1. Beth Shak Maxim
2. Beth Shak Poker
3. Rick Leventhal Net Worth
4. Beth Shak And Rick Leventhal

Level One Hour Two Update: Raymer Eliminated

Jul 05, '10

Daniel Shak, a hedge fund manager in New York, is suing his ex-wife, Beth Shak, alleging he was kept in the dark about her designer shoe collection, according to a report by an ABC News blog.

Beth Shak, the former Full Tilt pro and ex-wife of entrepreneur and high stakes poker player Dan Shak has filed a lawsuit against a lawyer who talked her into filing a suit against her second ex. Beth Shak is an American professional poker player, entrepreneur, and philanthropist. Beth Shak was born on November 8, 1969, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania the United States of America. As of 2019, she turned 50 years old. Beth holds an American nationality and belongs to the white ethnic group. Beth Shak on IMDb: Movies, Tv, Celebrities, and more. Oscars Best Picture Winners Best Picture Winners Golden Globes Emmys San Diego Comic-Con New York Comic-Con Sundance Film Festival Toronto Int'l Film Festival Awards Central Festival Central All Events. 'Beth Shak will help you and your student zero in on the best college fit, for the best value with the least amount of handwringing. She is meticulous and methodical when it comes to identifying college matches. She will help calculate acceptance percentages and likely aid packages, generously sharing her knowledge and demystifying the process.

Blinds: 50-100

Players Remaining:

Average Chip Count: 30,000

Notable Chip Counts:

Lacey Jones – 47,000
Ted Forrest – 40,200
Michael Mizrachi – 40,000
John Hennigan – 38,500
Corwin Cole – 38,000
Steve Wong – 37,000
Jordan Morgan – 36,000
T.J. Cloutier – 35,500
Chris Moneymaker – 34,000
Beth Shak – 32,000

Card Player Chip Counts:

Barry Shulman – 31,000
Allyn Jaffrey Shulman – 43,000
Adam Schoenfeld – 33,000
Lee Watkinson – 28,000
Shannon Shorr -35,000
Mark Gregorich – 28,000
Diego Cordovez – 30,000
Justin Marchand – 35,500

Players Twitter Accounts:

Barry Shulman
Erik Seidel
Maria Ho
Chris Moorman
Greg Raymer
Beth Shak
Mike Caro
Jamie Rosen

Notable Eliminations:

Greg Raymer

Big Hands:

Aggressive Shak Takes One Away

The player on the button put in a raise and Beth Shak reraised to 1,050 from the small blind. Action folded back to the button who made the call.

The flop ran 8Q6 and Shak fired 1,500. The button thought more a moment before letting his hand go.

Shak had around 31,700 after the hand.

Boyd’s Aggresion Earns Him One

After a raise and reraise preflop, Ductch Boyd and Pierre Neuville saw a flop of 224.

Neuville led from the small blind for 1,050 and Boyd quickly made it 3,150.

Neuville disgustedly threw his cards into the muck and Boyd stays right around their starting stack.

Chad Bastista Takes One

Chad Batista made a raise to 275 from early position and called a three-bet to 875 from a player in middle position.

The flop came 10Q9 and both players checked. The turn was the Q and Batista checked again. His opponent bet and Batista made a check-raise to 2,500 and his opponent quickly folded.

Cowboys For Mizrachi

Picking up the action after the board had run out 8734A, Michael Mizrachi fired 2,000 into a pot holding 7,000.

His opponent in seat 6 tanked and then threw in the call. Mizrachi tabled KK and seat 6 mucked.

Mizrachi took the pot and he was at 40,000.

Raymer Done

Greg Raymer moved all in for his last 2,600 and the next player shoved. Other players in the hand mucked and Raymer was isolated.

Raymer: 88
Opponent: AA

The board ran out K10276 and Raymer could not crack aces to save his tournament life.

Hennigan Takes One

A player raised to 300 and John Hennigan called. The small blind reraised to 1,800 and Hennigan was the only caller.

The flop was J83 and both players checked. The turn was the 9 and the small blind bet 2,025. Hennigan would have none of that nonsense as he raised to 5,100.

His opponent mucked and Hennigan took the pot. He was at 38,000.

Nick Schulman Busts

Picking up the action on the flop, the board read Q97. Nick Schulman bet 1,200 and Hunter Frey made the call. The turn was the 4 and Schulman shoved for his last 6,550.

Frey made the call with AQ but was trailing Schulman’s KK. That all changed when the river brought the Q, giving Frey trips and booting Schulman out the door on the first level of play.

Beth Shak[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2012 at 22:21:51 (UTC)

Reason

This high-quality image of professional poker player Beth Shak has been donated to the Wikimedia Foundation by Douglas Sonders, and (I believe) was handled through the OTRS by user The Rambling Man.

