I've heard him on 4 separate podcasts now. Enough!!
Same few lines, repeated ad nauseum on all 4 pods. He has his spiel down pat. I've heard it so much I felt a migraine coming on when I listened to him on the Thinking Poker podcast. His way of repeating his few lines is just so irritating and I'm afraid he has very little to offer poker in the way of "personality" (although that's not his fault, he didn't ask to be in this spot).
If his antics at the table are all someone has to do to get 15 minutes of fame then tournament poker is in a bad way, but I think Kassouf has simply benefitted from being on the wrong end of a blundering Tournament Director's decision. Any other time or place his talk isn't causing anywhere near this kind of fuss. He had the perfect setting - TV coverage deep in the ME, a bumbling TD, a female opponent, and a poker scene infamous in this era for the hoodie and sunglass wearing, socially inept Internet bound stereotype.
I can imagine someone next year attempting something similar to help along their "career".
On another note, he was screaming weakness with his 9 high and I'd be happy to be seated with him. I think this "speech play" would be encouraged by a good pro.

FWIW, PP is in the TV production business. In the US.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tGo_TjNYRg

(original clip)
watch at 2:16, when jack eiffel showed up and tells the dealer or the other floor personnel " i am gonna handle this"

watch stacy's face when he say's that

lol well that does seem like the smirk of 'you're done buddy'

i obviously can't know what was going on in Jack and Stacy's heads, but in a hypothetical situation where I was close with the head TD through a business arrangement, and i was in a rulings pickle, and he finally came over to give me some relief, that is the face i would probably make as well

Great spot

.

I believe it was you that previously said something about contacting gaming, did you happen to do so and if so did you get a reply?


Apologies if it wasn't you that said that.

Of course, that would also be the face of a lot of people in this hypothetical situation whether or not they had any relationship with the TD.

OUT OF ALL THE PEOPLE SHOWN, i feel the two girls were the worst. NUT LOW.

yeah he was talking, but after the floor told him ot be quiet, SHE WAS ASKING HIM A QUESTION and when he answered jack was like "she wasnt talking to you"

GTFO. glad he won that hand..LIKE A BOSS

there's already a TD over there judging the situation, so i don't get your point. why would another random TD be better than the one that was already trying to rule

He is a regular in my local casino in London, the Vic andhas been saying those same 4 lines for the last 5-6 years. It's nothing new and it gets boring very quickly.

Just to understand I don't ever post in forums but felt the confusion about what a hand involving me could be more readily understood by coming from one of the sources ( me) not edited tv clips. That's why I began to post after it happened.
If anything I was trying to join in on the discussion to add what I attempted was clarity. If I failed at that with my wording in explanation ok but it was out of respect for the 2+2 forums that my input would be discussed with me vs conspiracy theories lol.
It wasn't that deep.

Fact - Caesars does not own our dealer school. We aren't employed or paid by Caesars or Wsop.
We offer a service to increase dealer enrollment by training students with specific techniques or procedures warranted by the Wsop.
We plan and have added to the employment of dealers working for the Wsop . Advertising on the Wsop /Caesars website is yes owned by the Wsop because they own the name that we officially use because we were asked to be the training school since they don't have a dealer school to train for events. We want to Add value and careers for dealers who want to work for the Wsop. But no they don't own our academy or are we on their payroll.

This post on 2+2 stated it in a way that makes sense
Re: "9 high like a boss"
So many silly issues being combined into one giant mess of a thread. What is the issue? Her fold? His banter? The conflict of interest? The ability of the tournament director to do his job?

You cannot avoid conflicts like this in a huge open tournament of this kind. Basically the entire poker world - at least those that can come up with 10k and a trip to Vegas - participates in the main event. Ergo, there will be many different conflicts of interest throughout the tournament, probably one at each table in some capacity. This particular one seems incredibly trivial. Unless you can show a pattern of behavior that clearly demonstrates preferential treatment, there is nothing to discuss.

Seriously, what do you want? To keep anyone who has a relationship with the WSOP, Ceasars, or tournament director out of the tournament? That's just silly. I would imagine a greater conflict of interest is the tournament trying to keep big names in the event longer, driving greater interest, higher ratings, etc. Should Helmuth and Negraneau be excluded from the tournament based on that? What if you are a regular customer of the casino, a known whale, should you be barred from the main event? The WSOP must work with countless suppliers to put on a tournament of that size, should any supplier to the WSOP, or Ceasars, be excluded from participating? The management of the catering company? The guy who prints the badges? What about ex dealers who once worked for Ceasars? Tournament director neighbors? Family members?

