...grinding (occasionally hungover).
So here I am starting from scratch again. You may ask well what's different this time? What's going to make this one stick? I think the answer lies in the fact that I have realised that reading about results, bad beats, make up/profit figures in the majority at least is a pretty fucking boring read.
I mean, I have found a crumb of comfort from knowing that other mid-stake poker players share my pain in terms of variance and the sick nature of the game. However, it seems to me that blogs about poker, from online mtt grinders, for the most part at least, are pretty generic and basically a platform to show off/ let off steam for a bad week/month/year ( lallallala friends theme tune) on the online felt.
This of course is completely within their right and my previous blogs could be pretty much bracketed into this field of literature. so perhaps I'm a little hypocritical in terms of my stance here. Nevertheless, I wanted to try and steer this blog away from the ' stealth moaning about variance' angle and fucking hell, my friends have heard enough whining about 10th's from me to last a lifetime.
So instead, this piece will focus more on current poker issues and trends in the game and perhaps touch on the nature of life as a mid-stakes poker player anddd maybe some other things (haven't quite made my mind up). So if you're still with with me at this point, thank you and yeah, let's get going.
The Joe Hachem Interview
In a recent interview during the Aussie Millions in Melbourne (link above) Joe Hachem, the 2005 WSOP Main Event winner, expressed his views on how the role of the 'World Champ' as an international ambassador for the game was as important as ever. In fact, this role was now even more crucial as he felt that the game of poker as a whole was 'dying'.
Now although the title for this interview focused on how he essentially bad mouthed 2006 champ Jamie Gold and 2007 winner Jerry Yang, claiming that they that had destroyed the 'legacy' of the 'World Champ'. I feel that Hachem, perhaps inadvertently, touches of on some major issues that are extremely relevant in the current poker climate, in regard to both the live and online arenas. I'll chop up (wahey) these points so that I can comment and give my opinion on them in a more coherent manner.
Ok first off...
Cough Joe Hachem... Hypocrite cough
Apologies about that, perhaps not the best place to start, we'll move onto the validity of Hachem as a spokesperson for 'modern poker' later.
Ok first off for real this time...
The silent, hoody up, Dre Beats playing 20 hands an hour looking bored draining their iphone battery online poker reg
Minus the Beats part this was me, ages 21 to 26. As an online mtt reg I felt that I had already decided what side of the fence I was throwing the chips into the middle from. I was the guy who would put his hood up, look like a leprechaun was stepping on my foot the whole time and try to tank like Durrrr because it looked pretty cool on Poker After Dark.
What was my reasoning for this? Was I uncomfortable at the table? Fuck no, I was and am a very social person and due to the fact that I have worked in variance sorry various communication based jobs (from customer service at Waitrose to trainee teacher at an Inner London school), I have absolutely no problem talking to strangers who derive from a range of demographics. However, in my wisdom, I still decided to act like I hadn't left the house in 4 years when playing live comps.
Maybe I did it because I thought it was cool, maybe I did because I saw some of friends do it, or simply I wanted to print 'young, TAG online poker reg who is capable of floating light' on my head. I think in my head I did it because I thought it would annoy people (primarily fish) on the table and their irritation would lead to them spazzing their stack off to me. This tactic, in my head anyway, did contribute to occasions where good and bad players alike, played a hand pretty poorly vs me.
The question begs, would they have played the same way if i had no hoodie on, wore glasses and shared light if generic conversation with them between hands?
The answer is... well I have no fucking idea. I would guess that sometimes it could have made all the difference and in other circumstances it would make absolutely no difference. People, especially in live poker, seem to play in a mode of tunnel vision and I'm not too sure whether an opponents attire or demeanour would really effect this so much that they would play a hand completely differently to standard.
In a sense, the issue of why young online players dress like and act like this at live tournaments is not really relevant here, the crux of the matter, which Hachem highlights,
is:
What effect does this have on poker as a whole in the modern arena?
Hachem fairly lazily, asserts that this divide between of cultures that defines live and online poker is crippling the game into a state of coma. Now despite, it being obvious to readers of this piece, that I do not hold a great deal of respect for Hachem I do feel that he brings forward some valid points in this interview. Firstly the idea of...
