Nobody would know who Howard Lederer was if it wasn't for the WPT. Yes, I know he was a successful player before that, but the WPT made him (and others) TV stars. How many books has he sold because of the WPT? How many DVD's? You think he would have a TV show if people didn't know who he was? It seems a little greedy to sue the people that made you famous. They make way more because of the WPT than they would without it. Also, who wouldn't want to be in a video game? For God's sakes, they are only poker players. You would think they would be proud to be apart of something like that.

the wpt should be more accomodating. just change the release and final table structure and they will play.

daniel annoys me with all his rants so much. why does he care?

howard i believe did win 2 wpts in its first season but i dont really put much weight into that argument because u can say moneymaker is the reason the WPT even exists, correct?

u guys should check for greg raymers posts on 2+2 recently. very interesting discussions

If the WPT lost the lawsuit and decided that it wasn't profitable to run their tournaments anymore, would poker be better off or worse off? It is their tournaments, their rules, if you don't like them go play somewhere else. To claim that they have a monopoly on poker is ridiculous seeing as how one has hundreds of choices every day as to which tournaments to play. If poker players want more control over their likenesss in major tournaments then they need to form an organization similar to the PGA or PBA and run their own tournaments or at least get a majority of "name" players to join a union of some sorts that would have enough bargaining power to force tournaments to listen to them.

Im not sure anyone is "right or wrong". It all depends on your own principals and morals.

Side 1: The WPT essentially gave you everything you have. Contracts, endorsement deals, millions of dollars. You wouldnt have a single one of these things without the WPT. Therefore they can do whatever they want. On top of that, they havent even DONE anything. Youre just suing them over something that they could, possibly do. As if that wernt enough, youre doing a disservice to online poker. You are running the risk of bringing the online poker industry into the media, which could lead to an outright ban and end up ruining online poker for everyone.

Side 2: The WPT gave you everything you have. Youre very greatful, however, just because they helped you get what you have doesnt mean they have the right to exploit you by having you sign a contract giving away every right you have to your own likeness. If it brings online poker to the media, good...it needs to come up sooner or later. If it gets banned, we can fight the ban too!

I am personally in support of side #2, but I can absolutly respect and understand people who fall on side 1....just my 2 cents!

While I wish it could have been handled differently, as I'm sure the parties involved do, too, I clearly think the lawsuit has merit. The WPT has been exceptionally heavy handed in this situation. The release they have players sign is signifigantly different than that of the WSOP, or the Ultimate Blackjack Tour I was on, of any other television program. There's just no reason they couldn't change it. The players involved, a couple of whom I have spoken to personally regarding this, should be highly respected, not just as poker players, but as quality individuals: Bloch, Ferguson, Lederer, Seidel, Duke, Moneymaker, Raymer, Haschem, etc. These people are taking the brunt of this (and coming out of pocket for the expense) for all the people to follow them. The WPT will not make or break them, but their actions could greatly influence how those of us who aspire to follow them will be treated when we get there.

As for Daniel, I greatly respect all his accomplishments and feel I have developed some of my personal style on the table from his example. However, I think his tendency to attack others personally (i.e. his attacks on Annie Duke a few years back, etc.) hurts his credibility in areas away from the table. I'm sure it's frustrating to be involved in a lawsuit and not able to publicly comment on it, but have Daniel blog it despite not being involved.

My thoughts,

Blue.

I took WSOP into account (which I count as 1), and allot of EPT's are taped as WPTs are they not? I don't think there are that many $10k+ events though, outside of the WPT. Maybe I'm wrong, I've played in exactly zero $10,000 buy-in tournaments in my life. Either way, the WPTs are the "big" ones, that's not disputable.

I believe the players tried to talk to the WPT and they basically, said "if you dont like the release, dont play the events".

I thought I remembered reading that or hearing it from Lederer. I cant imagine they would all be sitting around and decided to just file against the WPT, they must have at least tried to talk to them first :-)

I think Daniel is right on this one (as I have said in the past) but unfortunately he might be the worst spokesperson for the WPT (not that he is). Some of the things that he has said just don't need to be said (regarding tax scrutiny and such), he is also too emotional.

From my perspective there is just too much on the poker players plate and the lawsuit comes at a bad time. Also, this lawsuit is not for all poker players as Annie will likely suggest to you on the podcast. In fact, in the 2nd paragraph (either 2nd or 3rd sentence) it refers to the rights of "elite poker players". If they wanted to say "All Poker Players" or "Professional Poker Players" they certainly could have. I know and like many of the people involved in the suit but I disagree with this approach. Furthermore, I believe this is more about WPT Online and the competition that it could possible present to pokerstars, FTP and UB.

Frankly I don't think either side is right but I lean towards the WPT because of what they have done for poker and how little support the litigants have recieved from other poker players. Of the people involved, all of them do well promoting themselves and recieve endorsements befitting their elite status. Also, none of these people struggle to get WSOP coverage which is likely a point that will come up.

When its all said and done I feel like this lawsuit is setting up more of a clique in poker and is meant to exlude the average poker player. Currently I don't see many of these people fighting to get "up and comers" on shows that the companies they represent promote, nor do I feel that they have been an advocate for creating a system that would include newer successful poker players. On the contrary the WPT works very hard at promoting the stars they create and that is another reason I side with the WPT. If you win they try and include you, I haven't seen examples where the litigants have been a part of a movement like that.