January 2007 Archives

by Dennis Oehring

Four individuals participate in every match on Poker After Dark. Do you know who they are? No, they're not any of the players, but besides Shana, they are the only people on camera in each and every show. Their names are Danette Morway, Mary Gregorich, John Waltermeyer, and Angie Border. They are the dealers.

If you've followed televised poker for a while, some of their faces might look familiar to you, and you would be correct. This elite group has appeared on many shows that HSOR and POKER-PROductions have been involved with, and they have been handpicked by the producers for their outstanding skills as well as their professionalism.

I have watched them go about their business during the taping of several shows, including Poker Superstars, the National Heads-Up Poker Championship, High Stakes Poker, and the Pro/Am Poker Equalizer. I have the utmost respect for them; so much that I wanted to feature them here so that readers and viewers could get to know them.

So look for biographical information and pictures of each of the dealers on Poker After Dark on this blog in the near future. These are not your average poker dealers, and the fact that they rarely, if ever, make a mistake on the many shows they've worked on is a testimony to this fact. As far as I'm concerned, they are the creme de la creme of the profession, and I am proud to be associated with them and to call them my friends.

by Dennis Oehring

First of all, congratulations to Phil Ivey on winning! He showed how to play the game when you have a big stack to perfection. Ivey would often enter pots with marginal hands because he could afford to, and then outplay his opponents with a weak board on the flop. Ivey showed how important accumulating chips in the early stages of a match is, and that he is one of the best at putting pressure on his opponents when he has that advantage.

But Ivey could just as easily have been out in 6th place were it not for Lady Luck, who arrived in the form of a queen on the turn and on the river. Sam Farha was the early chip leader, having $33,000 in chips to Ivey's $20,000, when Phil called Sammy's all in reraise after a flop of 6 9 8 with 2 spades. Farha held the 5 7 of spades for a made straight with a flush draw, and was a decided favorite over Ivey's set of sixes. But consecutive queens on 4th and 5th street gave Ivey sixes full, crippling Farha, and more than doubling up Ivey. Farha went from the big stack to the short stack, and wound up being the first player eliminated.

It's hands like this that help me understand how both proponents of poker being a game of skill and detractors who say it's just another game of chance feel about their respective positions. But in the final analysis, I don't see how either player could have played the hand any differently.

I enjoy watching Hellmuth and Matusow play against one another, and especially how they are always trying to put each other on tilt. Whether you are fans of theirs or not, it's hard to deny the tremendous drawing power that they have in terms of ratings. At times, I find myself pulling for them, and at other times against them. Some of the things they say make me laugh and some make me cringe, but maybe this is one of the reasons I love watching them. Anyhow, Phil could never get his game strategy in gear and finished a disappointing 5th.

Andy Bloch provided an element of balance to this table of talkers and big egos. I like to watch Andy play, because he is disciplined, humble, and I've never seen him rattled. He plays solid poker, and makes sound decisions. Holding pocket 10s with the short stack, Andy called an all in preflop reraise made by Phil Ivey, who had pocket 9s. Bloch was a 4:1 favorite to win the hand, but another 9 on the flop sent Andy to the rail in 4th place.

With three of the more verbal players in Tony G, "Mike the Mouth" and the "Poker Brat" all seated at the same table, I expected anything but peace and quiet during the match. But I admit to being somewhat surprised at Tony G's demeanor. I've seen Tony play a few times, and this was about as well mannered as I've ever seen him on television. For the most part, he came across exactly as he does when he isn't involved in a game at all, which is friendly and very respectful of others. Unfortunately for Tony, he was card dead throughout most of the match, and didn't get paid off for the good hands he did have, and found himself out in 3rd place.

That left Mikey heads-up against Ivey, and Matusow wasn't in that bad of shape as Ivey only held a 3:2 chip advantage. But the start of heads-up play was about as close as Matusow ever got to catching Phil, as Ivey systematically whittled down Mike's stack. On the final hand, both players made top pair when a queen came on the flop, but Ivey's king kicker was better than Matusow's once both players were all in, and Matusow couldn't pair his kicker on the turn or river to give Ivey the victory.

By Dan Gati

Each week on Poker After Dark, we have a new cast of characters. Some weeks the players talk incessantly (Week 1 with Hellmuth, Annie Duke, Sheiky); other weeks, the game of poker is the focus (Week 3 with the WSOP champs). What is the perfect combination? Would the audience rather see blowups, a la Hellmuth in Week 1? Or would the audience rather see disciplined, smart poker play with little interaction between the players (Week 3)?

There is no easy answer to this question, and, like most issues, there's probably a common ground to be had. Ideally, the players would be entertaining most of the time, and, while all the theatrics are going on, they'd play solid poker. And from time to time, you get that perfect storm.

