blonde poker forum

it's rife. I could have pointed out five-six players yesterday on my tables alone who were coked up.


I wasn't even on your table and I cringed at behaviour of that young lad

Does that make it OK?

does what make it ok?

I thought you were suggesting that as so many were doing it, it became acceptable?

it's rife. I could have pointed out five-six players yesterday on my tables alone who were coked up.


I wasn't even on your table and I cringed at behaviour of that young lad

He was normal pre-break, & as high as a kite after it - I was on the same table. He suggested Ding was a Racist! ("Innit").

He was absolutely OTT, totally out of his head. It was very hard to focus with him banging on at the top of his voice about everything. "Bro".

Remind me the last time anyone was ejected fom a Poker Tourney for taking drugs. Well, for anything, really. We just have to accept it I think. I wonder what might have happened if someone had given him a slap? - several came very close to it.

not at all. Also the casino is regulated by the GC, its in their interests to catch people at it on the premises and their licence is at risk if it goes on and is spotted on an inspection

It doesn't necessary follow that unacceptable table behaviour and drugs are linked, but in the case of your table companion yesterday I think they probably were. I am a little surprised that no one had a quiet word with the TD.

would a quiet word with the TD (away from proceedings) to watch the table not have been a good idea? It was way OTT.

Mike (http://www.blondepoker.com/blondepedia/blondepedia_view_player.php?player_id=671) Matusow (http://www.blondepoker.com/blondepedia/blondepedia_view_player.php?player_id=671) used to play poker on speed a few years ago and he said it helped his performance at the table (I think you can tell at the 2004 wsop footage where he is nodding his head quite a bit) and he obviously is a perfect role model.

Generally I would say drug use and poker shouldnt even remotely mix, its certainly not something I have witnessed much myself and ultimatley I cant see how it can help ones game that much long term. The benefits of something that makes you feel sharp and confident like cocaine surely dont outweigh the long term implications of using it.

That said, if anyone ever wants to play at my table while on ectasy or LSD they are more than welcome.

What would be the point? They did not even stop players usng 'phones in the hand, which, trivial as it may be, was specifically mentioned in the pre-comp drawl as being prohibited.

Well at one point he got a little bottle out and I thought it might be the thing they give you when you have fainted?? it smelt quite strong and he dabbed some in his nose. And no it wasn't vicks sinex! But I had no idea what it was he took - so blatant I told myself it couldn't be anything illegal.

He was normal pre-break, & as high as a kite after it - I was on the same table. He suggested Ding was a Racist! ("Innit").

He was absolutely OTT, totally out of his head. It was very hard to focus with him banging on at the top of his voice about everything. "Bro".

Remind me the last time anyone was ejected from a Poker Tourney for taking drugs. Well, for anything, really. We just have to accept it I think. I wonder what might have happened if someone had given him a slap? - several came very close to it.

No action taken by the house staff?

No one complained about his actions?

Did anyone have a word across the table alone the lines of "Button it, you Twat" ?

The staff allowing behaviour like this to continue is a serious lapse in service to the punters, The players not reporting the issues or offering friendly guidance to the player in question can only blame themselves for allowing it to continue.

foshizzle?

God, it wasnt poppers was it? Did it give you a headache and make you feel a bit wobbly?

 Can poppers be in liquid form?

No - but I did feel the room swim a bit. i jut thought it was the smell - very pungent so i assumed it was medicinal. Can poppers be in liquid form?

Yes, about 6 of us did.

No - but I did feel the room swim a bit. i jut thought it was the smell - very pungent so i assumed it was medicinal. Can poppers be in liquid form?

 ::)

Ask Steve (http://www.blondepoker.com/blondepedia/blondepedia_view_player.php?player_id=413) Davis (http://www.blondepoker.com/blondepedia/blondepedia_view_player.php?player_id=413)

I dont geddit?

I was unaware poppers came in solid form.

Am I right in thinking poppers and amal nitrate is the same stuff?

Am I right in thinking poppers and amal nitrate is the same stuff?

Was told in my youth that it's known as poppers because it pops several thousand brain cells each time you take a snort. I didn't believe it would have any effect so took a huge breathe out and then sniffed it up like a goodun.
From that day to this my poker has never been multi-dimensaional. Damn that amal nitrate.

