Run, Carroll! Run!

There is a lesson to be learned from falling sports stars, it's just not very clear what that might be. There has been a concentrated string of sports heroes that are paying for indiscretions or evacuating their role as king of the mountain, and yet the moral lesson is still ambiguous. If we are going to make examples of athletes and coaches that make bad choices, then it should be clear why they are examples. Although sports figures are paying a heftier price than they once did, are they (or we) becoming better people because of it?

Baseball got the ball rolling by exposing the steroid issue. We have watched certain Hall of Famers sit in front of cameras and admit to steroid use in tearful apologies. We have watched with much more discomfort as the last of the steroid players vehemently denied their use, and decided to go down with the ship.

Then we have the "in between" guy Mark McGwire who finally came out of the steroid closet to ease his transition back to baseball. Rather than a straight forward apology, we got McGwire the victim, the rationalizer, and the delusional. There was an apology sandwiched in there somewhere. A wise man once said, "apologies under the gun are overrated."

My avid readers will remember I predicted an apology from McGwire as being unnecessary [The Punishment Fits the Crime: Big Mac's Return to Baseball] (this is becoming a habit), because it wouldn't change any opinions or shed any light on what was going on while he played. It is just a forced interaction that the media demands. It fits more in the category of celebrity gossip than watchdog journalism.

On a side note: If you want to see a reporter on top of his game, check out Bob Ley of ESPN's Outside the Lines. He has a wonderful blend of serious questioning and human decency. He is one of the few reporters that I admire in journalism, and I always feel like his work is for the public, and not for career advancement by being provocative. Sensationalism and spotty ethical framework are the driving reasons I decided not to pursue a career in the field. After watching Ley's latest series of interviews with McGwire, I feel a change of heart. He gives me faith that journalism can be an honorable profession. You just have to go to sports reporters to find it. What a shame...

Sports heroes have become more of a target these days. There's Tiger Woods (enough said), Mark Mangino, Mike Leach, Jim Leavitt, Michael Vick, Gilbert Arenas, Marvin Harrison, etc. I realize these cases are not related (other than the football coaches), but the days when sports figures literally got away with murder are over (thanks OJ). The Plaxico Burress conviction reversed the idea that professional athletes get favorable treatment from the courts by making him an example of tough gun control law.

The next to fall off the mountain could be former University of Southern California head coach Pete Carroll. Carroll decided to leave USC to become the head coach of the Seattle Seahawks. There is nothing too strange about Carroll's desire to give the NFL another crack, but the way the change took place seemed quite odd. Carroll made some statements eluding that the college atmosphere could not live up to the NFL's, and in a flash, he was gone.

To Seattle.

Not exactly the dream situation you would think Carroll would leave USC for. After inhabiting what most around college football viewed as the top position for nine seasons, Carroll jumped ship seemingly out of nowhere.

Shortly after, reports began swirling about NCAA infractions by the USC football program. Carroll has coached with impunity in his tenure with USC. No other program in the nation had such egregious dealings ignored by the NCAA. How long has the entire nation known that Reggie Bush's family was given a home? People have gone on record with proof that these transactions took place, yet no action has been taken.

Conversely, there are universities that find out about violations of the program, kick the players responsible off the team (including the starting QB), self impose scholarship restrictions, and the NCAA still hammers them. The largest biases in collegiate athletics does not live in the media, it resides in the justice league that is the NCAA. They clearly have programs they hate, and programs they adore. The NCAA has long been the Gestapo of the sports world, but for some reason USC remained immune during Carroll's tenure. It must be his moon reflecting smile.

Regardless of the past, it seems like USC has gotten away with too much and the NCAA must finally take action. They have already buried their basketball program for being dirty, and it looks like football is next. The Bush issue has resurfaced along with allegations that RB Joe McKnight was driving around LA in an SUV purchased by a booster for his "girlfriend."

The only reason I have any confidence in the NCAA to exact their brand of justice is due to Carroll's fleeing. He had the cushiest job in college athletics serving as football king in LA, a city that Carroll seemed perfectly suited for. Instead, he leaves the sun and beach behind for the tropical paradise of Seattle. How do you take your Latte, Mr. Carroll? Hope you packed your slicker.

College coaches have a history of fleeing programs that are about to be punished. The university takes the hit and the coach walks away to another job. Anybody ever heard of Kelvin Sampson? It looks like Carroll will be the next on that list. How can the NCAA let this happen? They are the strictest governing body in all of sports, yet they allow coaches to escape unharmed for their violations.