Week 4 (Matusow, Tony G, Ivey, Farha, Bloch, Hellmuth) is pretty close to that perfect storm, and I think the audience will agree that this has been one of the best weeks of Poker After Dark.

And the good news is, Week 4 is just the beginning. Next week, Phil Laak and Antonio Esfandiari join Poker After Dark, and it's always entertaining when those two are at the table. Plus, you have the added benefit that both of those guys are exceptional poker players who really enjoy the nuances of the game.

Back to the original question: what's the best table possible? You definitely need two or three "talkers." Guys who are entertaining. But you also need guys like Phil Ivey who are insanely good players and will chime in from time to time with a witty one-liner.

The process of selecting a group of six will evolve over time, and eventually, it will be down to a near science. In the meantime, enjoy the rest of Week 4 and all of Week 5. It doesn't get much better than this in the poker world.

by Dennis Oehring

Champions Week on Poker After Dark proved to be a highly dramatic event, just as was envisioned by the producers and NBC. The $120,000 first place prize money wasn't nearly as important to the players as being able to say that they sat down at the same table with five other World Champions and defeated them. Pride was at stake in this match far more than the money.

What also made this match compelling to watch was that it really gave viewers a chance to get inside of the heads of these champions and ask themselves what they would have done in the same situation. Table talk was minimal, allowing the viewers to concentrate on the action and compare their own decisions to the ones made by those who have made millions from theirs.

It's highly doubtful that any of the players expected to go all in on the first hand, but that's exactly what happened. Carlos Mortensen and Chris Ferguson tangled right off the bat when Carlos held pocket queens in the big blind and Chris had A J on the button. After some preflop raising, an ace on the flop prompted Ferguson to raise an "in the dark" bet made by Carlos, and eventually go all in when Carlos came over the top of him, causing Carlos to fold and find himself severely crippled right out of the gate. Carlos would end up being the first to be eliminated. More details on this hand can be found in Dan Gati's Hand of the Week column by clicking here.

Next to be eliminated was the reigning World Champion, Jamie Gold. This was one of the first opportunities to see Gold in action since his WSOP victory last year, and many probably tuned in for just this reason. But even his bowl of blueberries couldn't help him catch a card he needed to complete an open-ended straight draw against Chris Ferguson's two pair, and he was sent to the rail in 5th place.

Doyle Brunson flopped a pair of aces and got all of his chips in with the best hand against Johnny Chan, who had flopped a pair of queens. But Johnny also held two spades, and with one already on the board, two more came on the turn and river to give him a flush and put Doyle on the short stack. Even the best suck out from time to time. Chan would then go on to eliminate Brunson in 4th place soon after.

With the blinds at $1000/$2000, Chan moved all in preflop with A 8 offsuit from the small blind. Ferguson, on the short stack and in the big blind, deliberated and eventually called with K 5 offsuit. Johnny had Chris covered, and an ace on the flop all but sealed Ferguson's fate. Another ace on the turn did, and Chris was out in 3rd place.

So it was Chris Moneymaker and Johnny Chan to heads-up play, with Johnny holding a slight chip advantage. Attending the taping of this show, I was struck by how often Chris would let out heavy sighs once play got to this point, indicative of the pressure he was experiencing and how badly he wanted to win this match.

The final hand found Johnny going all in after the flop with middle pair, leaving Chris to ponder whether to call with an open-ended straight draw. Chris finally decided to gamble and made the call, and both players stood up and started pacing around the room, another indication of how much each wanted to win this match. But like Jamie Gold before him, the cards Chris needed to complete his straight eluded him on the turn and the river, and Johnny Chan emerged victorious.

By Dan Gati

Week 3 promises to be quite a week on Poker After Dark. Why? Because this is the first time in history (though I could be proven wrong) that all six players at a six-handed table each have a World Series of Poker Main Event bracelet.

Chris Moneymaker (2003). Jamie Gold (2006). Johnny Chan (1987, 1988). Chris "Jesus" Ferguson (2000). Doyle Brunson (1976, 1977). And Carlos Mortensen (2001).

Over the last six months, no player's game has been more discussed and more analyzed than Jamie Gold's game. He's the defending champ, and his game is under intense scrutiny.

Ever since Jamie Gold won the Main Event this past year, he's developed his fair share of critics. Putting his pending lawsuit aside, people close to the poker world have called Jamie lucky and annoying, and those are some of the nice things said about him.