An article on brain doping to help you with concentration:

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/dec/20/science/sci-braindoping20

A better article titled "Pills, Thrills and Bad Beats - Doping and Poker, the Future of Tournaments?"
http://www.pokerverdict.com/Strategy-Articles/Poker-Strategy/61995/pills_thrills_and_bad_beats.html

WOW, and still the dealer did nothing?

Was told in my youth that it's known as poppers because it pops several thousand brain cells each time you take a snort. I didn't believe it would have any effect so took a huge breathe out and then sniffed it up like a goodun.
From that day to this my poker has never been multi-dimensaional. Damn that amal nitrate.

Any difference between this and getting pissed as a fart at the tables?

Any difference between this and getting pissed as a fart at the tables?

no, she couldn't get it up and all her teeth fell out.

Not Tikay, though, he's only managed six semis in the last year or so

Amal nitrate? I always find that makes me 'looser' at the table

Nope overreactionaments imo

Old Fart Alert.

The first diference between coke and booze is one is legal, and one isn't. 

Any club that has a licence has an obligation not to allow drug taking on the premises, otherwise they will lose their licence, if caught.

So, if it upset / affected anyone to the extent of reporting them, then the company are obliged to do something about it.

Similarly is someone is overboozed.  They can quite happily be led from the premises.

Poker still has it's bad boy image, and as such many people see such shananigings as par for the course.  Others want to clean it up so it can truly become a game for everyone.

You pays yer monies........

Not Tikay, though, he's only managed six semis in the last year or so

What if you are just really loud and chatty like this guy but without doing any drugs? Would that be bad?

taking it in a public place ( especially a licenced building ) is controllable.

they can't keep drugs out of nightclubs or even prisons, how they gonna keep them out of casinos?

Let's just concentrate on trying to keep them out of schools.

I believe casinos are a little lower down the list of priorities when you report it to your MP.

It's down to the desire to do it.  It really upsets me when someone like tk suggests there's no point in complaining because nothing will be done.  I'm as guilty as the next man about doing nothing when I should speak out.  I'm just lucky ( unlucky/sexist - whatever your view ) that about the only time I'll speak out is if someone else is affected, especially a woman.  If it's just me, I'll bite the bullet and ignore it - I don't want to get beaten up over someone as unimportant as me.

But all I'm trying to say is drugs in a licenced place is easy.  Sort it, or I'm reporting you ( although I'd put it nicer, and take out any suggested threat, of course )

I really don't see the problem. Occasionally someone who has taken an illegal substance may behave badly at a poker table.

Alcohol creates problems far more frequently. No one suggests banning alcohol from casinos.

Even more frequently people behave badly with no help from any drug, legal or otherwise.

It's the behavior that's the issue not the drug taking, and often that's a matter of subjective opinion. You can't bar people just because you find their manner irritating.

I really don't see the problem. Occasionally someone who has taken an illegal substance may behave badly at a poker table.

Alcohol creates problems far more frequently. No one suggests banning alcohol from casinos. Alcohol is legal, drugs aren't.  It's that simple

Even more frequently people behave badly with no help from any drug, legal or otherwise.

It's the behavior that's the issue not the drug taking, and often that's a matter of subjective opinion. You can't bar people just because you find their manner irritating.   But behaviour is judged by the opinion of the reasonable man on the Clapham Omnibus.  So if the behaviour is irritating to one, then probably not, but to several , then maybe.  Or many, then yes, you can bar someone.  And I'm not saying bar, as in don't let them back in ever, but remove until they can control themselves, be it ten minutes or 2 days

If someone's behavior is unacceptable then chuck 'em out and bar them, it doesn't matter if they've been taking coke or eating cake.

If someone's behavior is unacceptable then chuck 'em out and bar them, it doesn't matter if they've been taking coke or eating cake.

It may not be diffucult to prove someon is in possession of drugs, but to go about searching everyone who behaves slightly badly is going to cause a whole heap of problems.

That's where it gets difficult. If someone has done nothing wrong other than acting in a manner which some people don't like then it is difficult to bar them. It becomes subjective and whilst some don't like it others might not mind.

As long as they are not physically or mentally abusing anyone then it is a matter of opinion as to whether someone's behaviour is unacceptable.

