fomma: don;t think I every quoted favorite meals? but will surely have complete update mid week as promised.

* I'm not letting this go, stay objective and positive, thnx

Hi KazHead,
back at the office and on computer. promise to work hard and provide complete update. Will keep it objective and I think many will find the update useful and thoughtful.

thanks, have a nice day....

That's what I'm saying, don't leave out all the important background info this time. The more detail you give them, the better the chance that they'll take it seriously and dive into your manuscript.

Think about it. Right now, all they've got is a straightforward "case closed" situation with a known undesirable customer and a quick little note from you. If you're going to make progress, you need to drop a big detailed stack of paper on their desk.

Don't hold back. Tell them everything. Let it rip!

Fromma: whats the slogan the Sixers are using..... that's the only path I know

I'm not sure what that means, but you should definitely include all your thoughts about it in your followup letter.

really hoping the parties can resolve the matter so I do not have to put the time in and prolong the (obvious) issue here....

I'm wondering what reasonably people expect the WSOP can/should do.

Apology?
Sure. They can say, "Sorry, w f'd up."

Compensation?
Cash damages are speculative in terms of loss of equity. LV can't really say he played poorly due to the harassment or security reaction (and nobody has pointed to a game decision that seems out of line). Paying him here would open the WSOP up to paying out others in the future for other claims of third party harassment. As a legal matter, it would be all but impossible to prove damages. He would theoretically have had a better case if he got up and left due to the harassment.

Reassignment/suspension/demotion of the floor supervisor involved?
That seems reasonable perhaps. But it doesn't do anything for LV other than giving some sense of acknowledgement and retribution.

So what if the WSOP says:
We f'd up, we're sorry, we disciplined the guy, and that's the best we can do. What more is there? Money? Sorry, sir, there will be no money.

At the end of the day, for the WSOP it's a simple +/- analysis. How much do they lose in actual dollars when LV doesn't play (which, once he shows up and plays the Main means that there is almost no loss at all)? How much do they lose because others don't play (do you know anyone staying away because of this)? That's just not a big number.

An aside: This is where the poker community can do better. If everyone (or most of the players) at the table said that this was unacceptable and refused to play until the problem was solved, it may have worked out better. I know people who would have done that. It seems, that nobody at that table perceived this to be that bad, or that all of them were spineless when it came to a fair treatment issue.

From what I can tell from this thread, it's not even clear that there's a matter to be resolved.

Mr. Jack Effel
WSOP Director @ Rio
3700 W. Flamingo Road
Las Vegas, NV 89105

June 22, 2017

(Follow up-letter 2 of 3) The Colossus 2017 Failure

Dear Mr. Effel,

I received two calls from Las Vegas yesterday; unfortunately I was in a meeting and could not take your call. Since more than 20,000 people are following along with my original The Colossus 2017 Failure report, I thought it best to keep everyone in the loop and write a follow up letter.

My view and experienced professional opinion of this entire matter is that the player (Vrabel) that was bullied, discriminated, and intimidate by your staff needs to be corrected. I’m going to provide a suggestion to solve the compensation to Vrabel issue first, one that may be considered in a court of law.

Compensation

1. From my view, your (WSOP) exposure to damages started when the player (Vbrel) began at the last 10 person table.

2. I suggest the stacks for each player at the start of that table be recreated. The records and tape would show exactly how many chips each player had at that point.

3. I would then apply a “chip-count” formula and calculate the value of each players stack.

4. At this point you would have a “hard number” of the value of remaining chips at this table at that [exact point];

But; it’s not going to be that clean and easy. In court, skill level factor would also need to be considered.

Now that the value of chips in each stack has been established, I would (in court) insist that a skill level and probability of finish based on the past results of the players at the table be applied to the equation. Establish a “line” just like they do in your sports book. Each player would be ranked according to skill level and the actual “hard number” value of the remaining stacks would surely change based on the event being played out on even terms.

** I do not know or have not researched the skill level of any of the other players, so this is something that a small group of professionals could perhaps undertake and assign on behalf of WSOP. It’s a method we would use in court, and it’s that difficult to calculate.

Once the skill level value and probability is established, simply apply that to the “hard stack” value to come up with each players stack value at that point in time, the start of 10 handed play.

The difference in value (if any) in the Vrabel stack and his payout amount is what WSOP is obligated to compensate Vrabel based on chips and stack.

Compensatory Damages

com·pen·sa·to·ry
kəmˈpensəˌtôrē/
adjective
• (of a payment) intended to recompense someone who has experienced loss, suffering, or injury.
*reducing or offsetting the unpleasant or unwelcome effects of something.


