Defining the terms of a bet

[Simon Galloway]

All Rob had to do was tell someone in the group of bettors that Keith pulled out

Just to play devil's advocate for a second, would it be reasonable if the onus for informing the group that they were now short fell on Keith rather than Rob?

[GreekStein]

All Rob had to do was tell someone in the group of bettors that Keith pulled out

Just to play devil's advocate for a second, would it be reasonable if the onus for informing the group that they were now short fell on Keith rather than Rob?

I think if the responsibility fell on Keith, me, Dan and Luke we would have a right to be pissed off at Keith but as we are the 4 bettors making up the 5k of action, I wouldn't blame Rob as much if the bet was cancelled. However, I would see it that both Keith and Rob should contact us to see if anyone wants to take the 1k shortfall. In this case that would have happened within seconds.

[MANTIS01]

For me I don't like the fuck off or your banned approach to it really. But having said that I don't know why a group of lads are all going out on the town and letting one dude paid for it all. He's not their Dad or their boss is he? If you want to be treated as equal I don't think that is a good way to go about it. No such thing as a free lunch imo.

Come off it Mantis - this was a dinner paid for by the boss of a club for some of its regular clients.

Maybe you're trying to belittle me or w/e because of our history on here but even you must know that's a rediculous statement.

Yo, the same important regs who can fck off if another e-mail lands? I wouldn't in any way belittle you for accepting free night cos it's normal teenage mistake. Would deffo have to belittle you now for thinking ur serious reg to this guy.

I mean, that's just the worst post you've ever made

Come off it buddy, I've made loads worse than that. The whole problem here is Rob's attitude to this insignificant bet is like Dubai's attitude to a 0.25c/0.50c game. Just can't be arsed with the hassle of it. Simon said the bet is like £5 to Rob so financially insignificant. I'm afraid to say it's clear he sees the people involved as equally insignificant. A few months down the track and sensing a problem the dude can just about be arsed to send a messenger boy to ask around. No courtesy of personal contact and when he becomes irritated by the pesky kids attempts to contact him they're told to fck off. I don't know why serious clients who get rewarded with Vegas dinners for their custom would be told to fck off from the business over a £5 bet. Oh I do it's cos those people are insignificant.

Thus my post is quite pertinent and questions the notion that the group are taken out cos they are in any way important to the business or indeed to the individual. In fact the whole thing is a bit weird. On the one hand you got a group of kids who think they are serious clients/friends when clearly they aren't, cos you don't tell clients/friends to fck off over a fiver. On the other hand you got this Rob dude who's £265,000 down in unpaids but happy to carry on making this type of bet over a dinner he's paying for with people he doesn't rightly trust. If I had a bet with anybody I respected and thought there was a problem I would pick up the phone and get in touch. The whole Vegas dinner deal reminds me of some puff daddy video where diddy is surrounded by his bitches all on chains. This German guy I once knew said that if you act like a biatch you get treated like a biatch and hey presto. Don't know why being German is relevant but they are quite efficient people.

However, the reality is your handshake shouldn't have different grades of seriousness and commitment according to the value of the bet and the people you're betting.

[GreekStein]

For me I don't like the fuck off or your banned approach to it really. But having said that I don't know why a group of lads are all going out on the town and letting one dude paid for it all. He's not their Dad or their boss is he? If you want to be treated as equal I don't think that is a good way to go about it. No such thing as a free lunch imo.

Come off it Mantis - this was a dinner paid for by the boss of a club for some of its regular clients.

Maybe you're trying to belittle me or w/e because of our history on here but even you must know that's a rediculous statement.

Yo, the same important regs who can fck off if another e-mail lands? I wouldn't in any way belittle you for accepting free night cos it's normal teenage mistake. Would deffo have to belittle you now for thinking ur serious reg to this guy.

