Posts Tagged ‘Voting’

Women in Poker Hall of Fame Voting – One Writer’s Opinion

 Women in Poker Hall of Fame Voting – One Writer’s Opinion

After a month of nominations from the poker community and a couple of weeks of review by the Nomination Committee, the Women in Poker Hall of Fame has put together an outstanding list of nominees for induction this year. The 11 nominees run the gamut of the poker world, from working behind the scenes as important cogs in the machine to being some of the most visible performers on the grandest stages. Unfortunately (at least at this point), they cannot all go in, with the responsibilities of selecting the inductees on a select panel of past inductees and media members – including this writer’s opinion.

Having a vote on anything as important as a Hall of Fame is a badge of honor. In essence, you are structuring how the history of (in this case) women in poker will be remembered. It is something that should not be taken lightly and, as such, I’ve been studying the nominees extensively to determine how my votes would be distributed.

As pointed out by my friend and colleague Dan Katz last week (who deserves a vote here also – we’ll work on that for 2020, Dan!), each of the panelists on the WiPHoF panel have ten votes they can hand out. They can give them all to one person or break them up however they would like (no, Dan, I won’t give each nominee a vote – that WOULD be wishy-washy!). With these criteria in mind, I set back to learn about the nominees (in alphabetical order):

Hermance Blum
Mandy Glogow
Haley Hintze
Angelica Hael
Maria Ho
Karina Jett
Terry King
Shirley Rosario
Kara Scott
Lupe Soto
Jennifer Tilley

As you can see from the list, this is not an easy decision. Any of these ladies would be a fine addition to sit beside such legends of the game as Barbara Enright, Jennifer Harman, Linda Johnson or Cyndy Violette (and that’s just a short list). But the voter must do the unfortunate task – choose the inductees – and I’ve decided to look at my votes in the following manner.

Hermance Blum, Mandy Glogow and Angelica Hael – These ladies have been instrumental in bringing poker “to the people” with their work behind the scenes on the World Poker Tour and with PokerStars. But all three of these women are young and, in this writer’s opinion, they haven’t yet achieved their “pinnacle of greatness.” I see these three women at some time making their way into the Women in Poker Hall of Fame, just not in this year’s election.

Maria Ho and Kara Scott – Once again, we have two great professional poker players who are still in the midst of their highly successful careers. To say that either Ho or Scott have achieved all they will ever achieve in the world of poker (and let’s be clear here – this isn’t a slight to these women, just as it isn’t a slight to those ladies who are further down this list that have a bit more “experience” on their resumes) is doubting their skills and experience in the game. Once again, I see these two women definitely making the Hall, just not this year.

Lupe Soto and Jennifer Tilly – I will make this statement here and now – I believe that these two women will be inducted this year. Soto has been one of the biggest advocates for women in the game of poker that you will ever find. Tilly brought attention to the women’s game with her World Series of Poker Ladies’ Tournament championship back in 2005. But I am not voting for them; as what I view as the “frontrunners” for induction, they’re not going to need my vote. Not that I would be ashamed for voting for either of these ladies, I believe there are other potential inductees on this list that need my vote a bit more.

With this process of elimination, we have the four women who will receive my votes for induction. Longevity is an important part of my selection process, as is having made a significant mark on the game. In my humble opinion, these women have.

Haley Hintze – Hintze has been around the game of poker as a journalist as long as this writer has, and we’ve often trod the same ground in working for the same outlets. While she has made an outstanding career writing about the players and the “entertaining aspects” of the game, Hintze was instrumental in bringing information to the players regarding the Absolute Poker/UB “Superuser” scandals of the mid-2000s. Without Hintze’s work, there is plenty that probably would have never come to light regarding that sordid time in the industry; she deserves recognition for that effort, even if she’s not as active today as she used to be (2 votes).

Karina Jett – Jett has been a part of the professional poker scene for almost two decades, demonstrating her skills in the game on a variety of stages. She has earned almost $ 500,000 in tournament cashes over the past 20 years, including four trips to the WSOP Ladies’ Championship final table with a runner up finish in 2011. Jett has also shown the philanthropic side of the poker industry, serving as the hostess and organizer for the popular Ante Up for Autism charity event (3 votes).

