Poker site logos are okay on WPT now, but the Sox aren't?

Omaha Chris

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 5:53:33 PM4/13/06

to

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.

--

Chris P.
http://www.omaholics.com

brewmaster

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 6:18:04 PM4/13/06

to

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

dtkodak

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 7:08:05 PM4/13/06

to

On Apr 13 2006 3:18 PM, brewmaster wrote:

> On Apr 13 2006 2:53 PM, Omaha Chris wrote:
>
> > 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..

_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com

Alway...@aol.com

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 7:08:50 PM4/13/06

to

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

guinness

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 10:34:50 PM4/13/06

to

Profit has nothing to do with revenue. By not turning a profit, WPT is
stating that it reinvests all its monies into additional capital \
resources.

tim (NH)

<Alway...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144969730.8...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Mike Mosh

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 10:53:02 PM4/13/06

to

that was very strange... dan had to be pissed ! i was like,whats up with
his hat,then noticed they made him cover the logo's

John Harkness

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 10:51:34 PM4/13/06

to

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.

John Harkness

Oliver Tse

unread,

Apr 13, 2006, 11:47:37 PM4/13/06

to

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.

On Apr 13 2006 2:53 PM, Omaha Chris wrote:

> http://www.omaholics.com/

_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com