If however that person has been taking drugs then it is no longer a matter of opinion, it is a matter of law.

It is not difficult to prove that someone has coke. I'm sure that if they have taken it at some point that evening they are going to be taking it again. Therefore there will be some in their pocket. If they have class A drugs in their pocket they get arrested simple as that.
If someone is currently doing something bad enough to get arrested (possessing class A drugs) surely they shouldn't be sat at a poker table?

lol, my god if they banned all the people on drugs the tour would collapse, half the dealers would be gone, I know atleast 40-50 regular poker scene players that always have a few grams every tourny and thats not mentioning others linked to the gaming industry.

Its goes with the game like it or not, just like the strippers and the whores a lot of players/staff use every tourny

Where did this coked up little scrote get £1k from to play this kind of event?

has he bought himself in with drug money???

You guys are starting to make it sound as though this guy chopped out a line on the table rolled up a note and tooted it while the game was going on, afaik there was not one iota of evidence that he had done anything illegal.

You guys are starting to make it sound as though this guy chopped out a line on the table rolled up a note and tooted it while the game was going on, afaik there was not one iota of evidence that he had done anything illegal.

And fair play to him - he is still in the game! And we're not!!

Another good question.

Should performance enhancing drugs be banned ?

That was the question I asked at the beginning of the thread! Do keep up!  Have a line - it might help....

Where did this coked up little scrote get £1k from to play this kind of event?

has he bought himself in with drug money???

Do you really think the casino's want to kick people on coke out? I dont think some people realise how wide spread coke is these days. Im not saying that makes it okay. But im pretty sure that the casino are happy to have peoples judgment impaired even more. If you point it out theyll probably sort it out, but they wont actively look for it. Theres probably 50 coke fiends in any casino on a weekend night.

This bloke your talking about sounds like a twat, the coke brings this more to the surface. He obviously wasnt nice and polite while he was getting ready to come out, rolled up a £20 and turned into the incredible c**t!

I guarantee that if i sat at the bar had 10 pints, a couple of lines and a joint then sat at your table i wouldnt upset anyone. People would know i was battered but i wouldnt be offensive because drugs dont create that in a person.

As for what to do about it, you cant do anything.

You bar him forever, next week your sat next to another one.
You get him thrown out, he stabs you in the car park.
You slap him and tell him to be quiet, you go to prison.
You send him to rehab, he meets amy winehouse, now he's on crack.

I so want to believe that is a level but fear it's serious

I love threads like this, they show how many people just don't live in the real world


now that's a proper post from someone who does understand the world around him

I guarantee that if i sat at the bar had 10 pints, a couple of lines and a joint then sat at your table i wouldnt upset anyone. People would know i was battered but i wouldnt be offensive because drugs dont create that in a person.

I agree 100% with this.  Alcohol can make people offensive, violent, and very unpleasant.  I can honestly say I have never been offended or verbally abused by anyone on coke or weed.  Alcohol is the main problem.  Playing poker with drunk people can obviously be a good thing if they decide to give you a christmas present, but they are also likely to kick off when they lose a pot and become otherwise loud and offensive, occassionally violent.  People on drugs tend to be happy (at least in this environment, I don't mean the people shooting up on a daily basis)

So you condone his behaviour ?

so it impairs the punters judgement and will keep them awake all night? and you think we should try to stop them using it?

Having allegedly witnessed the results of drug use during a poker game yesterday (absolutely bizarre behaviour/volume/actions etc etc) I just wondered what the general feel was about drugs used in poker.

Legend has it that the bin in the mens loos at Luton has been used more often than not for a line of coke by some players and one was banned from Luton for doing a line on the metal bars of the smoking cage and being caught on camera.

In an unregulated playing arena such as poker is it open season for whatever works for you, or should the killjoy in me have asked the TD to check the player for drugs and have him booted out if anything was found? (I'm pretty sure they can't do that by the way - it's a rhetorical question acting as a devils advocate)

As I sat by this player last night with him banging on in my left ear constantly about 'keeping it real Bro' and 'peace and love' and everytime a camera went past he shouted 'strike a pose, strike a pose' I thought about how drugs and violence are connected. I for one, was close to punching him in the face.

