12 Jan 12

Can Famous Poker Players Expect Privacy?

Following two high profile stories involving poker players personal lives in the mainstream press, Barry Carter asks if the top poker players are too famous to expect privacy?

Does being a world champ mean no privacy?

Every day we find out more than we would ever deserve to know about the rich and famous on news channels, websites, and papers. If you are a celebrity, this is something you come to expect, and often even exploit for your own end.

But should a 'famous' poker player expect the same sort of treatment?

Two examples have occurred recently where poker player's personal lives have been exposed in both the mainstream and poker media. WSOP main event champion Jonathan Duhamel was hospitalised and had his bracelet stolen, in an incident which has seen his former girlfriend standing trial. Personal details of their relationship have inevitably made it into the mainstream media.

Another high profile player, Phil Ivey, has seen his divorce proceedings splashed across the mainstream and poker media. Perhaps the most notable of all the revelations being that he was paid $920,000 a month from Full Tilt.

We live in a world where privacy is fragile, and in particular, celebrities are expected to waive their anonymity. Celebrity journalism is a massive industry, and most stories where the private lives of the rich and famous are intruded, is justified as being in the public interest.

But do we want it in poker?

Public interest?

In the cases of both Ivey and Duhamel, there is arguably a legitimate poker public interest. With Ivey, what he was paid by Full Tilt is almost certainly something poker players deserve to know, especially those ones with money still stuck on the site.

With Duhamel, the fact his main event bracelet, the most coveted item in poker, was taken, is the sort of thing that poker players perhaps would want to know. Unfortunately for him, the involvement of an ex-girlfriend has made the story all the more sensational.

So if there is a poker related reason to publish the story, I think it is pretty fair to say that the news is fair game for the public domain. Cheating scandals for example, bad debt to other players, or anything that involves a players conduct at the table.

But what if it is something unrelated to poker? Do famous poker players waive their right to privacy?

One of the biggest arguments journalists make when they expose the private indiscretions of celebrities is that it is in the public interest because they are an ambassador or role model. A recent example of which is Tiger Woods, who both made millions as an ambassador endorsing products, and was a role model to children the world over. His affairs were justified as front-page news, because he was said to have let down his fans and his sponsors.

Not many poker players have to worry about paparazzi

Role models

Can the same be said for poker players? First of all, are they role models? While there is no doubt that thousands of us wish we could play like Ivey or maybe admire the way Daniel Negreanu conducts himself, I am not sure poker players are role models in the traditional sense.

We may want to play like them, but we don't look to poker players for advice on our personal lives. Most of us come into poker as adults, not many children look up to poker players, and it is usually going to be the children who are vulnerable to, and may aspire emulate, the less desirable elements of a celebrity.

Onto the poker players as ambassadors. Most high profile players are sponsored by someone, and for that reason, they should expect to come under a certain amount of scrutiny if they conduct themselves poorly.

I'm not sure that means it should be open season on a player whose marriage is breaking up, but maybe if they are regularly spotted selling drugs or kicking puppies, they should expect to come under fire as an ambassador of a poker room.

Are poker players famous?

Are Phil Ivey's divorce details in the public's interest?

My next question is, are poker players even famous enough to warrant tabloid attention? I think the Iveys, Hellmuths, and any recent world champion are all big enough names that they can probably consider themselves 'famous', at least in their home countries, but beyond that I am not so sure.

Those of us in the poker community probably over estimate the mainstream appeal of poker players, and when a  moderately well known player does actually make it into the newspapers, they are usually referred to as 'poker champ' or 'poker player' in the headline, rather than using their own name.

Which leads me to my final question, should we in the poker media be adopting the same approach with our 'stars' that the mainstream press do with celebrities? I think for the stuff that is genuinely in the interests of poker players, most of the time we get it right.

Thankfully there is much less incentive for us to divulge details of their personal lives anyway, because it tends not to earn the publisher any extra revenue, and most of the time would only enrage the sponsor of the player, who is often likely to be an affiliate partner.

One area that really can feed on personal lives of poker players is the social media and forum communities. This is really where something that has every right to remain private can become public knowledge despite the best efforts of the people involved.

However unfortunate that is, this is not a problem unique to poker, it is simply the high price we all pay for an age of transparency where everyone knows everyone's business on the Internet.

I have often found myself writing about subject matter about poker players that made me a little uneasy, no doubt I may have crossed the line now and then. I also have found myself many times hearing stories about players that in any other industry would make me a fortune to expose, but have refused to spread the story any further because it was not in the interests of the game.

It is a difficult balancing act, most of us want to protect the integrity of the game, and most of the time I think that means keeping the conversation firmly on poker.

by Barry Carter