Bigger Deal

Since taking over the World Series of Poker, and moving it to the Rio in 2005, Harrah’s hasn’t had the greatest press. Critics and players have complained about how corporate the event has become, with beer commercials on every table layout and ESPN dictating the scheduling of final tables.

Some of the carping has been deserved, especially concerning the terrible bathroom facilities in the WSOP’s first year at the Rio, the sudden appearance of extra chips in the main event a couple of years back, and Harrah’s swingeing 6% cut of the entry fee.

But generally I think they have done a pretty good job. It is hard to imagine that Becky Binion would have ever grown the World Series to the size where there would be 3,929 players sitting down for a $1,500 no limit tournament more than a month before the main event, as happened earlier this week. Poker players are, as a group, one of the biggest collection of moaners and whingers I have ever come across; even if they were all given free entry to the main event, I suspect some would complain that they would rather have played two pot limit Omaha tournaments at $5,000 a time instead. Harrah’s has responded to the criticisms it has received, listened to player suggestions and, in several cases, actually responded to those ideas and made changes for the better.

Players often forget that Harrah’s is the largest casino company in the world, and its private equity buyers have a seriously hefty pile of debt to pay off. It should come as no surprise that management tries to make as much money out of the event as humanly possible. Harrah’s is not a charity – any more than the Binions were – and it has taken a punt on poker in a way that few of its rival Vegas operators were prepared to. (Poker produces far lower returns per square foot than slot machines, and you don’t have to worry about slot machines turning up for work or needing to go on a break).

Anyway, the whole point of this blog is to praise something Harrah’s has introduced at this year’s World Series of Poker – the Excessive Celebration Rule. It came into force last Saturday, and states that ‘excessive celebration through extended theatrics, inappropriate behavior or physical actions, gestures or conduct may be subject to penalty.’

The rule has already informally become known among players as the Hevad Khan rule, after the final table antics of last year’s sixth-place finisher. His shouting, grimacing and all round play-acting were considered by many to be disrespectful both to the event and his fellow competitors.

Now such behaviour can be punished. ‘We’ve introduced a new rule that puts a focus on unsportsmanlike conduct and brings to life our desire to have the competitive field as enjoyable and pleasant for the players as possible,’ said Commissioner Jeffrey Pollack in an interview with USA Today.

‘You could be put on the rail (held out of play) for a few minutes, you could have a forfeiture of chips, there can be a forfeiture of prize money, there can be ejection from the tournament. We even have the ability to ban people from future WSOP events.’

Khan was hardly the first person to behave like this at the tables, and over the past five years I have seen some pretty astounding rubdowns and arrogance from players. The motto ‘get it quietly’ seems to have passed them by.

Part of the problem was that the cameras patrolling the floor at the Rio would focus only on those who brought attention upon themselves – so players soon learned that if they wanted to be on TV (and seen by all their buddies), then the most likely way to achieve that was to behave like a total tool. There was a snowball effect to this as television editing meant that viewers at home were educated that ‘in your face’ behaviour was perfectly acceptable at the World Series (where were the commentators saying: ‘He’ll be embarrassed as heck when he sees the footage and realizes that he looks like an utter tosspot’?).

So far, from what I have heard, the rule has been sensibly applied and, most importantly, is actually being enforced. Unlike the F-bomb rule (anti-swearing), it has a high degree of subjectivity as to what constitutes excessive celebration, and I hope that it is applied consistently throughout the tournament. If someone gets kicked out from the final table, and it turns out that similar behaviour in an earlier tournament has not been punished by a different member of the tournament staff, then I could see lawsuits flying.

I still expect to see some pretty rough behaviour at the World Series tables - you can’t expect players to turn off their emotions when so much money is involved – but it might at least calm some of the worst exhibitionists and make life a little happier for the 99% of players who just want to get on with it.

PS: One small criticism of Harrah’s relating to the record-entry $1,500 event (event 2) of this year’s World Series. Players were forced to play until 5.40am on Tuesday morning because Harrah’s and ESPN’s schedules were not flexible enough to add an extra day. I know these things are hard to arrange – all the management who could make that sort of level of decision were probably still fast asleep in bed – but with so much money at stake, it is tough on players to keep them playing for 16 hours or longer, especially as it was clear that some were losing focus and making major mistakes as it got past the 4am mark.