One of the poker magazines recently wrote about performance enhancing drugs in poker, suggesting some heighten your awareness of surroundings and help you keep track of what's going on in the game more easily. Remembering tells behaviours etc. Last night I drank a mineral drink throughout the evening and was alert at all times and at midnight would have believed it was 10pm, I was so full of energy. Is there any real difference between what I did and what 'peace and love' allegedly did?

I'd love to be at the meeting at the casino if someone suggests they should look into customers' cocaine use. think it'd be a short meeting


they'd probably consider putting the stuff in the free coffees if they thought they could get away with it

I can just see the headline in Bluff magazine

"Shock horror: poker player behaves badly at the table."

...

Inappropriate behaviour at the Poker table is innapropriate behaviour...regardless of if it's drug fuelled or alcohol fuelled.

Sadly this is more of a reflection of the British attitude of apologising and not wanting to be seen to be making a fuss..

I was going to go on a lengthy rant ...however i deleted most of it. a few minor points

1) Drugs are illeagal for a reason...It's not just to spoil peoples fun..

2) Frankly I feel this thread reflects fully the sad state of the Country, where law abiding honest folk are cowed by the actions of the mindless. Where asking someone to refrain from inane behaviour is seen as wrong and inane behaviour is rewarded by amusement from some at the discomfort of others

If we condone this activity what other illeagal activity do we condone..

The people who run and work in casinos are not monsters.

lol Jon, that might not have come across quite as it was meant. I didn't actually mean to suggest they would spike the drinks, more that it would be the perfect thing to give away with the coffees if it were allowed.

I reread this thread again this morning, and suddenly I'm saddened.

Obviously noone cares about drug usage in poker.  That is itself is not a problem for me.  Poker is a bad boys game, noone wants to clean it up.  Ok, no problem.

How many times have you heard that poker reflects life.  Well, I, for one, think it's true.  Which is where the saddness comes in.  Defending out of order behaviour, no matter where, is just typical of society today.   The sort of 'It didn't affect me, therefore I don't care' attitude.

Drugs is rife, so it doesn't matter what people do while under the influence, there's nothing we can do.

Pissed people get out of order and noone does anything.

Some people are just tw*theads, we just have to put up with it.

Shame, isn't it.

I don't care about drug use in poker. The whole subject of drugs is one for society to address, and there is a time and a place in everyday life to present your views should you wish. When I play poker I see it as complete escapism from the real world. I don't want to be burdened with morality questions or issues concerning society in general. I want to just play, and play in a carefree way. I see poker as a test. Can I work people out, can I find a weakness in them, can I tolerate their behaviour without getting agitated, can I win their money, all this stuff. I don't want to be policing people about drugs at the table or discussing the crisis in Dafur. I want to just play. I have every right to get what I want from poker. And what I want is to leave society behind, not judge anyone, just understand what makes them tick. Yes, society has problems, and yes it is a shame, and that is why playing poker and leaving these issues of social judgement behind for just a minute is so refreshing.

id just like to add that alcohol and nicotine are widely avaliable and legal.

if america/the old british empire etc produced the worlds cocaine/ganj etc. they would be legal.

as it is i would far rather encounter a little mob of stoned people (in pretty much any circumstances) than a little mob of drunks. at least the stoners dont get psychotically agressive.

Lots of people use alcohol in the knowledge that it is doing them little or no harm. Lots of people are probably using cannabis/marijuana in the belief that it is doing them little or no harm when in fact it is probably about to unpleasantly surprise them in 10 years or so with some kind of psychotic mental illness.

Excessive use of cannabis may cause mental health problems later on in life.  Excessive use of alcohol may cause liver failure later on in life.  It's the same with all things.  Everything in moderation.  The reason drugs are considered dangerous is because some are highly addictive, thus increasing the likelyhood that you will end up using excessively causing the above complications.  Drugs you buy on the street are dangerous because they might be contaminated with other dangerous substances, a problem that would be solved if they were legal and monitored.  Heroine and coke are highly addictive, but drugs like cannabis and ecstasy etc have no addictive properties.  Yes, you can get addicted to them like you can get addicted to anything, poker, shopping etc, but it's not chemically addictive like nicotine.  Like I said in one of my previous posts, an extensive study was done by a large group of people including scienctists and the police, and alcohol and nicotine were actually rated more dangerous than cannabis and ecstasy.  It was that extensive that it has been recommended to the governement that they take this list into account the next time they look at the drugs classification system.