Responsibility
Being a poker player myself I have some, albeit limited, ability in the art of reading people. To me, Hachem, has been and still is biting his tongue on certain issues regarding the state of poker. He clearly demonstrates a loathing for the online poker culture as a thorough bred, talkative, family orinetated live grinder. This interview demonstrates Hachem starting to reveal to the world the things that are basically pissing him off.
Towards the end of the interview, he concedes that he does feel that it is the 'responsibility' of the young champs like Greg Merson and Ryan Reiss to 'fly the flag' for poker. This was interesting to me, as mid interview in his mind, he must have changed tact, as earlier during it (2.35) he claims that 'personally they are doing nothing wrong, no one can be forced to go and carry the flag'.
Now on the surface, it is clear that he trying not to personally upset fellow champs, however as the interview develops Hachem clearly spreads his wings on the subject and actually provides a fairly deep insight into his thinking on this issue.
This issue of responsibility in regard to poker as a profession is quite unique as in reality poker defies what society defines as being 'responsible'. As a poker player, whichever way you cook it, you have chosen to gamble for a living. An educated 80/20 gamble yes but a gamble all the same. Also, you have chosen to turn your back on your 'responsibility' (although whether this is an actual requirement of being a member in modern society is another issue) as a citizen of the country you live in.
Getting up mid afternoon, popping down to Tesco Metro and late regging the Hot 33 is a fucking cool life, however in societies' ( cough Tory cough ) eyes we are essentially bums who irresponsibly look at electronic/real cards for a living. Thus, the word responsibility does not tie in easily with the world of poker, as by choosing the poker lifestyle we have seemingly turned our back on the restrictive 9 to 5 culture and all the responsibilities that go along with it.
So how can we relate this to Hachem's comments? The question that begs to be asked is:
Are newly established high profile poker players responsible for the development/survival of the game?
In a nutshell, should shaggy haired, unassuming Ryan Reiss a former 1-2 live cash grinder who luckboxed (everyone who wins a tournament has been lucky to do so) his way to fame and glory now travel the world with a big flag saying:
'Come and play poker it's really really fun and even though you will be super shit at first no one will be horrible to you. Well maybe Phill Hellmuth, but don't worry after a while he calms down.'
People are attracted to poker because they like the idea of poker. The idea of the rush, the idea of being first at something. Most people in society will never score the winner in the Champion's League Final however they can quite feasibly flick 215 dollars on stars on a Sunday and be able call up their boss at work on Monday morning and say:
'Fuck you, Colin, stick your data entry job up your arse'. THAT is the appeal of poker. To achieve something above yourself.
From my understanding, something that Hachem ignores is that it probably should be the job of the poker monopoly (Stars/FTP/888) to promote poker in a more fun and interesting way. It shouldn't really be the job of a young, quiet, recovering drug addict, who is now cursed with this label of 'ambassador' simply because he won a poker tournament.
In this way Hachem is clearly comparing poker to sport. Olympic Gold Medal winners are expected to run workshops at schools and colleges nationwide promoting athletics to the younger generation of potenial athletes, so why didn't the fresh faces of poker royalty from Eastgate through Merson do something similar for poker?
Poker and Society and guy who should embark on a poker pilgrimage to unite the two
Well, first off poker does not have the same social standing as sport. Poker, despite the Moneymaker boom is still very much frowned upon in modern society. Black Friday demonstrated that fact in neon flashing lights. Poker is not really welcome in the mainstream. Poker shows are rarely shown before midnight in the UK and if you asked someone in the street who Phil Ivey was they would grimace, put their head down, and quicken their walk.
People who find poker, are those whose personalties are attracted to it. My knowledge on how poker companies source and attract potential punters is pretty much zilch however I assume that people usually find poker, not the other way around. This could be through watching a TV show or going to the casino with friends on a night out and unexpectedly finding a love for Hold Em.
Thus, seemingly, people who get into poker were probably always going to get into poker. A young man in sunglasses travelling around, wearing a stars patch, saying 'Poker is great honest', probably isn't going to have much effect on new players, next to a full scale advertising campaign or good value, well advertised start up bonuses for players, provided poker by websites.
A young kinda geeky guy who randomly won 8m dollars or a team of guys whose job it is to promote and spread the identity of a product.
I mean, which one would you rather have?