With the money paid to college basketball and football coaches, it is time to start hitting them in the wallet. I'm so sick of seeing the guys responsible for violations slink away in the night, only to watch the innocent schools and fans live with the punishment. As former Tennessee and current USC head coach Lane Kiffin highlighted, college coaches are really just free agents that follow the dollar. They don't have to live up to contracts, they don't have to follow rules, and they don't have to suffer the consequences of their actions.

College coaches are the only ones getting paid (legitimately), yet there is never a financial punishment. Why?

I understand that punishing the university is part of the process. It should be. But if they are not going to suspend coaches, then the NCAA should be fining them. Sports is used to teach life lessons and the NCAA acts as the moral authority. Coaches are directly responsible for imparting these lessons to their student athletes. What kind of life lesson are we teaching by letting coaches act without consequences?

Carroll will leave a legend in USC folklore while the program suffers consequences that are long overdue. Don't get me wrong, I don't feel bad for USC at all. In fact, I think they are going to get what they deserve with Kiffin as their new head coach. Tennessee is currently being investigated for several minor infractions Kiffin left behind. When the money and temptation of LA gets in his blood, there will inevitably be repercussions. I don't think the media will give Kiffin the pass Carroll had.

An unfortunate precedent has been set with the current system, and it is up to some competent people in the NCAA to reverse it. I realize "competent NCAA" is an oxymoron, but I can hope. Until the coaches themselves are punished for fleeing violations, there will be no change in their dirty activities. It is my belief that nearly every major program is dirty within the confines of NCAA restrictions. Either start paying the players or fining the coaches. The current system is faulty, and we will see just how much when they rule on USC.

So what have we learned from all these sports heroes? Men cry more often than we thought? Don't get caught? Money rules everything? I guess the answer is yes.

None of our baseball heroes caught in the steroid scandal would have admitted to cheating unless they had already been caught. None of our "old school" college football coaches would have been fired if they got along with their athletic directors. Tiger Woods wouldn't be losing sponsors if he wasn't such a colossal star that transcends sports. NBA and NFL stars would still be getting slapped on the wrist if it wasn't for the public outcry for serious litigation against rich athletes.

In the end, we do not have a better understanding of right and wrong from this latest public lashing. If the ends justify the means, then the most valuable lessons in athletics have been lost. The greatest teaching tool of human character is obscured by fame, greed, ego, and a faulty system of justice. If the NCAA truly wants to keep athletics pure, then they need to clean their own house. When they do, they can bury USC in the pile of skeletons they will need to shed to illustrate a clear ethical picture.

Math is Idiotic

After coming from behind to win a televised pot worth $550,000, poker professional Barry Greenstein uttered the phrase, "Math is idiotic." By taking the short odds to win a massive pot, Greenstein (who is a mathematical genius) contradicted the sentiment that poker is a game of skill. A sentiment nearly every poker player lives by. The idea that a hand can, and sometimes should be played on feel limits the amount of actual skill that it takes to win at poker. This was painfully evident at this year's final table of the World Series of Poker Main Event.

Since its inception, the WSOP Main Event in Las Vegas has been the tournament that crowns the "world champion" of poker. Before a camera was developed for a TV viewer to see hole cards, Texas hold 'em was limited to guys in green reflective visors and those that were nicknamed after cities or states. The 1999 Main Event had 393 entrants. Ten years later after becoming an annual broadcast on ESPN, the event boasted nearly 6,500 players (which is even lower than the prior two years).

Texas hold 'em and the WSOP have exploded in popularity world wide after Chris Moneymaker, an amateur poker player and seemingly normal guy, won $2.5 million in the 2003 Main Event. It seems like ESPN has replayed the episode of Moneymaker (actual name) winning the Main Event nearly once for every dollar he made. Soon to follow were internet poker sites, more televised events and the dawn of the poker "superstar," some of whom are as popular as professional sports stars.

ESPN has taken what was once a collection of grainy footage airing late night on ESPN2, and turned it into a serious broadcast airing prime time with production value. The latest and greatest marketing innovation is the November Nine. Now, players in the Main Event that make the final table wait four months to finish the tournament. This serves to create excitement for the TV viewer by keeping the winner a secret while they watch the episodes leading up to the final table. It is as close to televising a live poker tournament as you can get. Televised tournaments are heavily edited to include only interesting hands. For every hand that is television worthy, there are 15 that are about as interesting as watching a banana rot (I should throw that out).

This year is the second year of the Novemeber Nine and ESPN received a gift when the games best and most popular player, Phil Ivey, made the final table. The tournaments have gotten so big that major pros are becoming nearly extinct from Main Event final tables. This year ESPN had four months to market the most marketable player (nicknamed the Tiger Woods of poker) and hype the event. Despite the fact Ivey would be starting the final table with just five percent of the chips in play, he was viewed as the favorite because of his tremendous poker skill.

