When the World Poker Tour issued a formal response to the lawsuit against it by seven professional poker players, it called to mind some pointed comments TV poker commentator Michael Konik made at last fall's Vegas Valley Book Festival.

Konik marveled that poker players, of all people, have emerged as the new breed of American heroes:

"How can you celebrate a guy who stays indoors 10 to 14 hours a day sitting on his butt, essentially successfully lying to people? It seems antithetical to American values. These are generally not the people we celebrate in society ¦ I didn't see it coming. I never thought corporate America would embrace guys like that."

Of course, Konik wasn't specifically addressing the lawsuit, filed in July in a federal court in Los Angeles, or the poker pros behind it.

He was talking, in general, about the possibility of leading professional players banding together either to form a union or to take some sort of legal action. But his comments eerily presaged the lawsuit against World Poker.

The crux of the suit is the players' reluctance to give up their "intellectual property rights" - including their names and images - as a prerequisite for competing in World Poker's televised tournaments. They also maintain World Poker and its partner casinos conspired to eliminate competition in the field, quashing the chances of any would-be rival poker tour.

World Poker's 22-page response, filed Aug. 24 in court in California, tends to get a little bogged down in legalese.

In a more plainspoken way, Konik had already expressed many of the same sentiments.

Here's the World Poker document on how the poker boom has led directly to myriad lucrative opportunities for star players:

"In short, poker is more popular than ever before, which has led to more poker tournaments, more poker players entering tournaments, more poker programming ¦ and more prize money for players. The poker industry is a model of a competitive marketplace, with more and greater opportunities and choices for casinos, broadcasters, publishers, players and consumers alike. For plaintiffs to suggest in the face of the recent explosion in the poker industry sparked by the World Poker Tour, that (World Poker) has restricted the output of poker tournaments or otherwise restrained competition in the poker industry is disingenuous and without foundation."

Here's Konik, also a gambling author ("The Man With the $100,000 Breasts") and golf writer, on the novel phenomenon of poker players earning paid endorsements for, well, being poker players:

"They're getting endorsement deals for playing a card game? They should be getting down on their knees and thanking their lucky stars every day," Konik said. "They want to be compensated for being on TV? Boo-freaking-hoo!

"Any big-time players who say, 'Hey, man, don't put me on your show and (watch your) ratings plummet,' they're nuts.

"If players want to unionize, or any of this other baloney I've heard about, good luck to 'em, because there will be 1,000 (players) ready to be scabs - and if they win a World Poker Tour (event), they'll get the endorsements."

Here's the World Poker document on how its televised tournaments helped pave the way for poker players to enjoy the trappings of celebrity:

"The irony of plaintiffs' claims is that the 'notoriety' that these seven plaintiffs claim forms the basis of their considerable income is due in no small part to their participation in the World Poker Tour in its early years, at a time when the public had never heard of them, and which would not have been possible without the reasonable releases about which the plaintiffs complain."

It could be presumptuous to view the World Poker document as anything but a calculated and measured response to a legal threat.

By any account, the seven poker players behind the lawsuit - Andy Bloch, Annie Duke, Chris Ferguson, Phil Gordon, Joe Hachem, Howard Lederer and Greg Raymer - are among the most accomplished, brilliant and highly respected gamblers in the world.

But Konik's comments - especially considering they were candid, off-the-cuff and made well before the suit was filed - make you wonder how much commiseration the suit evoked in the poker community or among the public at large.
By Jeff Haney