I mean, that's just the worst post you've ever made

Come off it buddy, I've made loads worse than that. The whole problem here is Rob's attitude to this insignificant bet is like Dubai's attitude to a 0.25c/0.50c game. Just can't be arsed with the hassle of it. Simon said the bet is like £5 to Rob so financially insignificant. I'm afraid to say it's clear he sees the people involved as equally insignificant. A few months down the track and sensing a problem the dude can just about be arsed to send a messenger boy to ask around. No courtesy of personal contact and when he becomes irritated by the pesky kids attempts to contact him they're told to fck off. I don't know why serious clients who get rewarded with Vegas dinners for their custom would be told to fck off from the business over a £5 bet. Oh I do it's cos those people are insignificant.

Thus my post is quite pertinent and questions the notion that the group are taken out cos they are in any way important to the business or indeed to the individual. In fact the whole thing is a bit weird. On the one hand you got a group of kids who think they are serious clients/friends when clearly they aren't, cos you don't tell clients/friends to fck off over a fiver. On the other hand you got this Rob dude who's £265,000 down in unpaids but happy to carry on making this type of bet over a dinner he's paying for with people he doesn't rightly trust. If I had a bet with anybody I respected and thought there was a problem I would pick up the phone and get in touch. The whole Vegas dinner deal reminds me of some puff daddy video where diddy is surrounded by his bitches all on chains. This German guy I once knew said that if you act like a biatch you get treated like a biatch and hey presto. Don't know why being German is relevant but they are quite efficient people.

However, the reality is your handshake shouldn't have different grades of seriousness and commitment according to the value of the bet and the people you're betting.

You've just never been significant enough that anyone's taken you to dinner by the sounds of it.

[MANTIS01]

Good one

[SuuPRlim]

For me I don't like the fuck off or your banned approach to it really. But having said that I don't know why a group of lads are all going out on the town and letting one dude paid for it all. He's not their Dad or their boss is he? If you want to be treated as equal I don't think that is a good way to go about it. No such thing as a free lunch imo.

Come off it Mantis - this was a dinner paid for by the boss of a club for some of its regular clients.

Maybe you're trying to belittle me or w/e because of our history on here but even you must know that's a rediculous statement.

Yo, the same important regs who can fck off if another e-mail lands? I wouldn't in any way belittle you for accepting free night cos it's normal teenage mistake. Would deffo have to belittle you now for thinking ur serious reg to this guy.

I mean, that's just the worst post you've ever made

Come off it buddy, I've made loads worse than that. The whole problem here is Rob's attitude to this insignificant bet is like Dubai's attitude to a 0.25c/0.50c game. Just can't be arsed with the hassle of it. Simon said the bet is like £5 to Rob so financially insignificant. I'm afraid to say it's clear he sees the people involved as equally insignificant. A few months down the track and sensing a problem the dude can just about be arsed to send a messenger boy to ask around. No courtesy of personal contact and when he becomes irritated by the pesky kids attempts to contact him they're told to fck off. I don't know why serious clients who get rewarded with Vegas dinners for their custom would be told to fck off from the business over a £5 bet. Oh I do it's cos those people are insignificant.

Thus my post is quite pertinent and questions the notion that the group are taken out cos they are in any way important to the business or indeed to the individual. In fact the whole thing is a bit weird. On the one hand you got a group of kids who think they are serious clients/friends when clearly they aren't, cos you don't tell clients/friends to fck off over a fiver. On the other hand you got this Rob dude who's £265,000 down in unpaids but happy to carry on making this type of bet over a dinner he's paying for with people he doesn't rightly trust. If I had a bet with anybody I respected and thought there was a problem I would pick up the phone and get in touch. The whole Vegas dinner deal reminds me of some puff daddy video where diddy is surrounded by his bitches all on chains. This German guy I once knew said that if you act like a biatch you get treated like a biatch and hey presto. Don't know why being German is relevant but they are quite efficient people.