Articles in which this image appears

Beth Shak (lead image)

FP category for this image

People/Others

Creator

Douglas Saunders

• Support as nominator --A Thousand Doors (talk contribs) 22:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
• Support There hasn't been something like this for a while (although slight crop may be warranted). Brandmeister^talk 08:51, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
• Support. J Milburn (talk) 09:55, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose Low EV as I wouldn't guess she's notable as a poker player from this image. If there would be a joker sticking out somewhere... Also staged images are non-neutral, but rather promotional. --ELEKHH^T 11:42, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose. Low EV. As Ms. Shak is not an interior decorator, far too much of this shot is occupied by a tastefully-appointed apartment; as Elekhh notes, this image's composition does nothing to link Ms. Shak to poker. While on a personal level I don't mind looking at photographs of women with pretty bodies, this image could be of any generic glamour model—its EV is harmed by the way that it minimizes her face against so much pleasant-but-extraneous matter. Truth be told, this image is high-enough resolution that there's a not-too-bad (featured-quality resolution, but not featured-quality composition) head-and-shoulders crop that would probably be better from an EV standpoint; I've uploaded such a crop for comparison but not voting. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment: although I'm not opposed to photographs of people not doing the things for which they are known, the promotional nature, stance and composition doen't lend themselves to it being a clear portrait of the person. Grandiose(me, talk, contribs) 21:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support the image does seem promotional and unrelated to poker, but it wouldn't be out of place in the collection of existing Featured Pictures at Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Entertainment, so I don't feel there is sufficient grounds for an oppose on the basis insufficient EV or the promotional pose. Someone is welcome to do a D&R later with a photo of her playing poker. 07:43, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
• Support High quality portrait image. If she was only a poker player then I probably wouldn't support for the reasons above (would be better to have some kind of context or a more neutral/natural candid shot) - however per the article, she is also a fashion designer (women's shoes in particular) and this justifies the glamour photo IMO --Fir0002 10:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose She is not a model, so zero EV. Just another picture with boring background (is this a fridge next to her?). Also it is rather promotional.--GoP_T^CN 13:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
  • We have several promoted photographs of people that are portraits rather than them doing the thing(s) for which they are famous (one example). Grandiose(me, talk, contribs) 15:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I think the fame of the subject may change the criteria slightly. Sammy Davis Jr is unquestionably a notable figure. Beth Shak isn't, and interest in her should be related to her poker playing, not her (provocative, in the case of this photo) appearance or her lifestyle. robo (talk) 09:04, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose It is great to get high-quality full-resolution professional photographs. But, as noted at Commons, this is surely not the best photo taken during that shoot: her left foot is off the ground and her knee sticks out against the door. And it is more about her fine apartment than her personally. I note that we have a high-EV photograph of her File:Beth Shak.jpg which isn't FP quality but more appropriate for the article. However, it was removed from the article for non-encyclopaedic reasons (see talk). She's notable for the poker aspect and nothing else as far as I can see. I don't buy the fashion designer justifying glamour shot claim (read the article carefully: she collects shoes and plans a range of fashion, according to the unsourced text). If she was a fashion model or tv presenter then perhaps the pose would be appropriate. Colin°^Talk 17:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
• Finally someone points out the dislocated knee cap! 131.137.245.209 (talk) 09:45, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• (Strong) oppose this is a PR photo with next to no EV. Nick-D (talk) 10:48, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• Weak Support Per Colin. I don't see anything in the criteria that says a promotional picture has any less EV then a non-promotional picture (a picture is a picture.) I believe that we are supposed to judge nominations by the criteria, and vote based on those set guidelines, not come up with a random reason to oppose (with an exception to Colin who actually found some minor flaws, and I agree with most of his concerns). I see no reason for opposing due it possibly being a promotional picture. Dusty777 02:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
  • The reason is one of much higher importance than the FPC guideline, it is one of the five pillars of Wikipedia, the neutral point of view principle, which states that articles should 'document and explain the major points of view in a balanced and impartial manner'. Promotional is not impartial. And since there it is only one image in the infobox, and in the whole article, the representation is not impartial. --ELEKHH^T 12:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
    • Hmm. Balance is a luxury we can rarely afford for pictures, particularly for people. We pick from a very limited choice so tend to include any reasonable picture. And photographs, of any quality, are nearly always posed so naturally present a positive side of the person. When judging EV, we're looking at just one photo, so it can't sum up the person in their entirity nor can it be balanced on its own. It helps EV if the picture shows off an important aspect of their personality (such as the sport they play, or career). I don't think we should rule out promotional pictures, indeed for someone who is a 'star', a promotional picture has higher EV than some random snapshot of them walking down the street. I agree that this promotional picture has low EV but a promotional picture of her playing poker might have great EV. Colin°^Talk 14:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
      • Very much agree with the last sentence. However, I can only assess EV in the context of the whole article, not simply by 'looking at just one photo'. And while no single image can 'sum up the person in their entirety', five documentary pictures will provide a much more comprehensive and balanced representation than five promotional ones. --ELEKHH^T 14:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

• Tell me, what makes a promotional picture different then a non-promotional picture? Elekhh, can you elaborate a little on how the picture being a promotional picture affects the NPOV? It seems to me that is an issue with the article... I don't see how that affects the nomination. Dusty777 00:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Beth Shak Maxim

I can't speak for the others but in my mind it's not about neutrality; it's about the fact that the photograph is staged so as to show off the subject is a glamour sense and not about documenting what she actually looks like for an encyclopedia. The staging here detracts from how well it illustrated the subject for the encyclopedia. Grandiose(me, talk, contribs) 14:02, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I do think this is missing the point. 'Documenting what they look like' isn't generally why people commission photographs or even permit photographs to be taken. I don't see any passport photographs making FP. Would you expect a high-EV photo of Audrey Hepburn to be anything other than staged to show of a beautiful actress? This kind of photo might be appropriate for another biography article, but seems unjustified and inappropriate here. What next? Boudoir photographs for Olympic athletes? Colin°^Talk 15:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Beth Shak Poker

Rick Leventhal Net Worth

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 03:05, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Beth Shak And Rick Leventhal