I happen to fall in a different camp. From what I saw of Jamie in this year's World Series, I thought he played exceptionally well. Did he get lucky? Of course. No one wins the Main Event without getting lucky. It's impossible. But his unique style - talking at the table and often telling the truth - really confused some of the best players in the world. He pulled off nice bluffs at the final table and actually made Allen Cunningham look foolish on at least one hand.

Having worked on a number of poker shows, including High Stakes Poker and the Pro-Am Poker Equalizer, I've seen many hands that Jamie has played, not just the ones included in ESPN's WSOP broadcasts. While he often gets himself into some difficult situations, Jamie is an excellent player. I think time will prove that Jamie is not a one-hit wonder.

At the Pro-Am Equalizer, Jamie should have won his table. Had Huck Seed and Jeff Madsen not outdrawn him repeatedly, Jamie would've made the final table and had a shot at $500,000. I can't get into too much detail on how Jamie played on High Stakes Poker 3, but suffice it to say, it wasn't the crowning achievement of his poker career.

Jamie has so many haters because it's easy to hate on the champ. Jamie certainly caught a lot of cards at the Main Event, but he knew what to do when he was catching cards. Not too many people can do that, and he did it to perfection. He led the field at the end of Day 3 and never let go. That is unprecedented and should not be overlooked.

So, how does Jamie do on Poker After Dark? Well, watch this week and you'll find out.

By Dennis Oehring

Week 2 of Poker After Dark saw Daniel Negreanu emerge as the winner by defeating David Grey in heads-up play. Congratulations, Daniel! The match was not only fun to watch, but also had some very interesting hands.

This match demonstrated exactly what the show's producers had hoped to accomplish. Besides being entertaining to watch, it was also very educational. As Shana Hiatt said in her comments prior to the season's opening match, the show provides viewers with the opportunity to see how a match develops over time, and how the top players have to adjust their play as the match progresses.

There were several examples that caused me to reflect on my own play while watching this match. Among them were the value of having position; the importance of sometimes raising preflop with marginal hands when out of position in order to take the lead in a hand after the flop, and how critical it is to play your opponents rather than simply playing your cards. All of these factors came into play several times during the match, and I know my play in the future will benefit from realizing them.

And how about some of the bust outs? With Doyle first to act and going all in for his last $400 with A 8, action folded to Mike Matusow who found big slick and raised to $3000 from the small blind. Gabe Kaplan, in the big blind, looked down at pocket sevens and reraised to $10,000, a play that caused Matusow to fold and isolated Gabe against Doyle. Negreanu had already folded a 7, so when an ace came on the flop, things were looking good for Dolly, but the case 7 fell on the river to give Kaplan a set and eliminate Brunson. Had Matusow called Gabe's reraise or moved all in, I'm sure Kaplan, who was pot committed, would have called and crippled Mikey, but Matusow wound up making a great laydown.

The hand that knocked Kaplan out was a classic. Kaplan, who I thought played very well, found the A Q of spades on the button and raised to $3000 preflop. David Grey, in the small blind, had pocket queens and reraised to $10,000. Kaplan went all in and Grey called. The flop came A 10 10, making Kaplan a 90% favorite to win the hand at that point, and leaving Grey to catch runner runner K J for a split, two clubs to make a flush, or a one-outer to win. The turn brought the miracle case queen, giving Grey a full house. The river didn't bring an ace that Gabe needed to win, and he was eliminated. What a cooler. Both of these hands showed how much luck is still a factor in this game.

I'm really looking forward to Match 3, as the table will be comprised only of players who have won the World Championship, including the reigning WSOP Champion Jamie Gold. How could you ask for anything more?

By Dan Gati

We're two weeks into the first season of Poker After Dark, and there are a lot of opinions on the format of the show.

Since the show airs at 2:00 a.m. in most markets, Poker After Dark is not meant to be an intense poker show. The analysis is kept to a minimum in order to allow viewers to enjoy the play. Announcer Oliver "Ali" Nejad brings viewers up to date on the action. He's not there to give insight as to what players might be thinking on a given hand. And, from time to time, Ali will chime in with some humor to keep the mood light on Poker After Dark.

Ali's role on the show has been debated within the poker community, and there are a variety of opinions. Some people think Ali is funny and his limited commentary allows viewers to really get an inside look at the players at the table. Others think Ali doesn't give enough true poker analysis and interferes with the table talk.

As someone who is involved in the production and who knows Ali well, I'm one of the people who think his commentary adds a lot to the show, but I can see the other point of view. Ali fully recognizes the need to allow the players to be the stars of the show. He's just there to remind viewers of what happened in a given hand. Occasionally, it's necessary to talk over the conversation to make sure the action in a hand is clear. 95% of the time, the table talk that gets talked over is irrelevant and/or inappropriate.