However, the reality is your handshake shouldn't have different grades of seriousness and commitment according to the value of the bet and the people you're betting.

haha so true

ok, this post is actually good.

fwiw i see rob's side a lot better since Key's last post, but still think he handled it wrong by not snap ringnig dan/luke or someone next day and saying "there is longer £5k's action, you have 20seconds to commit to the £5k cos im on a deadline or the bet is off, as firmly agreed at the start"

tbh I think everyone should shake hands and move along now

[MTT DESTROYER]

For me I don't like the fuck off or your banned approach to it really. But having said that I don't know why a group of lads are all going out on the town and letting one dude paid for it all. He's not their Dad or their boss is he? If you want to be treated as equal I don't think that is a good way to go about it. No such thing as a free lunch imo.

Come off it Mantis - this was a dinner paid for by the boss of a club for some of its regular clients.

Maybe you're trying to belittle me or w/e because of our history on here but even you must know that's a rediculous statement.

Yo, the same important regs who can fck off if another e-mail lands? I wouldn't in any way belittle you for accepting free night cos it's normal teenage mistake. Would deffo have to belittle you now for thinking ur serious reg to this guy.

I mean, that's just the worst post you've ever made

Come off it buddy, I've made loads worse than that. The whole problem here is Rob's attitude to this insignificant bet is like Dubai's attitude to a 0.25c/0.50c game. Just can't be arsed with the hassle of it. Simon said the bet is like £5 to Rob so financially insignificant. I'm afraid to say it's clear he sees the people involved as equally insignificant. A few months down the track and sensing a problem the dude can just about be arsed to send a messenger boy to ask around. No courtesy of personal contact and when he becomes irritated by the pesky kids attempts to contact him they're told to fck off. I don't know why serious clients who get rewarded with Vegas dinners for their custom would be told to fck off from the business over a £5 bet. Oh I do it's cos those people are insignificant.

Thus my post is quite pertinent and questions the notion that the group are taken out cos they are in any way important to the business or indeed to the individual. In fact the whole thing is a bit weird. On the one hand you got a group of kids who think they are serious clients/friends when clearly they aren't, cos you don't tell clients/friends to fck off over a fiver. On the other hand you got this Rob dude who's £265,000 down in unpaids but happy to carry on making this type of bet over a dinner he's paying for with people he doesn't rightly trust. If I had a bet with anybody I respected and thought there was a problem I would pick up the phone and get in touch. The whole Vegas dinner deal reminds me of some puff daddy video where diddy is surrounded by his bitches all on chains. This German guy I once knew said that if you act like a biatch you get treated like a biatch and hey presto. Don't know why being German is relevant but they are quite efficient people.

However, the reality is your handshake shouldn't have different grades of seriousness and commitment according to the value of the bet and the people you're betting.

LOL Amazing post

[Girgy85]

For me I don't like the fuck off or your banned approach to it really. But having said that I don't know why a group of lads are all going out on the town and letting one dude paid for it all. He's not their Dad or their boss is he? If you want to be treated as equal I don't think that is a good way to go about it. No such thing as a free lunch imo.

Come off it Mantis - this was a dinner paid for by the boss of a club for some of its regular clients.

Maybe you're trying to belittle me or w/e because of our history on here but even you must know that's a rediculous statement.

Yo, the same important regs who can fck off if another e-mail lands? I wouldn't in any way belittle you for accepting free night cos it's normal teenage mistake. Would deffo have to belittle you now for thinking ur serious reg to this guy.

I mean, that's just the worst post you've ever made

Come off it buddy, I've made loads worse than that. The whole problem here is Rob's attitude to this insignificant bet is like Dubai's attitude to a 0.25c/0.50c game. Just can't be arsed with the hassle of it. Simon said the bet is like £5 to Rob so financially insignificant. I'm afraid to say it's clear he sees the people involved as equally insignificant. A few months down the track and sensing a problem the dude can just about be arsed to send a messenger boy to ask around. No courtesy of personal contact and when he becomes irritated by the pesky kids attempts to contact him they're told to fck off. I don't know why serious clients who get rewarded with Vegas dinners for their custom would be told to fck off from the business over a £5 bet. Oh I do it's cos those people are insignificant.

