chris ferguson boycotts wpt - will other pros follow

[grocery_mony 8]

Frankly, if I was the WPT I wouldn't be worried one bit that Andy Bloch or Chris Ferguson won't play in the events. It's not like they are on the show every week or are all that much of a draw. Unless you had the poplular players decide that they didn't want to play, the WPT one be affected one bit. If Phil Ivey, Gus Hansen, Doyle Brunson, myself, Mike Matusow, Phil Hellmuth, and other players like that decided to boycott, that might worry them. Andy Bloch and Chris Ferguson? Personally, I just don't see how that has any negative effect on WPT ratings.

BURN!!!

[bdc30 0]

Teneight Hat $ 19.95 Custom36 Tshirt $ 14.95Royal Tour Polo $ 39.95Spademan Card Protector .02TobyOrNotToBe Signed 8x10 priceless

You can't forget DDiabolical.He thinks it's ok that WPT does this.Scroll up to see what I mean.We should use his avatar as our main logo,and his name to promote our product.It's apparent he wouldn't want any percentageof our profits. That's gotta be +ev!

[bdc30 0]

Unless you had the poplular players decide that they didn't want to play, the WPT one be affected one bit. If Phil Ivey, Gus Hansen, Doyle Brunson, myself, Mike Matusow, Phil Hellmuth, and other players like that decided to boycott, that might worry them. Andy Bloch and Chris Ferguson? Personally, I just don't see how that has any negative effect on WPT ratings.

DN, I see your point and I agree that they aren't the two biggest names on the WPT, but I'd really like to hear yourthoughts on the actual issue.Do you not think the money they're taking in should insome way filter back to the players?What's your stance on some kind of a union or group ofpoker players getting together?

[DanielNegreanu 141]

Anyone else that posts here I will use their likeness on tshirts and sell them and give you no money in return. That's what WPT is making you do. The dvds, promos for the show, etc, no nothing nada, and oh by the way plop down your $ 10,000 here on this table boys and girls and NO you can't wear your logo on our show, oh ok but not ALL of you can wear Full Tilt hats, OK ????? Teneight Hat $ 19.95 Custom36 Tshirt $ 14.95Royal Tour Polo $ 39.95Spademan Card Protector .02TobyOrNotToBe Signed 8x10 priceless

That's not true, and the WPT has NEVER done that.

[jooka 0]

Frankly, if I was the WPT I wouldn't be worried one bit that Andy Bloch or Chris Ferguson won't play in the events. It's not like they are on the show every week or are all that much of a draw. Unless you had the poplular players decide that they didn't want to play, the WPT one be affected one bit. If Phil Ivey, Gus Hansen, Doyle Brunson, myself, Mike Matusow, Phil Hellmuth, and other players like that decided to boycott, that might worry them. Andy Bloch and Chris Ferguson? Personally, I just don't see how that has any negative effect on WPT ratings.

no offense DN but I have a hard time seeing them having to change anything should they not want to, even if the list you mention goes on that same boycott. Im not saying they wont make the change or that the change would probable be a good idea, I just dont see them lossing the audience they have on tv because of it. I personally wouldnt stop watching the show because the above list quit playing the WPT tournies, it would suck dont get me wrong, but Im still going to watch it.

[AlexR 0]

Let me just say this...Why does Jesus even have a business deal that will not allow him to sign the WPT release? I would say it is because the WPT has helped make him a "star." Sure, he has appeared mostly on WSOP broadcasts, but the WSOP and WPT shows go hand in hand. Does anybody watch one and not the other?Let me break it down another way. The WPT and WSOP (along with online poker) are responsible for the poker boom. Jesus appears on these broadcasts and inturn becomes a "big name" player. Jesus then signs an exclusive business deal, perhaps multiple deals including Full Tilt. Jesus then proceeds to boycott the WPT. Does this make sense to anyone other than Jesus and Andy Bloch?Without the WPT and WSOP being on TV, who is Chris Ferguson?