Terry King – Not known perhaps to the “general” poker community, King has a long history in the game. A 1978 WSOP bracelet winner, King played in cash games throughout the 1970s, battling against the biggest players in the game, most if not all of them male. While her playing exploits might have been enough to get her in the Hall, King has also served as a dealer (first woman to deal the Championship Event of the WSOP), a floorperson and a tournament organizer and helped open the Hollywood Park Casino in its heyday. She is a wealth of knowledge as to the history of poker, something that is the base reason for honoring someone in the Hall – to preserve the history (2 points).

Shirley Rosario – The number of hats that Rosario has worn in the poker world would fill any closet. A former proposition player at the Bicycle Casino, Rosario parlayed that into a successful cash game career and built an excellent tournament poker resume. In her career, Rosario has earned $ 506,484, mostly built around the difficult mixed game and non-Texas Hold’em disciplines of poker.

It is arguable, however, that Rosario’s work outside the poker room is more notable. In the past two decades plus, Rosario created the website Poker-Babes.com that was THE place to go for information on players from 2004 to 2011. A breast cancer survivor, Rosario also was a part of the PokerStars family, helping the company to write their search engine optimization guidelines as the site became the biggest online poker site in the world. Add in the fact she was one of the original hosts of Live at the Bike and she’s basically covered every base you can hit in the poker world (3 votes).

So, there you have it, this writer’s selections for the 2018 Women in Poker Hall of Fame induction class – Haley Hintze, Karina Jett, Terry King and Shirley Rosario. While I would like to see all four ladies get in this year, as I stated previously I believe that Soto and Tilly are all but a lock (thus, I am looking forward to the vote again in 2020, when Betty Carey finally gets a nod!). But we will see who the 2018 inductees will be when the voting closes on April 15 and the official inductees are announced.

The post Women in Poker Hall of Fame Voting – One Writer’s Opinion appeared first on Poker News Daily.

Poker News Daily

PokerStars Opens Voting for SCOOP Players’ Choice Award

 PokerStars Opens Voting for SCOOP Players’ Choice Award

The PokerStars Spring Championship of Online Poker (SCOOP) is underway, but there is one event on the schedule later this month in which the details have yet to be completed. The 57th and final event of the 2017 PokerStars SCOOP is the Players’ Choice event, where the game type is to be determined by – as you might guess – the players. To tally the votes, PokerStars has put up a public poll on its Facebook page.

There are four event candidates, each chosen by one of the members of Team PokerStars Pro Online: Jaime Staples, Mikhail Shalamov, Randy Lew, and Lex Veldhuis. Here are the options:

No-Limit Hold’em Progressive Knockout – in this type of tournament, half of the buy-in goes to the prize pool and the other half is used as a bounty on each player’s head. When you eliminate an opponent, you don’t get all of their bounty, but rather just half of it. The other half is added to your own bounty. Thus, eventually there will be players who will be gigantic targets.

Jamie Staples, the popular Twitch streamer who suggested the Progressive Knockout for SCOOP, said in a press release, “I believe Progressive Knockouts are the future of tournament poker. It adds a layer of complexity, and excitement that starts from the very beginning of the tournament.”

No-Limit Hold’em Six-Max Win the Button Turbo – fairly self-explanatory, in a Win the Button tournament, the player who wins the hand receives the button for the following hand. The button does not move around the table like normal.

“This format is great,” Mikhail Shalamov said, “even when you’re not in the hand you get to cheer for other people to win the pot so that you don’t have to post big blind.”

No-Limit Hold’em Six-Max Deep Stacks Turbo – Randy “nanonoko” Lew is the proponent of this one, saying “A lot of times in tournaments we don’t get the option of playing with deep stacks like in cash games, so I’d love to see more deeper stacked tournaments come into play.”

Six-Max Pot-Limit Omaha – hey, another six-max game (and the press release prefaced it with a NLHE designation, which is obviously just a copy/paste error).