Thus my post is quite pertinent and questions the notion that the group are taken out cos they are in any way important to the business or indeed to the individual. In fact the whole thing is a bit weird. On the one hand you got a group of kids who think they are serious clients/friends when clearly they aren't, cos you don't tell clients/friends to fck off over a fiver. On the other hand you got this Rob dude who's £265,000 down in unpaids but happy to carry on making this type of bet over a dinner he's paying for with people he doesn't rightly trust. If I had a bet with anybody I respected and thought there was a problem I would pick up the phone and get in touch. The whole Vegas dinner deal reminds me of some puff daddy video where diddy is surrounded by his bitches all on chains. This German guy I once knew said that if you act like a biatch you get treated like a biatch and hey presto. Don't know why being German is relevant but they are quite efficient people.

However, the reality is your handshake shouldn't have different grades of seriousness and commitment according to the value of the bet and the people you're betting.

LOL Amazing post

<3 Mantis

[pokerfan]

tbh I think everyone should shake hands and move along now

+1

[Woodsey]

tbh I think everyone should shake hands and move along now

+1

+2

[Boba Fett]

For me I don't like the fuck off or your banned approach to it really. But having said that I don't know why a group of lads are all going out on the town and letting one dude paid for it all. He's not their Dad or their boss is he? If you want to be treated as equal I don't think that is a good way to go about it. No such thing as a free lunch imo.

Come off it Mantis - this was a dinner paid for by the boss of a club for some of its regular clients.

Maybe you're trying to belittle me or w/e because of our history on here but even you must know that's a rediculous statement.

Yo, the same important regs who can fck off if another e-mail lands? I wouldn't in any way belittle you for accepting free night cos it's normal teenage mistake. Would deffo have to belittle you now for thinking ur serious reg to this guy.

I mean, that's just the worst post you've ever made

Come off it buddy, I've made loads worse than that. The whole problem here is Rob's attitude to this insignificant bet is like Dubai's attitude to a 0.25c/0.50c game. Just can't be arsed with the hassle of it. Simon said the bet is like £5 to Rob so financially insignificant. I'm afraid to say it's clear he sees the people involved as equally insignificant. A few months down the track and sensing a problem the dude can just about be arsed to send a messenger boy to ask around. No courtesy of personal contact and when he becomes irritated by the pesky kids attempts to contact him they're told to fck off. I don't know why serious clients who get rewarded with Vegas dinners for their custom would be told to fck off from the business over a £5 bet. Oh I do it's cos those people are insignificant.

Thus my post is quite pertinent and questions the notion that the group are taken out cos they are in any way important to the business or indeed to the individual. In fact the whole thing is a bit weird. On the one hand you got a group of kids who think they are serious clients/friends when clearly they aren't, cos you don't tell clients/friends to fck off over a fiver. On the other hand you got this Rob dude who's £265,000 down in unpaids but happy to carry on making this type of bet over a dinner he's paying for with people he doesn't rightly trust. If I had a bet with anybody I respected and thought there was a problem I would pick up the phone and get in touch. The whole Vegas dinner deal reminds me of some puff daddy video where diddy is surrounded by his bitches all on chains. This German guy I once knew said that if you act like a biatch you get treated like a biatch and hey presto. Don't know why being German is relevant but they are quite efficient people.

However, the reality is your handshake shouldn't have different grades of seriousness and commitment according to the value of the bet and the people you're betting.

LOL Amazing post

<3 Mantis

Which puff daddy video is this?

[kukushkin88]

Might be "All about the Benjamins" with Puff Daddy and Lil Kim.

[outragous76]

There are way too many extraneous issues in this thread:

The bet facts:

1. A bet was made between Rob yong and a syndicate of 4 poker players.

2. Rob yong requested a minimum of 5k action for this bet. This was achieved in the following way:

Dan Morgan 1k
Cos 1k
Keith 1k
Luke fields 2k

Although not yet substantiated it is understood and I believe accepted that dan was to cover off lukes 2k as he was unknown to rob.

