Fire Jack Effel Now!!!!

[MrFizzbin]

[ QUOTE ]

10. His first WSOP experience was in 2005. He was brought in by Kenny Lambert Jr. who (like his father) has been summarily 'relieved' of all of his recent positions for reasons that a lot of people know but can't talk about. Jack Effel was Kenny's 'Bag Man' and the 'Dalmation' to Kenny's 'Clydesdale' Johnny Grooms. All of the above were summarily fired with 2 days remaining in the 2005 WSOP (although Grooms probably shouldn't have been - see 'guilt by association').

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry I don't speak "Soprano's", could someone translate this paragraph into English.....

Ummm If Johnny Groom was fired with 2 days to go in the 05 series what was he doing running the Circuit event in Tunica three weeks later (I know this cause I saw him there and at the WSOP....) If I'm not mistaken he also ran the Bally's Circuit event as well. But hey lets not let facts get in the way of colorful tales of bagmen, Dalmations and Clydesdales whatever the hell that means..... and I beleive he also ran the second circuit event in Tunica in January of 2006....

[vendbien]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

10. His first WSOP experience was in 2005. He was brought in by Kenny Lambert Jr. who (like his father) has been summarily 'relieved' of all of his recent positions for reasons that a lot of people know but can't talk about. Jack Effel was Kenny's 'Bag Man' and the 'Dalmation' to Kenny's 'Clydesdale' Johnny Grooms. All of the above were summarily fired with 2 days remaining in the 2005 WSOP (although Grooms probably shouldn't have been - see 'guilt by association').

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry I don't speak "Soprano's", could someone translate this paragraph into English.....

Ummm If Johnny Groom was fired with 2 days to go in the 05 series what was he doing running the Circuit event in Tunica three weeks later (I know this cause I saw him there and at the WSOP....) If I'm not mistaken he also ran the Bally's Circuit event as well. But hey lets not let facts get in the way of colorful tales of bagmen, Dalmations and Clydesdales whatever the hell that means..... and I beleive he also ran the second circuit event in Tunica in January of 2006....

[/ QUOTE ]

I was at the meeting the morning that the '05 WSOP championship event was down to 3 Tables. Lambert, Effel and, unfortunately, Grooms were told they were released from the WSOP and would not be asked back (Grooms later was, but turned it down). They still had contracts for the two upcoming Circuit Events that Harrahs felt they needed to continue... plus the above 3 already had other ties to those venues.
There were 19 more players in the Championship Event than registrations and buy-ins, and it had been Lambert's idea to put out many 'dead stacks' to accomodate late arrivals. Accounting found this to be the root of the problem and Harrah's determined that there was intent to circumvent procedures.

[vendbien]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

10. His first WSOP experience was in 2005. He was brought in by Kenny Lambert Jr. who (like his father) has been summarily 'relieved' of all of his recent positions for reasons that a lot of people know but can't talk about. Jack Effel was Kenny's 'Bag Man' and the 'Dalmation' to Kenny's 'Clydesdale' Johnny Grooms. All of the above were summarily fired with 2 days remaining in the 2005 WSOP (although Grooms probably shouldn't have been - see 'guilt by association').

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry I don't speak "Soprano's", could someone translate this paragraph into English.....

Ummm If Johnny Groom was fired with 2 days to go in the 05 series what was he doing running the Circuit event in Tunica three weeks later (I know this cause I saw him there and at the WSOP....) If I'm not mistaken he also ran the Bally's Circuit event as well. But hey lets not let facts get in the way of colorful tales of bagmen, Dalmations and Clydesdales whatever the hell that means..... and I beleive he also ran the second circuit event in Tunica in January of 2006....

[/ QUOTE ]

I was at the meeting the morning that the '05 WSOP championship event was down to 3 Tables. Lambert, Effel and, unfortunately, Grooms were told they were released from the WSOP and would not be asked back (Grooms later was, but turned it down). They still had contracts for the two upcoming Circuit Events that Harrahs felt they needed to continue... plus the above 3 already had other ties to those venues.
There were 19 more players in the Championship Event than registrations and buy-ins, and it had been Lambert's idea to put out many 'dead stacks' to accomodate late arrivals. Accounting found this to be the root of the problem and Harrah's determined that there was intent to circumvent procedures.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 'dalmation - Clydesdale' reference goes back to horsedrawn fire wagons. To keep the Clydesdales happy, it was found that dalmations somehow soothed the horses - much the same way that Lambert's 'star player' and key selling point for the staff he wanted to bring in, Johnny Grooms, wanted to bring along his friend, Effel. Effel later did an 'end run' around the WSOP division and got appointed head of Poker Operations (outside of Las Vegas which had its own separate division) a position he then used to backdoor himself into the WSOP in '06 and '07.