[WPTCookie 0]

I know that some people like to speculate and form opinions based on rumors, but there is so much that the public doesn't know about what really goes on with shows like WPT, the networks that air them, and the players that sign the releases.Though I can't go into great detail, I will say that the WPT cares a great deal about the players that participate in their tournaments. There is much going on to satisfy a few players concerns about signing releases, but the WPT has never tried to exploit players for financial gain. The television industry is complicated, and though most people think that advertisers are throwing money at companies like WPT, it's just not true.Please, please do some research before throwing out random generalizations and assumptions.Thanks, Daniel, for trying to clarify some things. I know that it's difficult without breaching confidentiality; that's exactly why I can't go into detail. However, I appreciate you trying to keep the rumors in check.

[digitalmonkey 929]

Nobody is bigger than the game! The only chance that the so-called well-known players have at making a difference is to start a league that competes directly against the WPT. There will always be poker players to step in for the Andy Blochs and Chris Fergusons of the world but if a very large group of players were to join forces and create a clone of the WPT only with the more popular players, maybe they would start cutting into the WPT's revenue which always causes people to pay attention.Of course, maybe Doyle Brunson will buy the WPT! :wink:

[AlanBostick 0]

Frankly, if I was the WPT I wouldn't be worried one bit that Andy Bloch or Chris Ferguson won't play in the events. It's not like they are on the show every week or are all that much of a draw. Unless you had the poplular players decide that they didn't want to play, the WPT one be affected one bit. If Phil Ivey, Gus Hansen, Doyle Brunson, myself, Mike Matusow, Phil Hellmuth, and other players like that decided to boycott, that might worry them. Andy Bloch and Chris Ferguson? Personally, I just don't see how that has any negative effect on WPT ratings.

I haven't been able to confirm this, but the rumor mill is saying that none of the Full Tilt pros can play in WPT events under he current release language. That includes Matusow and Ivey.It probably isn't correct to call it a boycott. The poker blog Card Squad quotes Chris Ferguson as saying that were Chris to sign the WPT release he would be in breach of contract:

"The release has gotten worse over time, and I simply can't sign it." He explained that the WPT release is so broad, it asks for rights Chris is not legally able to relenquish. "I have business deals that prevent me signing this release," He said. ... "I don't understand the WPT's position. The best players in the world, and even celebrities can't play because of this release. The win-win solution is to have us sign the Harrahs release," he said, because it is limited to promotional use only.

If it is true that the entire Full Tilt team of pros is not playing in WPT events, it might simply be because their contracts with Fulll Tilt don't allow it.My own opinion of the WPT release language is that it's terrible for the players. The WPT is in a position to take even worse advantage of people who play in WPT events than record companies do of musicians. I won't sign that release, and so I won't play in any WPT events. This isn't me "boycotting," and I don't have any contractual obligations that the release interferes with. Rather, I believe to sign that release would me giving up for little return something that is potentially of great value to me.

[VegasBone 0]

Frankly....I think the pros get their TV appearance kickback by the WPT attracting so many fish to the pond. I went over to the Bellagio last week or whenever it was to check out some of the Five Diamond tourney.....and I just wish they would show some of the garbage that was going on. People calling someone's All-in pre flop with K5 off.....and was 35 from the money. The quality of poker from 90% of the field was no better than the $25 morning tourneys at Sunset Station.....except instead of $25 ...these wannabes are putting up $15K.If it wasn't for the WPT.....there would be no FCP....especially an FCP with over 14K members. I think some of these people are kicking the gift horse squarely in the jaw. ESPN is only going to air a guy slicing fruits and vegetables so much....when it comes down to it....to continue to be successfully marketable....you have to make the TV finals, and cutting out the WPT is drastically cutting out your chances for some public face time.

[pmc 0]

actually, i'd be happy to not see danny on t.v. he's a dweeb who thinks he's cool. does he ever change his hair style? flock of seagulls went out in the eighties. but he's right. alot of the poker fans like him on t.v. funny how guys like andy bloch and jesus r not popular but a guy like ivey who just sits there looking spun is incredibly popular. why? i think if u take out the ten most popular t.v. players, then there will be ten less players at the events. it will probably hurt t.v. ratings but as far as the events go, people just want to win a title and money. personally, i could care less about danny and ivey and whoever showing up. i just want to win. mike matasou is right, these big name players r a bunch of prima donna's. tony g. from austrailia....now he's good for t.v.