I think you'll find that as the show progresses, people will begin to better appreciate the format of the show. Gone are the days of over-analysis. And, perhaps more importantly, gone are the days of just seeing "coin flips" like queens v. ace-king. People want to see and hear the players, and they want to see all kinds of hands, not just the ones where a player is eliminated. Poker After Dark is definitely a jolt to the system, but I have a feeling it will grow to be liked by the poker community.

By Dennis Oehring

Attending the taping of Poker After Dark was the 7th show I've been somewhat involved with during the past year. Being able to meet and get to know many of the greatest players in the game today has been a dream come true for me. Prior to moving to Las Vegas in 2005, I knew them only as they were portrayed on television, through books I read that they authored, or through magazine articles either that they wrote or that were written about them in various poker publications.

When I first got into this business, I was a starry-eyed middle-aged poker junkie who never expected to have much of an opportunity to meet any of the players face-to-face. After all, I was just a fledgling freelance poker writer, pursuing an occupation I had no experience whatsoever in while trying to combine it with my love of the game.

That soon changed, however, thanks to email exchanges I engaged in prior to my move with two of poker's most influential women, Card Player columnists Linda Johnson and Jan Fisher. Upon meeting them, we became fast friends. They introduced me to Mori Eskandani, now the President of POKER-PROductions. I can never thank Linda and Jan enough for all the help and support they gave me while trying to get my foot into poker's door.

My first exposure to big name pros came at a general meeting of the players before the taping of the first season of High Stakes Poker. One of my assignments was to take photos of the players for HSOR, LLC, the executive producers of the show of which Mori was contracted to organize and manage the production of at the time. Many of my photos came out blurry, as I was so nervous! But to a player, once I introduced myself as being associated with Mori, everyone made me feel comfortable. The respect the players have for Mori, who is the greatest person in the world to work for, became very evident to me that evening.

I wanted to share with you my favorite photo from that meeting. It is of Jennifer Harman and her husband, Marco Traniello, my favorite poker couple and two of the nicest people you will ever meet. The love they have for one another is so apparent in this picture. Together, they have something that I want, and I'm not talking about their bankrolls. Maybe one day I'll find it again before my playing days are over.

Now it is always a pleasure to work with the top players, and I have never met a player who wasn't courteous to me or respectful of what I do. Television has often cast players such as Phil Hellmuth, Mike Matusow, Shawn Sheikhan, and Tony G as villains to some extent, but they aren't in my eyes. Once you get to know these individuals and other pros personally, you'll find in general that they are warm and friendly people who are simply playing the cards dealt to them in life the best way they know how. To all of you, I look forward to seeing and working with you again soon.

By Dennis Oehring

Well, if the first week of Poker After Dark is any indication of what we can expect to see in the future, here's one guy that's not going to miss an episode! The first week had a little of everything, from personal confrontation and verbal taunting to interesting stories and great poker.

Being fortunate enough to attend the taping of the show, and from attending the taping of several other shows in the past, I knew the producers wouldn't shy away from showing the controversy that evolved during this match. Anyone who remembers the incident on the first season of High Stakes Poker involving Freddy Deeb being accused of "going south" will understand what I'm talking about. The producers are one and the same.

Televised poker, in a way, is the ultimate reality show. When a player is under the lights and knows that their every move and decision is going to be scrutinized by perhaps millions of people who are watching, the pressure to do well, regardless of the stakes, is very real. It can often bring out components of a player's personality that develop into questionable behavior that, while some love to watch, others loathe. To me, it's all part of what makes televised poker so interesting and entertaining.

Having Phil Hellmuth and Shawn Sheikhan at the same table was no fluke, but I doubt that anyone, from the producers to the players themselves, anticipated the degree of volatility that would erupt between the two. And while all the players needled Phil to some degree when he demanded to know if anything was going to be done about the table talk when he was faced with a big decision, I sensed a certain amount of remorse from most of the players by the end of the match concerning their behavior. Gus Hansen later said that what they did was wrong. Even Sheiky in his exit interview said he got what he deserved.

By the way, immediately after the incident, the producers put in place a new rule. It simply states that if other players are talking and a player wishes to have silence at the table when faced with a tough decision, the player need only let the dealer know this, at which time the dealer will inform the other players of the request. Failure to comply with the request by continuing to talk will now result in a "time-out" period of one lap of the button for the offending player(s), with blinds forfeited during this time. Phil was happy to see the rule instituted, so expect to see him in future episodes.

Many thanks to NBC Sports Executive VP Jon Miller and NBCsports.com manager Brett Vandermark for asking me to provide the website with an occasional blog. I hope to be able to share more behind-the-scenes information and other interesting little tidbits from matches in the future, along with a few surprises.