Looking at the specific ruling, it seems completely fair. He was warned, he didn't listen, he received a penalty. If anything I thought it was unfair to allow the clock to be called so quickly. And because of the constant talking, I would think more time should have been granted to compensate.

This seems like a huge tempest in a teapot. There is nothing to see here. Move on, please.
Last edited by PraguePoker; Today at 05:15 AM.


As far as questions about the straight flush hand I believe this final table player explained it pretty well. >

"I can give some more perspective here, having recently (2013) been at a televised final table. My televised table was only on ESPN360.com, but same concept applies.

Regarding the "cheating" accusation, I can't agree at all.

One unfortunate reality of "audience" poker is that people in the crowd will be seeking to help their friends, and you can't hold the audience to the same tight standards as you can players at the table, aside from obvious things such as not being able to use special devices to view beyond what the human eye can see.

In the case of Kassouf's straight flush, he apparently exposed his cards enough to where certain audience members could see he what he had. At that point, provided that nobody shouts it out during the hand, it's fair game if one of the audience members who saw it reports back to their friend at the table. You may say it's unfair, you may say it's cheating, but it's simply unrealistic to believe that the audience won't do things like this. And as the old saying goes, once you hear something, you can't un-hear it."


This went on at my final table in 2013. The stream was 15 minutes behind. I started noticing that certain players at the table were going to the rail and talking to their friends who were looking at smart phones. I realized that they were finding out hands of opponents which were airing 15 minutes behind. Everyone was doing it. In fact, if you didn't do it, you were at a disadvantage, as people would know your past hole cards and you wouldn't know theirs. Personally, I think it's a ****ty situation and wish they didn't have these streams. Or if they did, I'd prefer there would be a longer delay (maybe 2 hours?). But basically any time there's a short delay stream, someone can either consult the rail or call their friends watching at home while on break ("Hey, what did Mike have in that big hand where I folded the river 20 minutes ago?"), so even those without buddies in Vegas can pull this off."

It was said around the table as an exciting thing like wow he had a straight flush that hand when it was over. For those who asked me why I heard it, he didn't table the hand but I guess onlookers at our table saw it. I can't tell you because I was sitting in my seat but overheard when the hand was over.

I'm not looking to argue with anyone. It was a very weird experience and yes unfortunate couple of hands for me but I'm totally over it and was once the tourney ended. It should be a more positive experience to join in forums and discuss a game we all love. I live and learn

One minute you say someone whispered it to you now you say you overheard it?
Make your mind up (or get your lies straight)

Originally you said that a random guy saw the hand now one of your friends saw the hand?

Either way ethically I think you should have told Will that you knew what he had once you found out as you did not find out by means that are within the spirit of the game and as you clearly stated you are about the integrity of the game.

Apparently, you did not learn to stay off NVG and let sleeping dogs lie. The karma effect from your decision to rely on the "straight flush whisperer" did not teach you much.

So, skipping to the anonymously quoted card whisperer advice/explanation offered above:

Yes, as you cite above , what you described is said to be "cheating" and would be considered such by the Nevada Gaming Control Board with respect to "whispered " information relayed to players sitting in an ongoing game. (That the specific hand was over is nonsense. You know very well poker play is not just a series of single, discrete hands.)

The Nevada Gaming Control Board goes to great length to demand that television feeds be secured, that no hole card information be exposed during shooting/creation of a feed, and that tournament operators, including TDs prevent just the sort of cheating/access as you've returned to "explain" once again. (Similarly, the Board has a security concern over the use of RFID chips to identify cards.)

I suggested before you talk to someone with knowledge of what is considered "cheating", especially as you are responsible for training WSOP dealers in how to conduct a fair and honest game.

It is incredible that you, as the maven of official WSOP dealer training, would not have mentioned to the WSOP TD that such whispering had taken place and that the table was being fed private hole card info. (Instead, you chose to act upon this information, the karma of that decision ending your tournament.)

