The Inside Straight

Harrah's Hits Marketing Jackpot With World Series of Poker

In Only Two Years, Harrah's Takes WSOP Worldwide

By BOB PAJICH

In January of 2004, U.S. marshals came in with a court order, seized $2 million that was owed to a union, and closed Binion's Horseshoe. It took Harrah's less than a week to buy Binion's for about $50 million in mostly debts and liabilities. Harrah's already owned Jack Binion's Horseshoe Gaming Holdings ($1.45 billion), a company that owns riverboat casinos in several states. The purchase of Binion's Horseshoe in Las Vegas gave Harrah's complete control of the Binion's brand, and perhaps even more important, control of the popular World Series of Poker name.

That year, Harrah's reopened Binion's in Las Vegas a few weeks before the 2004 WSOP, just in time for Greg Raymer to come in and beat a field of 2,576 players. The year before, 839 players competed in the main event. In 2004, ESPN broadcast 22 hours of tournament action, and each segment started with a promo by Harrah's Entertainment, giving it arguably more national exposure than the casino chain had ever received in its 67 years.



Before the 2004 WSOP even began, Harrah's had already sold Binion's to MTR Gaming Group for about $15 million. Although MTR Gaming owns the buildings on Fremont Street, Harrah's still manages the hotel and casino. It's clear that Harrah's bought Binion's Horseshoe specifically for its name (which was made popular by both the larger-than-life personality of founder Jack Binion and his WSOP). It's a purchase that Harrah's is taking full advantage of through marketing partnerships tied in to the WSOP.



In only two years, Harrah's has taken the WSOP brand to a whole new level. About once a month, WSOP Tournament Circuit events are held at its casinos around the country. At all of these casinos, the red, white, and black WSOP logo can be found everywhere, and Harrah's does its best to feed the WSOP dream, holding satellites at all of the cardrooms to give its players a chance to get into the big events on the cheap.



It also seems that every other week, Harrah's announces that it has signed a deal with another company that wants to be part of the WSOP. Most of the news comes through Card Player magazine, which is the official magazine and Internet content provider of this year's WSOP, a partnership that was just announced in June.

Some of the other companies that utilize the WSOP brand are ExxonMobil, Quizno's, Miller Brewing, America Online, video-game publisher Activision, jewelry company Fredrick Goldman, cellphone game developer Glu Mobil, and watch company Corum.



Helping market the WSOP brand is global sports and lifestyles marketing firm IMG, which signed a deal with Harrah's in February of this year. IMG's job is to work closely with Harrah's across all areas of the WSOP business, including global sponsorship sales, global product licensing, official website development, international event development, and international television representation.



Having IMG working for a company is a big deal. Its clients include everyone from sports figures Tiger Woods and Eli Manning to Cindy Crawford and Ari Fleischer. IMG knows what it's doing when it comes to marketing.



IMG has been very busy. The company is responsible for helping make Milwaukee's Best Light the "presenting sponsor" of the WSOP until at least 2009, it landed Swiss watchmaker Corum as "The Official Timepiece of the World Series of Poker," and it helped get the WSOP bracelets redesigned by Fredrick Goldman. All of these companies have a global reach. For example, SABMiller, the brewer of Milwaukee's Best Light, has a presence in 60 countries across five continents with its 150 brands.

This year, it's conceivable that close to 10,000 players will play in the main event. When Chris Moneymaker won in 2003, the number of players totaled 839. It's been only a decade since the top prize of the main event reached $1 million. This year, it will exceed $10 million.



ESPN will broadcast the WSOP until at least 2010, and this year will make the final table of the main event available to pay-per-view customers. That's how popular the WSOP has become. Harrah's seemed to know what the WSOP would become when it bought Binion's in 2004, and it seems determined to make sure the world knows what's going on this summer at the Rio, when the biggest poker tournament the universe has ever seen is going on.



And just think, it cost Harrah's only $50 million, a drop in the bucket for a company that's first-quarter revenues for 2006 topped $2.4 billion.

CARD PLAYER'S

POKER BY THE NUMBERS

ASK JACK


Want to know how a multimillion-dollar poker tournament is run? Have a question about a specific tournament poker rule or past ruling you've encountered?



