Exclusive Interview Jack Effel on William Kassouf: ‘Our Job Is Not To Make People Mute’

Anyone who’s watched the latest episodes of the World Series of Poker on ESPN has an opinion on William Kassouf. It’s just about impossible to be impartial. It’s been awhile since someone was as controversial as Kassouf with his speech play.

In the fourth episode, Kassouf was highlighted by the ESPN production crew. In a hand with Stacy Matuson he used speech play to get her to do what he wanted. She wasn’t having any of it, so tournament director Jack Effel came by and gave Kassouf a one round penalty.

In Episode 12, William Kassouf once more took center stage – literally. The players at his table, most notably Cliff Josephy, Jared Bleznick, Kenny Hallaert and Gordon Vayo, were agitated by his slow pace and, to a lesser extent, his speech play once more. Again, Jack Effel came by and this time gave Kassouf a warning, reminding him that poker should be fun for everyone at the table.

The case of Kassouf versus the rest of the table makes for a polarized debate. On the one hand, Kassouf makes the argument that he’s in his right to do whatever the rules allow and that the rest of the table ganging up on him is anything but fair. Josephy calling him a clown and Bleznick berating him over the regular buy-ins he plays is harsh, if not offending.

The other side of the debate, one mostly shared by the other players in the room as seen on the broadcast and felt by a lot of the people in the Rio back in June, was that Kassouf sucked the joy out of the game. Him taking minutes to make seemingly easy decisions slowed down the game tremendously, giving the other players on his table a disadvantage. On top of that, the players felt he was just doing it for show and to agonize his table mates.

ESPN made Kassouf into the main character of the show. Whether you see him as the hero or the antagonist, he was there and everything was about him. In a way, it reminded of Jamie Gold and Hevad Kahn who polarized the viewers just as much in their respective deep runs in the WSOP Main Event.

Kassouf has been very active on Twitter, riding the popularity train like no other. He started his own site, retweets everyone that’s positive about his showing, and was on multiple podcasts.

He spoke on the PokerNews, Full Contact Poker, twoplustwo and Joey Ingram podcasts.

The other side of the story is that of his opponents. Two nights ago, Gordon Vayo took to Twitter to clarify his opinion, if that wasn’t clear enough already.

One side of the story, one that isn’t heard often, is that of tournament director Jack Effel. Effel usually doesn’t react to specific situations that happen during tournaments and declines most interview requests. He made an exception for PokerNews, as he was willing to explain the rest of the situation that wasn’t shown in the broadcast.

PokerNews sat down in Monaco with the WSOP tournament director for a one-on-one talk about William Kassouf and some of the other controversial things that have come up in this year’s coverage on ESPN.

William Kassouf has been a storyline in the WSOP broadcasts on ESPN since the beginning. At the start of Episode 4, the first big controversy hit and you came in and gave him a one round penalty. How do you look back on that situation?

The first thing that we have to remember is that TV only does so much in terms of showing the moments and the actual result of what’s happening. It doesn’t show all of the backstory or the interactions we’ve had with the player; it doesn’t show any prior warnings or any discussions we’ve had with a particular player.

I have a very large staff during the World Series of Poker. If I get called over to make a decision, it has gotten to the point where previous interventions from my staff were unable to get a player’s behavior curtailed. At that point a player has received warnings already and it has basically caused a standstill and a decision has to be made.

I’m not just walking around the Amazon Room trying to find someone that I can go and issue a penalty to or go yell at; that’s not what happens. It’s always about trying to maintain an environment where everybody can play in the best spirit of the tournament and in fairness.

There are rules that govern specific things, like whether you’re in your seat when the final card hits the button (rule 82, pdf) or the rule that you shouldn’t put any chips in your pocket (rule 107, pdf). Those things are clearly defined. Some of the situations in poker are, however, not. But within our rules, it says that in certain circumstances we can make a decision in fairness and in the best interest of the tournament (rule 45, pdf). Sometimes, when all other rules fail, we have to make a judgment call.

In the case of Will Kassouf, I don’t really think it was so much of a judgment call. With everything he had done leading up to me actually giving him the penalty, I could give him a penalty for three things: excessive chatter (rule 48, pdf), disruptive behavior (rule 111, pdf) and taunting (rule 47, pdf).

He had just been warned two hands prior to me giving him the penalty. I’m standing three or four tables over and I can hear him clearly. That means that he can be heard by all the other players. From a noise perspective, I feel like it’s kind of causing a scene. I don’t think that’s good for the tournament.

But a bit of banter is also part of poker and table talk is part of the game, right? I’m not ready for tables full of people not saying a word and just staring at each other.

I believe that poker is about comradery, social interactions between people [and] banter. A little bit of psychological warfare doesn’t hurt anyone. But I also believe that there is a line of what’s appropriate and what isn’t. The words he used might not have necessarily been crossing the line, but the way they were being used and the aggressive nature of his actions were enough to make me feel there was a tension between the players that wasn’t creating a positive, fun, interactive environment where people could freely play poker.

I do believe that talking is part of poker and if you look at everybody that runs poker tournaments throughout the world, I by far have the most lenient rules governing talking. I even allow players to talk when there’s no other player left to act, when the action could be closed (rule 113e, pdf).

When it’s bothering all the other tables, then I have to come in and say, ‘Hey guys, you’re not the only ones playing in this tournament. We have to be cognizant of everyone. We have to make this a good environment for everyone to play. And while the fact that you’re getting attention might be good for you, the tournament is not just about you. It’s about everyone and I must think about everyone.’

Even if it’s not directly affecting the table or no one at the table cares, it could still be affecting the other tables. I’m not just telling people to be quiet because you should be quiet in a poker tournament. Not at all. I’m telling them to be quiet because I can hear them three tables over and I can see people complaining to the other floor people because he’s being too loud. That’s disruptive.

William Kassouf in the hand against Stacy Matuson

You gave him a one-round penalty and he wanted to defend himself, but you wouldn’t let him. Shouldn’t a player be able to defend himself or herself in a situation like that?

I didn’t want to let him defend himself because, at that point, it had reached the point that he had talked enough and he needed to go take some time away from the table.

I did give him the courtesy and the respect to have a conversation with him away from the table after he had been given the penalty. After he took a little bit of a break, he and I talked a little bit and he went back to playing. I explained to him that while he wasn’t breaking all of the rules, he was definitely riding the line and if he didn’t learn how to draw the line when people say they’ve had enough of him, to have enough respect for them to give that respect back, then I have to draw the line for him.

This is the conversation I had. And of course, he understood that. Because he’s a lawyer, it’s easy to make the analogy to the courtroom. The judge just told him, ‘One more outburst like that and I’m going to hold you in contempt.’

Again, TV does not always play these situations out in the best light but we did have a discussion with him afterward. I said that he shouldn’t say another word or I would increase the penalty because, again, he had talked enough. It was time for him to go take a timeout. It was kind of a cooldown. So the players can try to relax and he can relax.

On TV, they can’t show the entire interaction or the show would be hours …

continue reading in source www.pokernews.com