[AlanBostick 0]

I know that some people like to speculate and form opinions based on rumors, but there is so much that the public doesn't know about what really goes on with shows like WPT, the networks that air them, and the players that sign the releases.Though I can't go into great detail, I will say that the WPT cares a great deal about the players that participate in their tournaments. There is much going on to satisfy a few players concerns about signing releases, but the WPT has never tried to exploit players for financial gain. The television industry is complicated, and though most people think that advertisers are throwing money at companies like WPT, it's just not true.Please, please do some research before throwing out random generalizations and assumptions.Thanks, Daniel, for trying to clarify some things. I know that it's difficult without breaching confidentiality; that's exactly why I can't go into detail. However, I appreciate you trying to keep the rumors in check.

Assurances about how the WPT manaagement "cares" about the players have no legal standing. Neither does a claim that "the WPT has never tried to exploit players for financial gain." What does have legal standing is that damned release, if anyone is fool enough to sign it.Forgive my French, but your release sucks. The grant of rights is intolerably broad and open-ended. I simply won't sign it. I'm not "boycotting", I'm just not willing to sign away those rights in order to play in your tournament at full price including vig.You say that the TV business is complicated. I'm sure it is. I don't understand it. What I don't understand in particular is what about the business makes it necessary for the WPT to demand without any hope of negotiation such an absolute, wide-ranging grant of rights, when Harrah's asks for a much more reasonable, restricted, limited grant of rights for players who play in WSOP Circuit events.That's the bottom line, you know: The WPT is not the only game in town. If you treat the players like patsies, only patsies will play, and the smart money will go elsewhere.

[WPTCookie 0]

I know that some people like to speculate and form opinions based on rumors, but there is so much that the public doesn't know about what really goes on with shows like WPT, the networks that air them, and the players that sign the releases.Though I can't go into great detail, I will say that the WPT cares a great deal about the players that participate in their tournaments. There is much going on to satisfy a few players concerns about signing releases, but the WPT has never tried to exploit players for financial gain. The television industry is complicated, and though most people think that advertisers are throwing money at companies like WPT, it's just not true.Please, please do some research before throwing out random generalizations and assumptions.Thanks, Daniel, for trying to clarify some things. I know that it's difficult without breaching confidentiality; that's exactly why I can't go into detail. However, I appreciate you trying to keep the rumors in check.

Assurances about how the WPT manaagement "cares" about the players have no legal standing. Neither does a claim that "the WPT has never tried to exploit players for financial gain." What does have legal standing is that damned release, if anyone is fool enough to sign it.Forgive my French, but your release sucks. The grant of rights is intolerably broad and open-ended. I simply won't sign it. I'm not "boycotting", I'm just not willing to sign away those rights in order to play in your tournament at full price including vig.You say that the TV business is complicated. I'm sure it is. I don't understand it. What I don't understand in particular is what about the business makes it necessary for the WPT to demand without any hope of negotiation such an absolute, wide-ranging grant of rights, when Harrah's asks for a much more reasonable, restricted, limited grant of rights for players who play in WSOP Circuit events.That's the bottom line, you know: The WPT is not the only game in town. If you treat the players like patsies, only patsies will play, and the smart money will go elsewhere.

So, are you saying that each of the 400 to 800 players that pay to play in a WPT tournament should be treated as individuals, and the WPT should draft separate contracts for each player depending on what they're worth to the show? It seems that I'm not understanding what you (and others who won't sign the release) are asking for. However, it's not my place to negotiate or speak for the WPT.It's definitely your choice not to sign the release and play in the tournaments, and you seem happy with that decision. I'm certainly not going to even attempt to change your mind. I simply wanted an alternative point of view in this forum.Thanks for listening.

