Phil Laak's Stunt

[The Czar 0]

I think a list of names for everyone at your table should be available upon request. The media has this information and could pass it along to someone at the table. Just open book the whole process and if people still want to do this type of thing, that's up to to them. I'm fine with him doing it, but let's all admit he did it exclusively for the attention it's now getting and the tv time. Even during the interview it sounded like he was having problems playing with the old man image. He decided publicity (Chance for endorsements) > $10,000. He's probably right.

[RDog 0]

so many things wrong with your logic and this post that i don't even know where to begin, simply amazing

The fact that you don't see where this could lead is the amazing part. We might as well just play the World Series of Poker online and forget this live stuff. Enlighten us with your brilliance instead of coming off as some know it all douche who simply doesn't have the time to point out what exactly he disagrees with in a post.

[chrozzo 19]

hi

[whatgreatis 0]

so many things wrong with your logic and this post that i don't even know where to begin, simply amazing

Who the **** are you?

[keith crime 8]

Maybe if he focused a bit more on his poker he wouldn't have busted out so early.Seriously, it really annoys me when I hear/read stories like this. There are so many people who dream of the chance to play in the ME and will never get the chance to do so, and guys like Laak just take it for granted and goof off. So obnoxious.

dumbest post I've ever read on this forum

[NickZepp 0]

It's not like Phil busted out in the first hour. He lasted almost all day with this stunt. He didn't just not try to win. He tried to last throughout the day and had as many as about 39k in chips I think.And he didn't give his ID.

[Franchise632 0]

I did think it was definitely funny, but him dressing up like that is way different than the bolded part above. In all those situations, you still know who you are up against, you still know that seat 3 is Dario Minieri underneath that ridiculous scarf, etc. Yes, giant sunglasses and hats hide facial expressions and whatever tells you might be able to get (which I think is certainly important, but highly overrated), but ultimately you know who you are playing against, even if it is Joe Unknown from Walla Walla, WA.People will obviously play differently against Phil Laak than they will against an old guy you don't know. Obviously it isn't against the rules because he spoke with the floorman before sitting down at the table, so more power to him that he can get away from it. But I'm not sure it should be allowed, the same way I'm not sure a guy in a giant chicken suit should be allowed to play either. Likewise, it is pretty much the same as playing on someone else's account online or opening a second account with a new name - you aren't truthfully representing who you actually are. Should wearing crazy faceless masks like these be allowed at a poker table - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10...-Wimbledon.html ?Had he made day 2, would he have played as an old woman? And would that be ok?Just trying to play devil's advocate...

As for the bolded part, while creepy, it would certainly be within the current rules. As far as knowing who you are playing against, isn't it the job of the player or players to figure that out for themselves? They can get the information if they want it, and had it never been revealed that it was Phil at the table would anyone have complained? As far a truly representing who you are...isn't that all in the image that you create for yourself? You can be a totally different person in life and act different at the poker table, is that a true representation of yourself? If you lie about things you may not be representing your true self.Really as both you and I pointed out, it is a matter of degrees and people are going to continue to push the boundries of what they can get away with until rules are put in place that limits these kind of things. If and when that happens who knows? In the grand scheme of things it probably doesn't matter and he busted out, but he has done something that money can't buy and that is the fact that people are still talking about him.

[SlapStick 0]

If we agree its unethical online I don't see why its different live.Anyway he was never going to do well, for some reason repeating "so sick" 15 times a minute makes everyone thinks hes a loose maniac when hes basically a nit. So dressing like a nit was pretty much the opposite of his normal strategy

[WhatArunAA 0]

The reason why its not fair.. is because lets say there is someone at the table that has played countless number of hours and hands with Phil Laak.. Then Phil Laak may play a certain way against this player and they don't know who they are... It is the exact same thing as a superstar online player playing on a different acccount online. He may play a certain way towards a certain player and that player won't know how to respond. I truly can't believe that the WSOP floor didn't make him show his ID.. thats rediculous.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

You have no "right" to know against whom you are playing. If Laak wants to try and horse around or remain anonymous that is his prerogative. Just because you "think" you're playing against some nitty old man and believe you can use that to your advantage doesn't mean Phil can't try and use your silly theories against you. In some ways this works AGAINST Phil. He is clearly a top player and his reputation in itself can be used as a competitive advantage. Not being Phil may actually take away some of the skills and tools he would normally use at the table. He can't run around like a madman and do push-ups behind the dealer or go all "Uni-bomber" - all tools he has used in the past to control the table in his own way....but to assume you have some sort of Poker God given right to know against whom you are playing - to the point of requesting a list of names?!?Sorry that is insane.