“Pot Limit Omaha is a great game,” explained Lex Veldhuis. “There is a lot of depth to it. Even when you’re short stacked in tournaments there is a still a lot of room to play. Every street is an all-out war because people can represent so many different hands.”

Players can vote for their choice (players’ choice!) on Facebook by selecting one of four emoticons, representing each of the four games. To be honest, I feel kind of bad for Lex Veldhuis, as the “angry” emoticon is associated with his tourney.

Voting ends at noon ET on May 8th and the winner will be announced that same day. The event will have three buy-in levels: $ 11, $ 109, and $ 1,050.

Poker News Daily

Daniel Negreanu Would Like to Change Poker Hall of Fame Voting Process

 Daniel Negreanu Would Like to Change Poker Hall of Fame Voting Process

Daniel Negreanu has never been one to keep his feelings about poker matters to himself. Now that Todd Brunson and Carlos Mortensen have been elected to the Poker Hall of Fame, he has something to say about the Hall’s election process. To be sure, Negreanu has no problem with the men who were elected – he calls them “both gentlemen friends and tough players.” What Negreanu would like to see changed are some of the eligibility requirements and the method by which the finalists are chosen.

In his blog on Full Contact Poker, Negreanu detailed the adjustments he suggests for the Poker Hall of Fame eligibility criteria. First, let’s review the criteria that are in place right now:

•    A player must have played poker against acknowledged top competition
•    Played for high stakes
•    Played consistently well, gaining the respect of peers
•    Stood the test of time
•    Or, for non-players, contributed to the overall growth and success of the game of poker, with indelible positive and lasting results.

Covering the last one first, Negreanu said that non-players, or “builders” as they are often called, should be considered separately from players:

I also find it difficult to vote for someone in the builder category when it takes up a spot that a player may have gotten. Since builders represent a small percentage of the nominees, my suggestion to address this is to induct a builder once every 4 years in addition to the two players that go in annually. That way people like Matt Savage, Steve Lipscomb, John Duthie, Bruno Fitoussi and others would compete against each other in this category and not be judged against players. It’s quite difficult to judge apples and oranges, so just the apples against the apples, and the oranges against the oranges.

He also wants to reword the criterion slightly to add more clarity.

Clarity is a common theme amongst Negreanu’s desired changes. When it comes to “top competition,” he wrote, “What defines top competition exactly? When the Hall of Fame was created, this could only happen if a player played the highest stakes cash games against the world’s best players. Since the 70’s poker has changed a great deal. You have online poker skills, tournament players, and a wide range of stakes that could be considered high stakes.”

Negreanu concluded that the “top competition” requirement should just be removed, as it is a given that if someone is good enough to be considered for the Hall of Fame, they will have played against the best players in the world.

Similarly, Negreanu wants to define “high stakes” as tournaments with buy-ins above $ 10,000, Fixed-Limit cash games of $ 400-$ 800 and above, and No-Limit cash games of $ 25-$ 50 and higher.

He aimed for similar clarity for the “played consistently well” and “stood the test of time” criteria, which are obviously quite subjective. In the end, Daniel Negreanu came up with a revised set of requirements for the Poker Hall of Fame:

1. Must Be a minimum of 40 years old at time of nomination
2. Played for High Stakes.
-Tournaments with buy ins over $ 10,000
-Limit Cash games $ 400-$ 800 and above
-No Limit Cash games of $ 25-$ 50 and above
3. Their poker skills are well respected by their peers
4. They were exceptional in at least one of these areas:
-Cash Games
-Tournaments
-Online Poker
5. Stood the test of time over a period of 15 years or more

As for the nomination and final voting process, Negreanu isn’t thrilled with the finalists being selected by a public nomination process because a fan vote basically boils down to a “popularity contest.” He would like it tweaked to allow four finalists selected by fans and six selected by the media and Hall of Fame voting panel.

Speaking of which, those 44 living Hall of Famers and media members currently get to submit ten votes split up amongst any finalists they would like. Negreanu feels that this “gives voting blocks far too much power” and would like it changed to allowing voters to select just two finalists, ranking them as a first choice and second choice.

Poker News Daily