Excessive use of cannabis may cause mental health problems later on in life.  Excessive use of alcohol may cause liver failure later on in life.  It's the same with all things.  Everything in moderation.  The reason drugs are considered dangerous is because some are highly addictive, thus increasing the likelyhood that you will end up using excessively causing the above complications.  Drugs you buy on the street are dangerous because they might be contaminated with other dangerous substances, a problem that would be solved if they were legal and monitored.  Heroine and coke are highly addictive, but drugs like cannabis and ecstasy etc have no addictive properties.  Yes, you can get addicted to them like you can get addicted to anything, poker, shopping etc, but it's not chemically addictive like nicotine.  Like I said in one of my previous posts, an extensive study was done by a large group of people including scienctists and the police, and alcohol and nicotine were actually rated more dangerous than cannabis and ecstasy.  It was that extensive that it has been recommended to the governement that they take this list into account the next time they look at the drugs classification system.

If you purely went by the medical evidence you'd have a good argument for banning alcohol and tobacco as well as what is already banned rather than making some of what is already banned legal.

...
The advantages of living in a democracy.  Do as you're told and shut up.  Forget about freedom of choice.
...

If you purely went by the medical evidence you'd have a good argument for banning alcohol and tobacco as well as what is already banned rather than making some of what is already banned legal.

???

How do work that out as a connection to democracy?

If you purely went by the medical evidence you'd have a good argument for banning alcohol and tobacco as well as what is already banned rather than making some of what is already banned legal.

Be careful, I'm an ex smoker, I feel a rant coming on lol.
I bought a pack of fags recently, smoked two, coughed like hell, and then tossed the remainder by the roadside. Free of them now, surely?

I think fags are one of those products that are legal because so many were using them while they were legal, that to turn round now and ban them would cause too much of an uproar. I mean, if they didn't exist, then someone tried to bring them to market now, would they pull it off? I think not. (cf the surprisingly amusing film 'Thankyou for Not Smoking')

I do use drugs fairly frequently, namely alcohol, under the guise of 'vodka' and 'whisky'. I know that I am intoxicating myself slightly but my usage is almost entirely within government guidelines. I'm pretty confident that such a habit extended over my lifetime will very likely not cause me any serious harm.
If I were to use skunk, on the other hand, even in moderation, I would do so knowing that there was probably a decent chance (I'd guess about 1/5?) of me developing a psychotic illness as a result. No thanks!
I know smoking is probably a more dangerous drug, but it it legal: so what? Driving down a dual carriageway at 150mph is probably safer than basejumping in Central London, but I don't make a habit of it....

Really?...I always wonder where these stats come from. I have heard loads of these scare stories about soft-drugs for a while now but most of them don't originate from Holland. I am pretty sure there isn't a ridiculously large part of the population in Holland that is Paranoid or psychotic (just me) so I have some doubts as to the validity of these studies. 1 in 5, my arse.

I hereby challenge you to publish a scientific study, which I will fund, with the heading 'Cannabis leads to mental illness: MY ARSE!'

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:h6pkQEKlfvsJ:www.theantidrug.com/pdfs/MARIJUANA_AND_MENTAL.pdf+cannabis+link+to+mental+illness&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6

It's on the interweb. Must be true.

There is growing evidence that people with serious mental illness, including depression and psychosis, are more likely to use cannabis or have used it for long periods of time in the past.

lol..that does have pretty colours...is that to keep "the president" interested? :)

Really?...I always wonder where these stats come from. I have heard loads of these scare stories about soft-drugs for a while now but most of them don't originate from Holland. I am pretty sure there isn't a ridiculously large part of the population in Holland that is Paranoid or psychotic (just me) so I have some doubts as to the validity of these studies. 1 in 5, my arse.

I refer people to Mr Fisher's book. I think he's pretty much spot on with his analysis

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=RyjzhFpt6RYC&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&dq=link+between+marijuana+and+mental+health+issues%3F&source=web&ots=NQQWKL5MYO&sig=eeF2hMXC72bgq0quGO-mMkdgQno&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA79,M1

Sure the Weed could be an agent in cases where people smoke a lot and are predisposed to having mental health issues...but there's a big difference between that and weed causing it.

in googling for that one I also found this

;

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinformation/mentalhealthproblems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabisandmentalhealth.aspx

Note how they worded this;
Really?..i had to re-read that statement 3 or 4 times and even then it didn't make any sense.