Card Player is giving you a chance to pick the mind of one of the game's finest – Bellagio Tournament Director Jack McClelland. You can send your questions to [email protected], and McClelland will share his 25-plus years of industry experience with you.



Tyler: I have had problems with players showing their cards after I make a big bluff or move in on the river to get them off a hand when I think I can take a pot down. This has happened to me several times and has cost me lots of money in tourneys and cash games.



The player shows his cards to get a read on me, and then makes the call. I don't see how this can be fair, for he has information that I did not get to have: the information from showing me his cards, getting a read on me, and then making up his mind based on my reaction. I was in shock two of the times that it was allowed.



I played in the main event of the 2005 World Series of Poker and saw Sam Farha at another table show his cards many times in hands against opponents to do this. What do you think about this?



Jack McClelland: In my tournaments, the first time a player intentionally exposes his cards to get a read on another player, he receives a 20-minute penalty. He must leave his seat and is blinded off. The second time is a 40-minute penalty. The third time is disqualification. So far, I've never had to disqualify anyone for this offense. A 20-minute penalty usually makes the point.


Tyler: I think you should be the first to say that there should be no more protection in tournaments. I know that it takes away from the poker game. Why not expose players to their enemies? I hate it when players wear sunglasses in tourneys. If you sit inside a box and push, raise, call, or fold and no one can see you, how is this any different from Phil Laak covering up with a hoodie and sunglasses so that no one can see him at all? One of the key elements of poker is the sport-like aspect that tells provide. I think they should all be out there to see, read, and so on.



For example, here's a World Series of Poker dress code.



1. No sunglasses or eye-masking devices of any kind. Prescription glasses must be see-through, and if glasses are tinted, they must be below an XYZ level.



2. No hoodies or clothes that cover up the face, forehead, eyes, or upper neck.



What do you think?



JM: I agree. Players have been pushing the envelope, and soon action will need to be taken. That day is coming.


Clayton: When dealing in a home game of ours, sometimes a card gets exposed on the deal. What is the ruling on this? We usually just declare a misdeal and reshuffle the cards. This is happening a lot and is slowing the game down. Is there anything else we can do? Thank you.



JM: In a button game such as hold'em, if one of the first two cards off the deck is exposed, it is a misdeal. If a subsequent card is exposed, continue the deal and replace the exposed card with the burn card. Two exposed cards is an automatic misdeal.

Ernie Fong (jogsxyz on the CardPlayer.com forum): Have you or the poker community ever considered seeding the field? Past World Poker Tour champions would all be awarded a top seed. Also, top seeds would go to a few notables. Top seeds would never be seated at the same table in the early levels of play. Is poker ready for seeding in place of the totally random draw in seating? Thank you.



JM: I believe seeding is an unworkable idea. Should the Yankees be in the playoffs automatically since they won the most titles? In poker, as in most sports, the hard facts are, what have you done recently? Who should be seeded higher, Phil Hellmuth with nine World Series of Poker bracelets or Joe Bartholdi, the leading money winner in World Poker Tour history? Annie Duke, WSOP Tournament of Champions winner and the first lady to win $2 million, or Greg Raymer, the first player to win $5 million? Russ Hamilton, the WSOP Silver Anniversary winner, or Joseph Hachem, the 2005 WSOP winner? That's why we play the game – to find out who is the best right now. Champions from several years ago, like Tom McEvoy and Phil Hellmuth, should be respected and honored, but a seeding system is going to take away from the game.


Phillip Johnson, Redmond, Washington: As one of the most respected tournament directors in the industry, what advice would you give someone who aspires to break into the tournament-directing field?



JM: Learn the rules thoroughly of all the games you will be directing. Have a lot of patience with the players and staff. In order, look out for your employees, players, and staff, and worry about yourself last. Learn all aspects – playing, dealing, floorperson, and tournament floorperson.


TJ "Nole91" Barchie, Roswell, Georgia: With the amount of money involved in the premier poker events, why have no tourneys found a way to provide instant chip-count updates? The technology exists, and I'm sure a sponsor (maybe Card Player) would be easy to find.