3. The bet was that rob yong was to hold a heads up tournament with 64 runners before midnight on 31st dec 2011.


Issues on facts:



5k funds: this seems to be the flimsiest of points. There is a suggestion that Keith wanted to pull out if re-entry was allowed. As far as I can see, so long as the syndicate put up 5k the bet stands. Keith should offer his stake to the existing syndicate to buy. I also believe that ANY party should be able to buy this action as it is absolutely a fixed sum to a fixed bet. The only way it couldn't be sold is if rob had a reasonable objection, such as he knew the buyer couldn't afford the bet or owed him money. This objection is easily by passed by Keith still being responsible for the 1k and having essentially privately sold his own action.

However Keith cannot just pull out of the bet and frustrate it for all parties.

RE-ENTRY

Having been accepted within poker, I believe that although it may not have been foreseen at the time of the bet, that this must be allowed. (fwiw my personal point of view is that it absolutely shouldn't be allowed).

However, everyone knew who they were dealing with (head of UK's biggest poker venue, entreprenuer, and poker website to use at will) , what he had at his disposal. Although possibly not considered at the time of the wager, this should now be accepted.

Providing that Rob doesn't go beyond the boundaries of reason, like having a 64 runner tourney and paying 64 spots just to win the bet.

Irrelevant points itt:

Escrow; mentioned on 4th November for 1st time. Irrelevant

Robs 250k + unpaid

Who paid for dinner

What the money means to the parties

Third party (& non written) communication. This is quite simply the most irrelevant fact itt. If the money means so little to rob that he chooses not to deal with it personally that's his problem.

Whether it forms part of monte Carlo and went in literature - irrelevant


I believe if you consider the above an accurate reflection then the bet is still running, Keith has a decission to make, and that if the event does not run then the syndictae win.

[robyong]

Sigh, this is getting out of hand. This whole thing should have been kept private between myself and the betting syndicate, I know Cos, Dan and Luke are a really nice bunch of lads and they would never have brought this into the pubic arena for any malicious reason, however its now becoming a flaming thread and not doing any of us any favours. We all should know better than to give complete tools like Mantis, whoever the hell he is, an opportunuity to get a little attention, does this guy actually know any of us well? Okay, I paid for a night on Vegas, big deal, its irrelevent to the bet, yet this jockey keeps going on about it, puff daddy, god, any one us could have and would have picked the bill up that night, if fact, most of the stuff on here is irrelevant to the bet.

Cos, Luke, Dan, lets just talk about this over a beer when we next see eachother, there are no hard feelings on my side at all, as I know genuinely that you guys would never wanted things to result into this, just wish you had not brought this onto a forum, Simon is a cheesed off because Cos posted my personal emails on here, but he will get over it! Rob

[GreekStein]

Sigh, this is getting out of hand. This whole thing should have been kept private between myself and the betting syndicate, I know Cos, Dan and Luke are a really nice bunch of lads and they would never have brought this into the pubic arena for any malicious reason, however its now becoming a flaming thread and not any of us any favours. We all shouldknow better than to give complete tools like Mantis, whoever the hell he is, an opportunuity to ge a little attention, does this guy actually know any of us well? Okay, I paid for a night on Vegas, big deal, its irrelevent to the bet yet this jockey keeps going on about it, puff daddy, god, any one us could have and would have picked the bill up that night, sigh.

Cos, Luke, Dan, lets just talk about this over a beer when we next see eachother, no hard feelings on my side, just wish you had not brought this onto a forum, Rob

Hi Rob,

Mantis is pathetic, dont pay any attention to his posts, most intelligent people don't.

I'm disappointed about how this has turned out and I've made it clear that I think the bet should have stood but I'm going to just forget it until I get back to England next year and we'll talk in person.

I didn't start the thread to cause trouble - initially it was started to ask for opinions on re-entries should it be an issue and then escalated once the outcome was asked for.

Hopefully it will be my last post in the thread.