I'm sure weed is pretty nice n'all, but is it really worth it? Doesn't alcohol produce a vaguely similar enough intoxication, without the stonedness, and without the longterm health possibilities if you use it in moderation?

The studies I've glanced at emphasize longitudinal studies and neurological correlation, to avoid red herrings like comorbidity. Personally I've seen enough never to touch the stuff, I don't know if it's enough to reclassify the stuff as ClassB schedule.

???

How do work that out as a connection to democracy?

There is a lot if misinformation about cannabis and its affects and some of it is getting parrotted on this thread. I loled at the suggestion that 'skunk' is almost pure THC. For starters, skunk is only one strain amongst hundreds of different varieties, but it has been latched onto by the paranoid UK media to describe any of the newer strains. Therefore, any discussion of the drug that refers to 'skunk cannabis' is likely to be misinformed.

The strongest strains have 18-26% THC, most are around 13-15%. 20 years ago the average was around 6-8%, but then, people probably used to smoke in larger quantities to get a stronger affect. Hashish is resin that is made from cannabis plant, whereas weed, grass or any other name you choose to give it are the unprocessed flowers of the plant. To describe hashish as a giving a more happy affect because it is weaker is also complete rubbish. Hash can actually be the strongest form of the drug, but it is taken in much lower quantities than the flowers are.

No drug is safe, but cannabis has had an unduly bad press. Much much safer than both tobacco and alchohol, IMO.

No drug is safe, but cannabis has had an unduly bad press. Much much safer than both tobacco and alchohol, IMO.

There is a lot if misinformation about cannabis and its affects and some of it is getting parrotted on this thread. I loled at the suggestion that 'skunk' is almost pure THC. For starters, skunk is only one strain amongst hundreds of different varieties, but it has been latched onto by the paranoid UK media to describe any of the newer strains. Therefore, any discussion of the drug that refers to 'skunk cannabis' is likely to be misinformed.

The strongest strains have 18-26% THC, most are around 13-15%. 20 years ago the average was around 6-8%, but then, people probably used to smoke in larger quantities to get a stronger affect. Hashish is resin that is made from cannabis plant, whereas weed, grass or any other name you choose to give it are the unprocessed flowers of the plant. To describe hashish as a giving a more happy affect because it is weaker is also complete rubbish. Hash can actually be the strongest form of the drug, but it is taken in much lower quantities than the flowers are.

No drug is safe, but cannabis has had an unduly bad press. Much much safer than both tobacco and alchohol, IMO.

Thanks for your post, you seem to know a lot about it. I'm unsure what the last bit means though, I've seen it elsewhere too. Safer for whom? For me? For the majority?
We could look at it this way: examine total diseases and deaths caused by tobacco and alcohol, then compare them to cannabis/mj/all its forms. Looking at it this way, overall, for the population, tobacco and alcohol are more problematic.
But for ME, as the responsible user, I know that I can take alcohol in moderation and it will not damage me. It may well do me good. But I know that I can take cannabis/etc and it could well do me harm. We're talking about scientific studies here. I know some science (eg mmr) turns out to be balony, but we're talking multiple studies, longitudinal studies, peer-reviewed journals, top UK medical journals, government medical officers, and SCIENCE (as in you get a certain number of subjects, you match them, you isolate in groups, you perform psychological tests that everyone is agreed upon, you show your results within an accepted statistical probability, and then you use reason to explain the meaning of your findings in the context of your study). These are not people with an agenda: the only merit in their actions is being able to demonstrate why their findings are as objective as possible. Repeatedly, these people are finding *causal* links between cannabis use and serious mental illness. Schizophrenia is no walk in the park. It's not in the same ballpark as a bad case of the DTs or emphesema. You may lose your mind. You may be sectioned. You may never work. You may hear and see things that are not there.
If someone offers you drugs, just say 'My arse!'

No serious scientific study has ever claimed that a little use of Weed will cause you to get sanctioned or lose your mind and start to become paranoid. You can't say "I enjoy alcohol responsibly and therefore it's fine" but then say "If I were to use weed in moderation responsibly I will go nuts" There has, to my knowledge, never been any evidence of this.


