The use of solvers by eventual champion Jonathan Tamayo’s coaches on the rail during the WSOP Main Event final table has been raging from all corners since the bracelet was won.
We’ve heard from the two players involved, Tamayo and Jordan Griff, and some of poker’s most vocal stars: Doug Polk, Alan Keating, Daniel Negreanu, and countless other knowledgeable and concerned players.
But there’s one successful and well-respected player who rarely bites his tongue, and 6x WSOP bracelet holder Shaun Deeb has skin in this game. He’s coached players on the rail before and he was asked by runner-up Jordan Griff to coach him on this year’s final table. Would we be living in a different world now if that had actually come to pass?
We caught up with Shaun as he was soaking in some much-needed R&R after a somewhat bumpy summer grind. You can watch the full interview above or read edited highlights below.
You’ve also been a coach on the rail at past WSOPs. Where do you stand on the issue?
It was a minor issue back in the day, but there was plenty of controversy in other years when I was coaching people. I was giving them hands, screaming out information, watching the stream, and passing along whatever I could.
That's been going on for a very long time. I think that's totally part of the game. You can't restrict media and people from watching, discussing, and talking strategy during an event.
What did you think of the use of solvers at this year’s final table?
They're not the most +EV thing you can do in that scenario. I do believe they are beneficial to some players, for sure. It's very different now, though. A few years ago, with the November Nine delay, you had three months to practice all the scenarios, stack depths, and do all the work to prepare for almost anything. Now coaches are doing stuff on the fly, and it takes a particular coach to figure out, ‘How do I give him enough information in 30 seconds before the next hand is dealt?’ That’s been a challenging thing for me as a coach.
[Jonathan] Tamayo was lucky to have Domink Nitsche and Joe McKeehen in his corner. Someone in [Jordan] Griff’s circle had floated the idea of me coaching him, and I was trying to make it work, but we didn’t really come to terms. I was going to be available for the short-handed day, the final day of the final table.
The WSOP had made announcements at the beginning of each event, making it clear that solver use was not allowed anywhere ‘in the tournament area’.
Yes. It's bad optics, but you also need to follow the rules. If the WSOP rules say no solvers in the tournament area besides on breaks, and they had some type of solver up, then there should be some type of punishment. I think DQ is too harsh. I don’t know what else they can really do, but something should be done if it was what it was actually perceived as.
I understand that you spoke up early in the series regarding this issue.
I brought it up with the floor staff. I don't think it's a big procedure issue, but its optics are the worst possible. I told the WSOP staff that you need to get out in front of this issue. And it being the World Series, they lay down the law, the TDA will follow, et cetera, et cetera. Some changes were made to the wording of the pre-event warning.
How should they enforce it?
I think it's extremely tough to enforce. Most fans and players don't realize that the average floor person can walk by someone's phone without knowing what they're looking at. I’m a top poker player, and I go by someone’s phone, and I have no idea what they’re looking at, if it’s a solver, RTA, or something else. So you expect floor people, who are not winning poker players, to know what they’re looking at, if it’s something that's legal or illegal? It’s so hard to enforce. Even if it's in the rules, it’s going to be very rare for someone to get caught and punished.
Have you ever used solvers to help improve your game?
I‘ve never had a solver on my computer. I don’t even know how to use one. I’ve talked to some players about them, though. They all came to the same conclusion. With my particular exploitive style and how player-dependent it is, how my image is a big component, and how big my live reads are to my game, solvers wouldn't help me too much.
What if you were up against the Ike Haxtons of the world, day in and day out?
Let’s say I was going to play the high-roller Triton events. I would need to have a solver background to at least understand what many of the players are doing. But I wouldn’t necessarily incorporate the information into my game.
I would make use of the information I learned to be able to predict what my opponents are going to do on future streets and how often I can continue in some spots. But the number of hours spent studying all that stuff for such a small amount of EV gain is just not worth it for me.
You seem to be an anomaly.
I'm an outlier. I want to find games in which I can make some money now instead of studying to make money down the road.
Thankfully, I have mixed games. The solvers are used a lot less frequently and are a lot less popular. And most of the mixed-game fish don't know how to use them.
There is one thing I am sure of: The game will pass me by sooner than people who are not as stubborn as me.