JM: We are looking into this technology. So far, the imbedded chips and the tables to read them are still being developed. But in the near future, it is coming.

Tim: I know this is a precise situation, but I've been faced with it many, many times, and I'm never quite sure if I'm doing the right thing. You built your bankroll on sit-and-gos, so you understand the psychology behind them. Here's my situation: It's a single-table sit-an-go and the top three get paid. There are four or five players left. I'm short-stacked, or not far off. The big blind is 20 percent – 25 percent of my stack. I'm dealt pocket tens or pocket jacks in the big blind, and someone raises to three times the big blind from early position. Everyone folds to me. The bet screams of A-Q or A-K. I know I'm about 56 percent or 57 percent to win, a slight advantage. I also know that sit-and-gos are about working larger margins than this. My question is this: When I'm behind in chips, should I raise all in or fold? If I call, I'm pot-committed, so it's not really an option. I know it depends on the opponent, but assuming I'm facing A-Q or A-K every time (I usually am), what is the right thing to do in this situation? Is this a big enough margin to push, considering the circumstances?

Scott: I think this is a perfect example of how to use my sit-and-go strategy, which I cover in depth in my new book, Online Ace. As much as I'd like to say that it's not an all-in lottery when the blinds get huge and there are only a few players left, that's essentially what it is. However, there is some skill advantage that you will have over your opponents in the long run if you play perfectly, but that's easier said than done, since the blinds are so high and the stacks are so low. My suggestion to you would be this: The next time you get down to three players, regardless of your stack size, push all in every hand if no one else has pushed all in before you. Analyze exactly what happens and pay attention to what your results are, and adjust accordingly. Once you are comfortable and feel like you can gauge when to push in, you won't need to do it every time; but at first, pushing in every hand will help you learn this. You can scale back accordingly in the future for optimal results.

Marcus: I know you are the perfect person to ask this question, since you play a lot of tournaments. I do well at one- and three-table sit-and-gos, cashing about 30 percent of the time, but I really want to be successful in tournaments with 100-plus players and always find myself in the middle of these tournaments with maybe six times the big blind. I play well, but it gets to that point where I don't see flops and there are huge raises preflop and blinds stealing. I do my part to steal from good position, and I push hard when I do get a monster, but I get to the point where I have to push or get blinded off, and I end up busting out a little bit before bubble time starts. I know there isn't a secret formula, but should I take more risks early in the tourney? The propensity of players online to play hands like A-9 and call all the way to the river until they are saved by an ace is horrendous; they call huge bets hoping for the ace, and they get it lots of times. Any advice you may have is appreciated.

Scott: First of all, you really shouldn't let yourself get down to six times the big blind. When you are near the bubble with seven-10 big blinds, in my opinion, you have two choices. You can pick up a monster, which is the same as getting lucky, or play no hands from any position, being very patient and waiting for premium hands. However, if you are on the button or in the small blind and everyone folds to you, push all in without looking at your cards. This strategy essentially enables you to play round by round, waiting to pick up a monster but not losing any ground if you are able to pick up the blinds with one or two others in the pot. In the long run, the math is with you when you push all in blind in that situation, because a player has to have a hand to call you and win at showdown. So, mathematically, you will win most of the time and keep your stack large enough to still have fold equity (meaning you have enough chips to induce another player to fold). This brings me to my next point. If you fall below seven big blinds, the math is not with you, because your chance of getting called is much higher. That is why you must push all in regardless of what cards you have when your stack is still large enough to steal the blinds.

Justin Bragg: Here's a quick question to help me fine-tune my game. I've been playing poker for about a solid year now, just part time, as a way to earn some extra spending money and keep my mind sharp. However, there are times when I am sitting at the table and find myself not concentrating on the play, like I'm not "feeling it" that particular day. Is this normal? What are some things to do to help overcome this lack of concentration?

Scott: Everyone has his own strategies for staying focused, and the ability to do so successfully is one of the single most important factors in tournament play. You really just need to find whatever works for you, and if you aren't "feeling it" that day, you shouldn't be playing. Not everyone can sustain his concentration over what can sometimes be 14-hour days, and that is often the difference between good tournament players and great tournament players. If you find that you are unable to play for long periods of time, you should opt for cash games or small single-table tournaments, where the time investment is smaller.