The show had so much potential. Why dont they bring up some interessting background info about josephy and coleman, obst, Kingsofcards and so many who where there till day 6? Makes me sick how they leave out all these individual poker success storys and what legends all these players actually are for years now. Instead ofshowing ackward interviews with first timers fish nobodys who would lose theire gamble money on the roulette table right now if it wasnt for luckboxing a sattie into the main.

For the poker enthusiast and random fan/tv audience its way more interessting to get to know the inside of someone like,lets say obst, and what he does and how and why(no startegy bull**** just reults and how awesome it is to be a pokerplayer) And that the guy is a millionaire because he decided to start playing poker online as a donk few years back , learned and became good ( show a 3 min. mini doc. With his online runs, et.. FFS). Same for all of them.

Isn't that why people deposit money? Because they dream of winning?

Or just eliminate everything personal and stick to dry hand for hand coverage right up to the final table and completely avoid any gossip. Like in golf , snooker, etc..
That way at least the wsop maybe stops looking like a festival of degenerate tools to the normal audience.

Oye... I have no reason to lie you're funny. Yes when people overheard it was whispered to me in case I missed it

Are you ok? Seriously. It was after the hand was over . after he showed what he had . Do you play poker ? Seems like you don't understand .
You're right , as I said in my previous post. Wasting time here .. take care

Sorry, but since you keep posting "explanations" of this or that, the issue arose because of a perceived business relationship with the WSOP and Mr Effel, that you vehemently denied and ridiculed.

After it became clear your business relationship with the WSOP was formally set out in some written agreement, you nevertheless return here to describe a couple of limited examples what that relationship is NOT.

No one was asking about the specifics of what your business relationship actually WAS. The clear existence of a relationship is a fact, the specifics of who paid who and why were private information you now could not avoid putting into public discourse for some reason.

A business relationship does NOT require that the larger contracting party own an interest in the other, smaller party, that the larger party directly employ staff of the smaller party or that payment flow from the larger party to the smaller party.

Rather, one would expect that a business arrangement centered on a license to use valuable trademarks and other IP assets would involve payment flowing the other way, from your business to the IP owner.

But, since you posted again on the business relationship topic, when no one was asking, and did so in a less than forthright angle-shot of what does not transpire:

(1) does payment flow from your business to the trademark and IP owner, either as a flat fee or perhaps as a share of your revenue from school fees ?

(2) .... (you really wanted this topic to continue on ?)

it doesn't seem to have stopped you so far
So now someone overheard someone else who'd seen the cards telling someone the cards then took it upon themselves to whisper it to you in case you hadn't overheard it yourself?

Stacy & Jack are completely atrocious.

WSOP TD is obviously biased & power tripped out of their minds

Jack & Stacy are completely atrocious

I think I understand pretty well. .... poker playing is not a series of discrete hands, information from one hand is useful in a subsequent hand against that opponent. Pretty deceitful of you to pretend otherwise when you've illustrated yourself itt how information whispered about the straight flush hand lead you to make a bad read in the later 9-6 hand. Okay, you tried to use private information from one hand, and fed to you by a whisper, to make your decision in a subsequent hand against that player.

He did not show it to you or to any other players sitting at the table. He showed it to what was a secured camera feed intended for later public dissemination. Someone learned it and then whispered it to you, you then relied on it, in an "a ha" or "wow" moment, to make a decision, to your detriment.

Should your school train dealers (and TDs) on how to spot and stop rail birds relaying private information like hole cards to players at the table or is that acceptable conduct in your view ?

None of this really changes the fact that if you and Jack are both part of the organization and in some fashion work together, there is a conflict of interest.

But I know you don't like discussing this in-depth, so you can ignore this post just like you have the rest of mine.

I'm very oi Stacey and ccl about anything she says, but you guys harping over obtaining knowledge about the straight flush hand is ridiculous. If that idiot kassouf doesn't want any chance of it being known he shouldnt hold it up and show the cameras and crowd. I would go up to every person and ask what he had.

It's not exactly the same but isn't much different from getting hands at the final table from your friends after the delay.

Because the other TD is going to handle it differently than the first one, based on their statement.

If I don't like the way one TD is dealing with an ongoing situation, wouldn't I be happy that a second one has shown up and said they'll handle it? I understand that this discussion is about conflict of interest, but I'd have the same reaction in that situation.