The real bizarreness of WPT last night was seeing what they decided needed to be covered up, and what didn't.
Dan Harrington's hat looked ridiculous with that tape on it. And yet there's Gavin Smith with Full Tilt in plain view, and Minh Ly sporting a Doyles Room shirt.
What the hell is going on here? Weren't poker logos banned by WPT to the point of player boycots? Why are they suddenly okay now and sports logos are not?
> The real bizarreness of WPT last night was seeing what they decided needed > to be covered up, and what didn't.
> Dan Harrington's hat looked ridiculous with that tape on it. And yet there's > Gavin Smith with Full Tilt in plain view, and Minh Ly sporting a Doyles Room > shirt.
> What the hell is going on here? Weren't poker logos banned by WPT to the > point of player boycots? Why are they suddenly okay now and sports logos are > not?
> I am terribly confused.
> --
I don't think that was a sox hat. The logo covered up was triangular. I think it was an Anchor Loans hat (Dan H's company). Why they covered it I don't know.
______________________________________________________________________ : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
> > The real bizarreness of WPT last night was seeing what they decided needed > > to be covered up, and what didn't.
> > Dan Harrington's hat looked ridiculous with that tape on it. And yet there's > > Gavin Smith with Full Tilt in plain view, and Minh Ly sporting a Doyles Room > > shirt.
> > What the hell is going on here? Weren't poker logos banned by WPT to the > > point of player boycots? Why are they suddenly okay now and sports logos are > > not?
> > I am terribly confused.
> > --
> I don't think that was a sox hat. The logo covered up was triangular. I > think it was an Anchor Loans hat (Dan H's company). Why they covered it I > don't know.
its a green boston redsox hat, if its the same hat that he wears during hte world series..
I wondered about that at first too... then it occurred to me, the wording was "approved sponsors", which Full Tilt and Doyles Room most likely are (read this as they pay a fee to the WPT for players to wear their stuff), and yet the WPT claims it still hasn't turned a profit, go figure
>I wondered about that at first too... then it occurred to me, the > wording was "approved sponsors", which Full Tilt and Doyles Room most > likely are (read this as they pay a fee to the WPT for players to wear > their stuff), and yet the WPT claims it still hasn't turned a profit, > go figure
On 13 Apr 2006 16:08:50 -0700, AlwaysAw...@aol.com wrote:
>I wondered about that at first too... then it occurred to me, the >wording was "approved sponsors", which Full Tilt and Doyles Room most >likely are (read this as they pay a fee to the WPT for players to wear >their stuff), and yet the WPT claims it still hasn't turned a profit, >go figure
>Joan
You're thinking of WPT as some kind of poker business.
It's a show business business, which means it has access to the most creative people in Hollywood, the accountants. Nothing in LA ever turns a profit.
Only WPT-APPROVED logos (i.e. company must pay WPT an approval fee) can be worn (no gambling businesses, no hard liquor, no tobacco, no firearms), and the logo must be worn on the shirt (not the cap) at WPT final tables.
> The real bizarreness of WPT last night was seeing what they decided needed > to be covered up, and what didn't.
> Dan Harrington's hat looked ridiculous with that tape on it. And yet there's > Gavin Smith with Full Tilt in plain view, and Minh Ly sporting a Doyles Room > shirt.
> What the hell is going on here? Weren't poker logos banned by WPT to the > point of player boycots? Why are they suddenly okay now and sports logos are > not?