SHARK ATTACK

More bad beats seem to happen in online poker than in live poker. If you play both types, I'm sure you agree. But exactly why would it be this way?



There are two popular theories:



Theory No. 1: Online poker is rigged.



Theory No. 2: There are more hands per hour dealt, therefore it's an illusion that there are more bad beats.



Both of these theories are wrong. Here's why: First, online poker is not rigged. I mean, c'mon … do you really think these multibillion dollar casinos would need to rig hands? They make their money from tournament entry fees and rakes, and trust me, they're making plenty.



So, what about the second theory? Well, I agree there are more hands per hour dealt in online poker than live poker. There's no disputing that. But I don't think that's a good enough reason – because bad beats seem to occur in a higher percentage of hands online.



OK, here's my theory on this: The reason more bad beats happen online is because the very nature of online poker leads people to play differently. The cards and odds are the same, but the players aren't the same.



In online poker, a large portion of players adopt the style of loose-aggressive. They act irrationally, play hands they shouldn't, and bet too aggressively. Why? Because online poker isn't as "real." The money isn't as real. Heck, the casinos give you so much "free" money when you sign up, how could it feel real? The cards aren't real. The chips aren't real. The table isn't real. None of that stuff even exists. All you see when you play online poker are some silly little animations. And you hear some "click, click" sounds of fake chips. That's it!



It's a different world, my friend.



Now, let's get back to the bad beats.



The fact that players are loose-aggressive is what leads to the situations in which bad beats happen. Here's why:



1. Players bet their draws more or call large bets with draws and low-strength hands (for example, bottom pair).



2. More players are involved in every pot.



3. The pots are bigger, since players are more aggressive.



When these conditions combine, it creates an environment in which there are a lot of big pots and bad beats. It's not that the cards are "rigged." It's that the betting patterns and playing styles are different from what you're used to.



So, is there any way to prevent bad beats? Yes and no. Ultimately, bad beats will occur no matter what, if you're playing good poker, because to win, you've got to take risks – and most risks have a minimum 20 percent chance of not working out.



With that said, there are still ways to prevent most bad beats online. Not only can you prevent them, but you can literally turn them around and make them your ultimate advantage. The key is to use the fact that players are so loose and aggressive to help you win more pots. This is achieved by adopting a special playing style designed specifically for online poker. I call this style tight-aggressive squared.



The concept of tight-aggressive squared is simple. It starts with the logic that tight-aggressive is the most effective poker-playing style. In online poker, more players see each flop, so you must play even tighter with your hand selection. You should play only monsters! There's absolutely no reason to get involved with "decent" hands (at a full table), because the odds are against you. You'll run into players who are chasing or who just caught a lucky flop.



When you do get involved in a hand, you must be extremely aggressive. The pot size will be bigger, so you can't lose many hands or you'll be out of the game in a hurry. You must strike hard and risk virtually all of your chips – frequently – in order to win. The goals are simple:



1. Force out all but one (preferably) or two players for any pot in which you get involved.



2. Have the odds so insanely stacked in your favor that you win far more pots than you lose.



And when you win lots of big pots, you become the chip leader very quickly. That's how you take control of a poker table.



The reason you want to force people out of the hand is simple mathematics. Let's say, for instance, that you get pocket aces. Here's what three of your opponents are holding:



Player No. 1: K-K

Player No. 2: 10-9 suited

Player No. 3: Q-10 offsuit



Now, if you went heads up against any of these hands, your chances of winning would be about 80 percent. They'd be about 85 percent against Player No. 3. But, if you went up against all three of these opponents in one single hand, your odds of winning are 58.5 percent! That's just over 50-50 with the absolute best starting hand possible. Get my point?



So, when you get pocket aces, you need to force out all but one caller. In low-stakes online tournaments and ring games, that often means going all in. If one of those players calls, you'll win four out of five times. So, if you get five big hands a game, you'll lose only once. Of course, that one you lose usually won't wipe you out, because you'll have more chips from the other big hands. Get it?



This is how you win in online poker. To learn more details about this playing style, and all the strategies that go with it, visit this webpage: www.FreePokerNewsletter.com