[dscoot 0]

Andy Bloch and Chris Ferguson? Personally, I just don't see how that has any negative effect on WPT ratings.

lolare these guys in a room with you? i bet their reaction to reading you say this would be priceless.I"ll be honest tho, i think i have scene different chris ferguson's bananna cutting and pie slicing skills performed during 8 different poker shows now, its a cool thing but ive probably seen it about.......... 6 times too many.

[ford14 0]

Let me just say this...Why does Jesus even have a business deal that will not allow him to sign the WPT release? I would say it is because the WPT has helped make him a "star." Sure, he has appeared mostly on WSOP broadcasts, but the WSOP and WPT shows go hand in hand. Does anybody watch one and not the other?Let me break it down another way. The WPT and WSOP (along with online poker) are responsible for the poker boom. Jesus appears on these broadcasts and inturn becomes a "big name" player. Jesus then signs an exclusive business deal, perhaps multiple deals including Full Tilt. Jesus then proceeds to boycott the WPT. Does this make sense to anyone other than Jesus and Andy Bloch?Without the WPT and WSOP being on TV, who is Chris Ferguson?

It actually makes complete sense. Granted, Ferguson and Bloch have gained noteriety from the WPT, that isn't what the dispute is. Let me use an analogy. Anybody remember how popular professional wrestling was in the late 90s? Seemed like everyone was watching it, wearing the t-shirts, using the lingo, etc. Wrestling was popular because of characters like Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Rock, and others. Now, the names "Stone Cold Steve Austin" and "The Rock" are owned by Vince McMahon, not the actual wrestlers. If a wrestler quits the WWF (WWE, whatever), they have to use a name different from their WWE name when wrestling. That's alright though, they get paid to act out that character for the WWE during their employment there and they understand that. Now, the difference between that and what's happening with these WPT releases? Chris Ferguson isn't a character name. Andy Bloch isn't some persona he acts out at WPT events. It's their f'n birth-given names, and they aren't being paid.Let's say for instance you play in a WPT event this coming year. You then enter the main event of the WSOP and win it, the prize money, and all the PAID promotional opportunities that come with it. Now let's say that the WPT comes out with a video game a couple months later with you on the cover of the box stating that the game has "The New World Champion of Poker, AlexR" featured in it. Your face is plastered all over posters and displays for the game, and for that you get paid exactly zero.

[Bertoli 0]

IF people liek to see NEgreanu on the WPT I think they're going to have to wait a while he really seems to suck right now

[A_Bullets_A 0]

I can't see the WPT changing anything at all. Even if the famous players that people like to see drop out it won't matter. After a while some newer players will start to make some final tables and then they'll be the new famous players that everyone wants to watch.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Chris Fergeson isn't the biggest name in poker, but he certainly isn't the smallest. He had his own beer commerecial, for god's sake. Paul Phillips has announced on his blog that he doubts he'll play any more wpt events.I think if the WPT uses players for promotion, they should re-emburse those players for it. It's only fair.

[ben_wallace 0]

I don't mean to be rude but Chris Ferguson sin't likely to have an effect on the average viewer. He may be big in WSOP but has never had huge success in WPT so I doubt ur average donk won't care. To "purists" and other pros its likely to have effect one way or the other, but I don't see it stopping guys. Many are making a career branding their name and it is making them a lot of money, and obviously WPT and Lake enterprises being business want a piece of that. Poker has become a business, not a game. Capitalism

[ispepi 0]

i read maybe four replies to the post, but seriously,everyone's starting look at poker skeptically...... it's natural, fine, do it, but i don't think it matters what this and that is, i don't think a poker union is going to create a positive gain.......... a poker union pretty much forfeits all the great things about the game. these great players should still have to pay every dollar the joe shmoe pays..... this game isn't, after all, about celebrity, it's only turned into that naturally,.... given the state of our world...... this game is about best man for himself... and to give these guys limited access is retarded.also, i'm retardedly drunk. so my post may very well be irrelevantyou guys talk to much

[FileError404 0]

I'm actually rather surprised that Daniel is ABLE to sign the release. Not that he shouldn't. But he of ALL the pros has so much external business going on. He's the STAR and the face of the upcoming "Stacked" video game and I can hardly believe he didn't sign an exclusive contract. If the WPT would decide to use him in their next WPT Poker video game, which they probably will, just to rub it into Stacked, he would have no leverage. Or rather, 30 laywers would make a lot of money to resolve the issue...