When the broadcast of the final table began, I felt more a part of the action, as if I was watching a sporting event. There are obviously some geniuses at ESPN that could take a parlor game and turn it into a sport.

I was excited because I had someone to root for in Phil Ivey, and a backup in Jeff Shulman (someone poker nerds like myself would recognize). I always root for the pro players because I am a student of poker and I want to believe that skill can beat luck. I want to believe you can get so good at poker that you can beat the game. Nearly every pro player believes that. They have to. What else would justify gambling for a living? You have to prove it is not gambling.

I still believe poker is a game of skill. I have played and studied the game at a fairly serious level for the last five years. I have read dozens of books by top pros explaining strategy and math for both tournament and cash games. I have played in thousands of tournaments (live and online) and I have logged countless hours playing cash games. I have played poker since I was eight years old with my family. My study, preparation and natural skill have helped me win more than I have lost, but my faith in the math of the game has been severely damaged after watching this year's final table.

Like any semi-serious poker player, I dreamed about winning the WSOP Main Event. Payouts fluctuate, but these days the winner is sure to see 7.5 million dollars, near that amount in endorsements, their poster on the wall at the Rio and poker immortality. It sounds pretty great, but there is a problem. No matter how good you are, it seems the luckiest player in the room is the one who wins the tournament.

Let me explain by what I mean when I say lucky. There were 6,494 entrants to this years Main Event. To outlast a field like that you are going to have to come from behind to win big pots. You are also going to have to win nearly every hand in which you are ahead (which is more lucky than coming from behind once or twice). You are going to have to hit flush and straight draws consistently when you chase them. You are going to have to get dealt cards you can play, and hit flops when you play them. You are going to have to stay out of auto bust situations (like getting dealt KK against someones AA). Most importantly, you are going to have to win coin flips, and lots of them (a poker coin flip is when you are all in with around a 50 percent chance to win the hand, the most classic example is QQ against AK). There is no chance for someone without skill to win this tournament, but there is also very little chance for someone with skill to win.

The winner of this year's Main Event was Joe Cada, a 21 year old online poker pro who looks like he should still be getting wedgies in the school yard. He broke the record (set last year by Peter Eastgate) for youngest player ever to win the Main Event. What once was a test for the elite players in the game, has now become a free for all crap shoot.

Dan Harrington, long time poker pro, former WSOP Main Event champ and math genius, explains the phenomena best. Unlike what you might see on an ad for an internet poker site, he likens the Main Event to a lottery. Every entrant gets a ticket. Some players are given more tickets (based on their skill) but the odds are still against them. When you have that many people competing in a tournament, luck has to be on your side.

I was sick to my stomach after watching the two and a half hour broadcast of the Main Event final table. The two worst players were the two left to battle it out heads up for $8.5 million. Each player took part in putting disgusting beats (winning with the short odds) on superior opponents multiple occasions. You can expect to see a couple of bad beats at a final table that shape the landscape of the tournament, but it was over and over. The best hand never seemed to win. Poker skill went out the window. The player who foolishly shoved all his chips in with the worst hand seemed to get rewarded every time.

My dream of playing in the Main Event has been shattered. I am not that lucky. The old saying, "lucky in love, unlucky in cards" applies to me. In the biggest moments of my poker playing "career," I have been the guy taking the beats. Luck trumps skill every time.

I would still enjoy playing a WSOP event, but not the Main Event. If I am going to gamble away $10,000 I will take my chances playing black jack since I can get free shots of Patron and $50 cigars while I play. It's not enough to read your opponent well and get your money in ahead, you have to stay ahead and avoid someone else's luck.

While the broadcast quality of the WSOP Main Event gets better, the quality of poker played gets worse. We have seen amateurs and unknowns win the championship for the last eight years. This event should not have the label "world championship." The Main Event should raise the buy in to $100,000, or consider calling the $50,000 HORSE event the championship.

HORSE would be a better game to determine a true poker champion because players have to play five different games including: hold 'em, Omaha, razz, stud and stud hi/low. The variances go in favor of the skillful players in this type of game, and you have to have serious gambling money to get involved.

Phil Ivey finished seventh and Jeff Shulman finished fifth. Both were huge favorites in the hands that knocked them out. Skill could only take them so far before they were overtaken by luck. This year's Luckiest Man Alive Award goes to Joe Cada, winner of the November Nine, thus proving Greenstein correct in his assertion, "math is idiotic."

So the next time you get lucky in your home game and someone gets upset with you, just remind them that you are playing like a poker champion. I guess that's what it takes.