My professional experience and opinion is that the player Luke Vrabel is owed compensatory damages:

• 18,000+ players competed in an event organized by WSOP, and each player and non-playing spectator are subjected to the same rules and regulations as found in the WSOP rules for 2017 directive.
• 10 players beat 18,000+ players to reach a last table of 10 players.
• Each player deserved the right to fair and equal rules to be applied fairly and squarely.
• The top prize was ONE MILLION DOLLARS. I’m assuming, this was not only Life changing money for every player at that table, but the WSOP bracelet carries substantial value for the winner. Winning this event is a big deal and amazing accomplishment.
• One player, Luke Vrabel, was singled out and was continuously taunted from the rail. The WSOP failed to protect this player.
• The rail was too close for a final table of 10 players playing for such a substantial amount of money and created a un level playing field when spectators were allowed to directly and continuously taunt Vrabel.
• The WSOP failed to protect Vrabel from potential angle play from friends and spectators on a substandard “rail.”
• Vrabel repeatedly appealed to the spectators to stop the taunting, and respect him and the game.
• When the taunting would not stop, Vrabel asked the tournament director(s) (TD) on site to intervene.
• Taunting and spectator interference is not allowed under the WSOP rules.
• Rather than taking corrective action to stop the taunting and visibly affecting Vrabel play, the WSOP TD ignored Vrabel’s appeals.
• Instead, the WSOP TD brought security to the scene and stationed them behind Vrabel in a pure visible display of intimidation, where they stood just feet behind him.
• The taunting from the rail continued against only Vrabel, it was observed by well over 100 spectators, many of which are professional poker players.

By not subjecting the spectators to the rules of the WSOP and then not protecting Vrabel, but instead bullying, intimidating, and discriminating against him, Vrabel suffered damages and is due compensatory damages.

Despite the misconduct of bullying, intimidating, and discriminating by the WSOP TD, and witnessed by over 100 people, no disciplinary action was taken and the TD continues in his supervisory capacity.

In court, an attorney would argue for a minimum of triple damages. You could pick your poison: Intimidation, Bullying, Discrimination, Unfair and deceptive business practices, the counts could go on and on.

Compensatory damages are due Vrabel due to the gross misconduct of the WSOP entity. At trial, my opinion is a jury would slap the WSOP for as much damages as they could possibly add onto the damages award for compensatory damages.


I strongly suggest taking action on this matter. It’s not going to go away. The player was damaged and EVERYONE knows it. The player is not going to let it die. He beat 18,000 people and was playing for 1 million dollars; your corporate employee created an uneven playing field, and caused great financial and emotional damage to the player (Vrabel.) The player is a full time pro, colorful and aggressive on social media and not going away. Everyone is watching.


This is an isolated incident. Nothing like this has happened in such a large event with a One Million Dollar first prize. It is my opinion that WSOP must take action, restore the integrity of the game, restore the order of rules, and show that when an employee makes a substantial error, the player will be made whole. Please compensate Vrabel as follows:

1. Vrabel should be compensated for the difference (if any) of the stack value as determined by the professional staff that existed at the start of 10 handed play.

2. Vrabel should receive a minimum of 1 ½ times the value of his stack as determined by the professional staff as compensatory damages by the WSOP TD overseeing the final 10 players that night.

3. In the alternate, both parties agree to binding arbitration from an independent arbitrator.

I will be submitting one final letter with some simple suggestions to improve the “on the ground” operation at WSOP. While it works somewhat well, it absolutely needs changes and improvements.


I am available to discuss this matter with you via email, phone or in person. I would be happy to fly back to Vegas and discuss it in person with you.

Sincerely yours,

Daniel J Dandreo III



2017 World Series of Poker® Official Tournament Rules Rio All-Suite Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas, Nevada

