You're correct, Steve. Clauses in rules allowing the sponsor/director/governing body to make rules changes how and when they want are standard. It's how they implement the clause that really matters (i.e. is it in a fair manner?). Here, I think the long-term benefits far outweigh the short-term annoyance that the players had. Harrah's (among others) is trying to grow a sport and to get more mainstream sponsors into the mix. There is always give and take in the process. No one should forget that the players are the stars (and the main draw), so upsetting the players continuously is not good for the game. But the players need to realize that they should be somewhat flexible when it comes to things that are, in th long run, good for their game and their collective future as players.