Moderation and responsible use is always key with these things.

There is a lot if misinformation about cannabis and its affects and some of it is getting parrotted on this thread. I loled at the suggestion that 'skunk' is almost pure THC. For starters, skunk is only one strain amongst hundreds of different varieties, but it has been latched onto by the paranoid UK media to describe any of the newer strains. Therefore, any discussion of the drug that refers to 'skunk cannabis' is likely to be misinformed.

The strongest strains have 18-26% THC, most are around 13-15%. 20 years ago the average was around 6-8%, but then, people probably used to smoke in larger quantities to get a stronger affect. Hashish is resin that is made from cannabis plant, whereas weed, grass or any other name you choose to give it are the unprocessed flowers of the plant. To describe hashish as a giving a more happy affect because it is weaker is also complete rubbish. Hash can actually be the strongest form of the drug, but it is taken in much lower quantities than the flowers are.

No drug is safe, but cannabis has had an unduly bad press. Much much safer than both tobacco and alchohol, IMO.

...
There have been serious scientific studies that show causal links between cannabis use and schizophrenia. If you know of a source that massively discredits these, please post.
As for schizophrenia, we do know for sure that in some forms of it (there are many):
[X] Loss of mind
[X] Paranoia
[X] Sectioning due to immediate threat to self or others or because doubts over whether user can be trusted to regularly self administer anti-psychotics.

There appears to be evidence that moderate use of alchohol does not carry long term health risks in most healthy individuals.
There does not appear to be evidence that moderation in the use of cannabis will preserve you from the aforementioned possible long term ill-effects.

Like I said earlier, I'm no expert, but I live in the real world, so I've seen what I've seen.

Skunk is, to my knowledge, grown indooors using the hydroponic systems that one sees on t'net.  And as such has a higher THC element than 'naturally' grown strains.  Ok so it's not 'pure' THC , but it is a much higher %  ( you suggest 2 - 3 times higher ).  Yes there are dozens of different skunk plants out there.  I've been told about different types, but that goes well beyond my understanding, or what I need to understand.

I'm using the term hash in an oversimplification, purely because I don't know a better term.  I'm trying to talk about the naturally ( outdoor ) grown plants, lower in THC, but higher in cannabides.  Which by the time it reaches the market comes as a little brown block. I don't think it's necessarily weaker, but I do believe it is less likely to cause the paranoic side-effects because of it's reduced THC / higher cannabide ratios.

The thing is, in this country it is much easier to get hold of skunk ( whatever 'brand' ) because it is grown in factories all over the country.  Whereas the resins are generally imported, which makes them less readily available, and more expensive.

I think talking about cannabis as a drug is an oversimplification.  It's how it is taken that is, in my mind, more important.

Drink a couple of pints a night, and it wont do you any harm.

Sounds reasonable ?  Well as long as thats a couple of pints of bitter, you're probably fine.  Switch that to scotch, and it becomes a slightly worse proposition.

As far as I know every serious study showing a link between cannabis use and mental problems has used heavy use of cannabis as the condition of possible problems occurring.

Moderate use  :)up then?

Scientists have found no causal link between drinking 2 pints of scotch and schizophrenia.

That's my evening sorted out then :)  ;yippee; :cheers:

There is a scientific link between cannabis and Wotsits tasting good.

lol..that does have pretty colours...is that to keep "the president" interested? :)

depressiOn and suiCide

I like the random capitalisation in the titles


was that to make that title more cheery?

this whole thread is lol, far too many people arguing about a subject on which they have zero knowledge

I like the random capitalisation in the titles


was that to make that title more cheery?

this whole thread is lol, far too many people arguing about a subject on which they have zero knowledge

STT

 2 players on crack
 2 on coke
2 on weed
2 on heroin
2 on alcohol
2 on e's

who wins?

The dealer?

STT

 2 players on crack
 2 on coke
2 on weed
2 on heroin
2 on alcohol
2 on e's

who wins?

Care to share?