[bm99 0]

I agree that the waiver the players have to sign is totally unfair, but nothin will happen until the players are really taken advantage of. As soon as the WPT starts to really take advantage of player and this pisses a few off, players might take action.Someone above mentioned things that can be done to make the WPT better....I say fire Mike Sexton. I can't stand the guys face/voice anymore. Every hand its " oh player x has KQ and player Y has 88. Now folks....what this means.....is.....player x with have to catch either a king.....or a queen... player y is going to win the hand" And no more Mike Sexton party poker commercials either.

[Big Trips 0]

I'm boycotting it too. I'll stick to 50 buck sit'n go's

[chunky04 0]

FileError has just pointed out where the contractual conflict probably lies - and DN may have a reason himself to be worried about it.There is precedent for it as well.How many NBA games have you seen that are missing prominent players (MJ, Barkley and Shaq are the ones I recall off the top of my head). This is because those players were contractually obligated exclusively to a signature game of their own at the time.I would imagine Chris Ferguson has a similar deal with a game (I believe he was the frontman for the WSOP game?).The difference is, those basketball players controlled the usage of their likeness - from the looks of that WPT release, it would not. This is where the potential for conflict arises.If the problem is one involving Full Tilt Poker then the problem is significantly worse.I'm with DN on many things, but his views in this instance from the limited input he has given seem highly hypocritical, especially with regard to his strong stance on the TOC freeroll extra players issue.Both issues ultimately deal with giving the players a fair deal, but in one instance he supports the guys that wouldn't have any effect on ratings, and in the other he doesn't. Considering the potential personal stakes DN had in each instance, it becomes very difficult to give DNs view any credence in the abscence of further information. It also seems to me that DNs views are very prejudiced by his conflict with Jesus (don't know anything about any previous Andy-DN interaction).

TobyOrNotToBe wrote:Anyone else that posts here I will use their likeness on tshirts and sell them and give you no money in return. That's what WPT is making you do. The dvds, promos for the show, etc, no nothing nada, and oh by the way plop down your $ 10,000 here on this table boys and girls and NO you can't wear your logo on our show, oh ok but not ALL of you can wear Full Tilt hats, OK ?????Teneight Hat $ 19.95Custom36 Tshirt $ 14.95Royal Tour Polo $ 39.95Spademan Card Protector .02TobyOrNotToBe Signed 8x10 pricelessThat's not true, and the WPT has NEVER done that.

At the moment. What happens if WPT becomes a publicly traded company (this may or may not be the case already), and someone else is able to leverage control of the company who is less scrupulous? If these releases are as broad as we're being led to believe, it is certainly a possibility, and one that would affect higher visibility pros (such as DN) more than anyone else.When you sign these things, I assume (as with most legal documents) you get a personal copy? Would someone have a fairly recent one and be able to scan in the actual document so we can see for ourselves?Edit: Just thought of another point. Given DNs recent problems with an exclusivity agreement with the Wynn restricting his earning potential in other areas, I'd have thought that would have made him more sympathetic as well - that could have become a huge mess if the Wynn had decided to play hardball.

[Guest]

When you sign these things, I assume (as with most legal documents) you get a personal copy? Would someone have a fairly recent one and be able to scan in the actual document so we can see for ourselves?

Check out Andy Bloch's blog for the full list of things that he as a Harvard Law School graduate has a problem with in the contract.http://www.andybloch.com/gl/pub/article.ph...051212152037696The part that shocked me the most is that they can use your likeness in a video game and not compensate you for it. I understand that need to have mostly unfettered rights to use people's likenesses when promoting the show, but it is rediculous that they should get free use for something completely separate like a video game. Heck, they could make WPT action figures and you wouldn't see a penny of it.I don't know what they have actually done when it comes to paying people for their likeness in the soon to be released WPT game. That's not the point though, the point is they COULD do it without any further compensation, now or at some unspecified time in the future.Zarathustra