SECTION IV – PARTICIPANT CONDUCT AND TOURNAMENT INTEGRITY
40. The competitive integrity of all Tournament play at the WSOP is paramount. All participants must adhere to the spirit and letter of the Official Rules of the WSOP that forbid play or any action that is illegal, unethical or constitutes cheating or collusion in any form.
a. Cheating is defined as any such act engaged in by a participant to break the established rules of play to gain an advantage.
c. All participants are entitled to expect civility and courtesy from one another at every Tournament table and throughout the Tournament area. Any individual who encounters behavior that is not civil or courteous -- or is abusive in any way -- is encouraged to immediately contact a Tournament official. Participants who violate this rule are subject to penalty in accordance with Rules 40, 41, 42,113, and/or 114.
43. Any attempt by any person to deliberately damage, corrupt or undermine the operation of the WSOP Tournament may be a violation of criminal and civil laws. Should such an attempt be made, Rio reserves the right to seek damages from any such person to the fullest extent of the law.
46. Rio prohibits the use of obscene or foul language in any public area of the casino at any time. Any participant who uses such language or makes a foul, profane, obscene or vulgar statement, or speaks abusively or in an intimidating manner to another participant, a dealer or a Tournament staff member, will be penalized. These penalties will be levied based on Rules 40, 113, and 114.
47. Any participant who taunts another participant through theatrics or gestures or engages in any form of inappropriate behavior intended to disrupt other participants in the tournament will be subject to penalty in accordance with Rules 40, 113, and 114. 48. Participant or staff abuse will not be tolerated. A participant will incur a penalty up to and including disqualification for any abuse towards another participant or staff member, and the participant could be asked to leave the property. Repeated etiquette violations, including, but not limited to, touching another participant’s cards or chips, body, or clothing, delay of game and excessive chatter will result in penalties. 49. The WSOP is subject to all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, including gaming, and all aspects of the WSOP are subject to the approval of appropriate regulatory authorities.
126. Participant Disputes: All participant disputes with Rio shall be resolved in accordance with Nevada law NRS 463.362 Resolution of Disputes. a. Whenever a patron and a [gaming] licensee, or any person acting on behalf of or in conjunction with a [gaming] licensee, have any dispute which cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of the patron and which involves: 1. Alleged winnings, alleged losses or the award or distribution of cash, prizes, benefits, tickets or any other item or items in a game, tournament, contest, drawing, promotion or similar activity or event. 2. The manner in which a game, tournament, contest, drawing, promotion or similar activity or event is conducted, the [gaming] licensee is responsible for notifying the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board or patron in accordance with the provisions of subsection 2, regardless of whether the [gaming] licensee is directly or indirectly involved in the dispute. b. Whenever a dispute described in subsection 1 involves: 1. At least $500, the [gaming] licensee shall immediately notify the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board. 2. Less than $500, the [gaming] licensee shall notify the patron of the patron’s right to request that the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board conduct an investigation. c. Upon being notified of a dispute, the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board, through an agent, shall conduct whatever investigation it deems necessary and shall determine whether payment should be made. The agent of the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board shall mail written notice to the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board, the [gaming] licensee and the patron of the agent’s decision resolving the dispute within 45 days after the date the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board first receives notification from the [gaming] licensee or a request to conduct an investigation from the patron. The failure of the agent to mail notice of the agent’s decision within the time required by this subsection does not divest the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board of its exclusive jurisdiction over the dispute. d. Failure of the [gaming] licensee to notify the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board or patron as provided in subsection 2 is grounds for disciplinary action pursuant to NRS 463.310 to 463.3145, inclusive. e. The decision of the agent of the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board is effective on the date the aggrieved party receives notice of the decision. Notice of the decision shall be deemed sufficient if it is mailed to the last known address of the [gaming] licensee and patron. The date of mailing may be proven by a certificate signed by an officer or employee of the [Nevada Gaming Control] Board, which specifies the time the notice, was mailed. The notice shall be deemed to have been received by the [gaming] licensee or the patron 5 days after it is deposited with the United States Postal Service with the postage thereon prepaid

Puckster has to be Sage Donkey!

No way they will compensate him. He even admitted to harassing others from the rail himself at prior tournaments.

Bull..... No so fast..... The staff directly bullied, discriminated, and intimidated the player and created an un-level opportunity by its action. Illegal in every state

No offense Puck but your best bet is for someone else to write the letter for you. It should be way more concise, professional and less aggressive imo.

Proper grammar would also help.

Neither a thread view or a Colossus entry is a unique person.

thanks, you could be correct depending on what is trying to be accomplished. feel free to edit and submit. I'm mailing out letter on Monday, don't mind folks editing and suggesting...thnx

Good morning Fromma........... super busy on the project this week and writing at night. Feel free to copy to Word, correct, and submit. Mailing out letter Monday, thnx

What a complete spew of verbal diarrhea. Knowledge of the law would also help. Attorneys would ask for treble damages!!! Uh you can't just ask for treble damages there has to be a statute authorizing them.

I also like how you take the absurd position of Vrabel being entitled to the cash value of his stack (hint: players cash for less than thei stack value every minute of every day; hint2: you have to show causation and an actionable claim which you haven't done) and then say actually he should get 1.5 times the value of his stack.

That is one of the more idiotic things I have read and I've been a poker player for 25 years and a lawyer for 15. Completely embarrassed for you if you are actually mailing these to Jack Effel.

Good morning Blackie,

C'mon Black, your a lawyer suggest rereading, take some time and figure out the message. Being a lawyer requires much more deep thinking than your displaying in your response.

regarding the stack value.... it might be less that what he cashed for? I did not calculate it or attempt to.

Would love to see your (legal) approach to the issue.

have a nice day

My legal approach to the issue is that he doesn't have a cause of action or damages that are attributable to Caesars/WSOP. He had a small chance at some sort of goodwill compensation like rooms/food which he torched with his profane borderline-insane screeds on social media.

So you think that his stack value 10 handed without a micro stack might have been worth less than his 9th place cash? Come onnnnnnnnnnn.

And I asked earlier for specifics of the "taunting" and still have seen literally not a single description or quote.

Laughing even harder at this after seeing Puckster's letter.

Another garbage writer pointing his finger at everything but his garbage writing.

Agree with everything other than ital/underlined portion. ICM values shorter stacks much higher than Black Aces apparently realizes.

But there is no cause of action here. None.

No I agree with you. I'm saying it is basically impossible to have a "cash value" of your stack be less than 9th place cash when 10 players are left unless you have a heavily contrived payout scheme or stack distribution.

Puck was the one claiming it might be.

if this thread isnt locked soon, it's getting removed from my subscriptions.

tks

OPs letter might carry more weight and validity if he delved into even greater detail about all the WSOP souvenirs he buys from the gift shops and exactly how much overweight his bags are on the flight home.

Can we sticky this thread onto page 86 please?