[tourney guy]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me give all of you folks the 'real skinny' on Effel and why he WILL be replaced at the end of the '07 WSOP.

THE TOP 10 REASONS JACK WILL NOT BE BACK.

10. His first WSOP experience was in 2005. He was brought in by Kenny Lambert Jr. who (like his father) has been summarily 'relieved' of all of his recent positions for reasons that a lot of people know but can't talk about. Jack Effel was Kenny's 'Bag Man' and the 'Dalmation' to Kenny's 'Clydesdale' Johnny Grooms. All of the above were summarily fired with 2 days remaining in the 2005 WSOP (although Grooms probably shouldn't have been - see 'guilt by association').
9. Of the three, Effel was the most hated and untalented (by far) because he was unbelievably defensive about his lack of qualifications for the job and offset that by being imperious and dogmatic about things he knew nothing about.
8. Effel has always walked into WSOP and Circuit Events AFTER they were already set-up and arranged (a 10-month process in the case of the WSOP), and he simply had to 'look' like he knew what he was doing, defer responsibility to higher-ups and pick up his monstrous envelopes and unreported tokes.
7. This year, he was in charge of setting up and arranging the WSOP (something he knew next to nothing about) and the resultant first 2 weeks of chaos showed his lack of understanding, foresight and administrative skills.
6. He is one of the most unlikeable people (especially at his relatively young age) in all of Poker.
5. He is NOT a multi-tasker as I learned on a daily basis in working with him for 2 1/2 years ( I was asked to be a senior staff member in 2007 and turned it down solely for the reason that I would not work with or for Jack Effel).
4. He gave Harrahs and the WSOP mucky-mucks a dog-n-pony story and show - using all of those corporate 'buzz words' that they love so much - extolling his qualifications and also smoozed all of the 'Pro Advisory' committee members so that they would give him their imprimatur.
3. Most of the staff members hate him (except for the idiots who wouldn't have a job unless someone like him was in charge - Jack likes to hire people less-qualified than himself so that they won't show him up).
2. The mucky-mucks don't even like him anymore and he WILL be the fall guy for any problems that cropped up...
... and last but not least, the Number One reason Jack Effel will not be back next year...
1. ... HE SUCKS BIG TIME.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is comical.

Let's analyse this.

10) So, you are accusing Jack, and Johnny, of stealing money for Ken Lambert.

Of course, you have no proof whatsoever. I hate this about poker. It is the only job in gaming where everyone who handles money gets accused of stealing. If you had proof they stole, why did you not call Gaming Control or LV Metro????

Answer, you have no proof. Case closed,

9)Tend to agree.

8)Not true. Jack probably does SOME leg work, but not all of it. As to huge envelopes - no proof.

7) Not all Jack's fault. He gets some blame, but the property does as well. There are clearly not enough people to staff the early WSOP days, and HET doesn't care at all.

6) I hear that a lot!!!!!

5) You should expound, or it sounds like a grinding axe.

4) No doubt this is true. He has little to no knowledge of true gaming rules, and has probably put HET's feet in the fire a few times.

3) This is obvious by the staff that is there.

2) If he is not back, it will not be suprising since he would be the fourth guy not asked back in 4 years.

1) That sounds very childish!

You clearly have an axe to gring here. The reference to stealing tokes and buy-ins is reprehensible. If you have the proof, which I know you don't, you could put in in a deep-six. You don't because you can't, and that illusion without proof is lame, lame, lame.

Guys like Jack don't get fired, they fire themselves. On that stage, it is easy to be exposed, and he clearly has.

You should leave the stealing stuff out. Seriously.

[vendbien]

10 & 8. Do have proof (saw it with my own eyes), but there are legal ramifications to consider.
10. Specifically did NOT include Johnnie Grooms ( you should read closer).
8. In both 2005 and 2006, Effel arrived approximately 3-4 days in advance of the first event of those WSOP's with all procedures laid out and department policies already finished except for those last minute preps that had already been determined. He then spent much of this time at fancy restaurants and chasing cocktail waitresses - even though he was married.
7. He WAS specifically in charge of those procedures that created all of the problems, and when not, should have known they were boottlenecks and snafus and pointed them out (as we did in '05 and '06).
6. OK, don't have to expand on this one... we agree
5. Not enough room on this site to list all of the incidents in detail... let's just call it 20+ - which is why people do not have confidence in his quick, questionable decisions.
4. Again, we agree.
3. AGAIN, we agree
2. See #4... he shouldn't have been there in the first place.
...and #1...
SEE THE ABOVE NINE