Joe 'Pass the Sugar' Hachem
Joe Hachem is no doubt a big personality. In truth, he has probably (again holes in research arise here) raised the profile and popularity of the game particularly in his native Australia and therefore in the long run has had a positive effect on poker as a whole during his time as a Pokerstars Pro/Ambassador.
Some will say, as a moderately successful mid-stakes poker player, that why should I be allowed to critically analyse his interview? Well firstly, it's a mixture of free speech and the internet. Secondly, it is because Joe, in my view,does not have more right to comment on the state of modern poker than me or any other well informed poker professional.
I have played more tournaments in my life than Joe Hachem however I have won far less money than him . He has a huge public profile, sometimes some of my older relatives get my name wrong, does this mean I should polish his soapbox or kick it from under his feet?
This article is not an attack on Joe Hachem, it is simply an review of how their is a tendency within poker to label the 'young online kids' as money grabbing wizards and the older generation of poker as weathered, moral and well informed warriors of the game that is poker. These stereotypes like most stereotype's hold some validity. However, in this case Hachem criticizing a certain breed of players for destroying the game through their inability to represent it sufficiently seems pretty laughable.
I remember watching Hachem on WSOP in 2006 where he was all in with Pocket Aces and celebrated the fact he had coolered the shit of some young kid (think the dolt overplayed JJ for 15 bigs or something) and turned his bullets over a little later than I would label as acceptable. In fact, he did not turn them over, he threw them in such a way that one fell on the floor and dealer had to scoop the card up so that they could deal the board out.
Classy.
Now let us debate, if the roles had been reversed and the young, scruffy kid had done that to him with Aces. What would the reaction to that be? Maybe something like... Oh, those young kids are so fucking disrespectful, they darken and smudge the integrity of our game. A game that Hachem apparently holds so dear.
Now I know for a fact that this kind of behaviour is not a one off, as on twitter recently a few well respected players have come out and said that Hachem acted in a disrespectful manner at the table, an example being shouting for cards etc when he has not been in the pot. Now some might say, its gamesmanship, its part of the act, its his edge.
For me, those who say that really cannot be privy to the unwritten rules of the poker world. I for one, would not dream of acting in such a way however because I don't small talk with my entire table at a live event, some of my peers and I are being seen to play a key role in the demise of poker.
Something is not quite adding up.
That's not to say that some of the things that Hachem is highlighting, such as the fun aspect being taken out of the game and the mistreatment of fish coupled with obvious bumhunting that now goes on daily, do not hold a certain amount of validity. However, I do not see his way of thinking as the guiding light to the salvation of poker.
It is the view of a man who probably plays a handful of live tournaments a year and I would assume by now, is pretty unconnected with the world of online poker. He is a live player and has a live mentality to the game. There is nothing wrong with that, however you have to take into consideration the whole picture of modern poker before you can start to effectively change it for the better.
Passing the ambassador sugar
In my view, a player like Phil Galfond who actually is very open with his opinions alongside being one of the older generation of the 'online kids' would be a better fit for a poker ambassador, if one were needed. He has launched his own poker strategy franchise where he encourages new members to interact with him both online and at live seminars and is seemingly a pretty personable individual.
The key though thing with Phil is that he has a wealth of experience and currently is still a high volume grinder in some of the toughest games in the world. Thus would be in a much better position to comment and analyse, for instance, on the problem of bumhunting that is now rife throughout poker. Again though, who should be an ambassador for poker in the future and if one is really needed, is another a debate for another time.
Time for a change then
Perhaps instead it is time for the young online players to take their headphones out and put the hoodies down and for the older generation to both realise and accept the changing climate of poker, so that it can actually survive until the next boom hopefully arrives. I mean we don't have to like or even respect each other really, we just have to get along so that the game itself, especially live, can continue to flourish and grow.
Moreover, there seems to an infrastructure that gives live poker the foundation to really develop and accommodate both live and online grinders, an example of this being the UKIPT series in the UK, which is a runaway success. Online and live poker, to a certain degree at least, rely on each other to survive, so it is probably high time that, when the two worlds meet, that they are willing to adapt to each other but also more importantly to accept each other.
Otherwise most of us be calling that twat of a boss to get our jobs back.
Thanks for reading.
Brady