[tobytobey 0]

You have no "right" to know against whom you are playing. If Laak wants to try and horse around or remain anonymous that is his prerogative. Just because you "think" you're playing against some nitty old man and believe you can use that to your advantage doesn't mean Phil can't try and use your silly theories against you. In some ways this works AGAINST Phil. He is clearly a top player and his reputation in itself can be used as a competitive advantage. Not being Phil may actually take away some of the skills and tools he would normally use at the table. He can't run around like a madman and do push-ups behind the dealer or go all "Uni-bomber" - all tools he has used in the past to control the table in his own way....but to assume you have some sort of Poker God given right to know against whom you are playing - to the point of requesting a list of names?!?Sorry that is insane.

This was my thought.

[jmbreslin 0]

How about if someone in poverty sees someone playing blackjack for $5 a hand, when that is a meal to them. Should they be upset that people are "wasting" that money?

It's not about wasting his money. I have an issue with people being obnoxious and pulling stunts because they take the experience of playing in the ME for granted. "Look at me, I'm so successful that I don't even care about the $10,000 entry fee - what can I do to get attention this year?" I also find it annoying that stuff like this takes attention away from the poker. People like Laak get airtime because they're good for television while there are lots of average shmoes playing good poker who get no attention.

[jmbreslin 0]

dumbest post I've ever read on this forum

Thanks for your constructive input into the discussion. Next time try formulating a thoughtful response instead of just throwing out an insult.

[The Czar 0]

We simply fundamentally disagree. I believe $10,000 should buy you the right to know who your opponents are. Can we agree this was far more about publicity for his "brand" than fooling the players at his table, though? Of course it worked against him, but he didn't care. He tried to get past Day 1, when he would reveal himself, but if he didn't he still gained over $10,000 worth of attention and publicity.

[Balloon guy 158]

I bet deep down he's glad he didnt make the final table.3 months wearing that outfit would have driven him sane

[NickZepp 0]

Outside of maybe the 50-100 or so name pros. How many of the players do you know in the Main Event? Probably not many.

[The Czar 0]

Outside of maybe the 50-100 or so name pros. How many of the players do you know in the Main Event? Probably not many.

Very true, but doesn't this make knowing they're at your table that much more important?Also I think the list should include sn on all sites and social security numbers (no, not really)

[NickZepp 0]

Very true, but doesn't this make knowing they're at your table that much more important?Also I think the list should include sn on all sites and social security numbers (no, not really)

If anything the fact that these pros are pros is a bit of a disadvantage. You can see the major pros plays more than anyone else. That's why pros have a hard time in the main event the last few years. But some are adjusting so they are getting better at it.

[patho 0]

I bet deep down he's glad he didnt make the final table.3 months wearing that outfit would have driven him sane

So, you're saying it's better that he stays INsane?

[CBass1724 1]

Why can't people just laugh about it being a stunt and instead automatically say it was unfair for him to do this? He wasn't doing it for an edge, he was doing it for comedy. What HE did is not like changing your screen name, however under different circumstances it could be done for an advantage. If you play under a different screen name, you are deliberately trying to hide without getting caught because nobody would know unless you bragged about it. He was doing this as a joke where it was for sure to come out.I don't know. I see how it could be used to deceive people for an advantage but this was hardly his plan as it was clearly a joke.And yes I know, where do you draw the line...

[CBass1724 1]

I bet deep down he's glad he didnt make the final table.3 months wearing that outfit would have driven him sane

If you watch the video he said there is no way he could wear it on day 2 because the chip counts and table draws are made public.Yes I understand your post was a huge SW but I'm sure someone who doesn't know you won't know the difference.

[Balloon guy 158]

If you watch the video he said there is no way he could wear it on day 2 because the chip counts and table draws are made public.Yes I understand your post was a huge SW but I'm sure someone who doesn't know you won't know the difference.

No chance

So, you're saying it's better that he stays INsane?

Oh wait

[CBass1724 1]

No chance

Who am I kidding? Everyone knows balloonguy! I'm going to light up an SJ-9 to celebrate. (kudos to you if you've heard of it!)

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Why can't people just laugh about it being a stunt and instead automatically say it was unfair for him to do this? He wasn't doing it for an edge, he was doing it for comedy. What HE did is not like changing your screen name, however under different circumstances it could be done for an advantage. If you play under a different screen name, you are deliberately trying to hide without getting caught because nobody would know unless you bragged about it. He was doing this as a joke where it was for sure to come out.I don't know. I see how it could be used to deceive people for an advantage but this was hardly his plan as it was clearly a joke.And yes I know, where do you draw the line...

Incidentally - I see nothing wrong with changing your Screen Name whenever you feel like it....or deception for the sake of advantage - this is POKER!!!

[NickZepp 0]

I was under the impression that Phil busted out but he's still in the tourney and has over 50k.