(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m288/snopesphoto/108%20-%20Your%20Cause/SuperSpliff.jpg)

FTMFW

Do you write for the Daily Mail. I suggest you find out even the most basic info about the plant you are talking about before you continue to spout about it. Wikipedia is not a bad starting point, but any search on the plant will do. To refer to naturally grown plants as 'hashish' shows complete and utter ignorance of the topic you seem to have such strong views about.

not really no.

the reason being I've learnt from experience that these convos go nowhere. people who will quite happily admit to having no actual knowledge will still argue to the death that all drugs are evil based on the fact that that's what they've been brought up to believe and the fact that they are illegal.

it's kinda like a religious debate, people generally know which side they'll end up on before it starts.

I'd happily have a conversation on the subject in person but it's too much to try and articulate written down

I'm not talking about scientific scribblings , I'm talking about watching otherwise sane kids beating the crap out of stuff when they're coming off the stuff because they don't know how to use it safely.

From my experience people who vehemently present a seemingly entrenched position are sometimes actually (if subconsciously) expressing a clear, if extreme standpoint so that an opposite position can be articulated to them and they can learn from it. We call this 'debate'. Consider the alternative. I come on the forum and say 'well, cannabis eh, might be good for you, might not, the evidence is a bit flimsy either say'. Boldie then comes on 'Well, I tend to agree, I did think it was bad for you, but the evidence neither here nor there'. Heck of a discussion right there. To combat this, as well as to amuse ourselves, we adopt extreme positions *regardless of our views* so that a debate can take place. My views may look entrenched and soapboxish, but I'm perfectly aware that science can be flawed and governments nannyish, my thoughts are presented in a rigorous fashion in order for the debate to progress.
If all we wanted was the info, we have a few million websites at our disposal...

I'm not talking about scientific scribblings , I'm talking about watching otherwise sane kids beating the crap out of stuff when they're coming off the stuff because they don't know how to use it safely.

People say that alcohol's a drug. It's not a drug, it's a drink!

I'm not talking about scientific scribblings , I'm talking about watching otherwise sane kids beating the crap out of stuff when they're coming off the stuff because they don't know how to use it safely.

 due to the nature of the written word and it's inability to express little jokes or sarcasm properly  this far too often leads to the conversation taking a wrong turn and people upsetting each other.

I'll just sit back and watch the name calling

Yeah and hash brownies are cakes right ?

all i have to say is......WHAT A LOAD OF BOLLOCKS

STT

 2 players on crack
 2 on coke
2 on weed
2 on heroin
2 on alcohol
2 on e's

who wins?

'The way I understand it.  Plants grown using hydroponics are high in THC and low in cannabides.  Plants grown outside using good old fashion sunlight and more natural systems are lower in in THC and higher in cannabides.  These are normally seen as brown blocks rather than buds of the plant.'

You are wrong about this. You have access to the interent, therfore you have the means to gain a greater undertanding of it. It's not my job to teach you.

all i have to say is......WHAT A LOAD OF BOLLOCKS

The dealer?

And you can back this up,......how ?

I thought the idea of having a discussion on a forum like this was to inform / help each other.

Like I've said, my knowledge isn't internet based.  It's from talking to users and exusers.  The vast majority of them don't have any problems / side affects from cannabis.  But some do.  It's these guys that have told me, from their own experience, the things I've said about the diferences between the different forms of the drug.

If you want to join in the discussion, then surely you should want to help other, less informed people ( ie me ).  If you can't be bothered to enter into a decent two way converasation, then I don't see why I should be bothered to concider your opinion.

I'll repeat.  I expect many of the terms I use are wrong.  They are picked up in day to day conversation.  I believe there is a difference in the effect various forms of the drug have.  This is, from what I've been told, and believe, due to the differing amounts of THC / cannabides present.  Some forms of the drug have different effects, and therefore different side effects to each other.

ok, my non involvement in the debate hasn't lasted long.

+1

that is the biggest load of bollocks I've ever read about cannabis use

Sorry - I'm not going to go into detail - I don't see why I should.  

But whilst the majority of people might not have any side effects, there are some ( I repeat , some ) that do.

It has nothing to do with them being scum ( as so thoughtfully pointed out by another poster ).  It has everything to do with being susceptible to the drug, taking the wrong form of it, taking it the wrong way ( very heavily for two days , then nothing for 5 ).  

And after many months of this, on about the 3rd or 4th day of abstainace, when the drug seemed to be clearing the bloodstream, there was a huge mood downswing.  This paranoia, and inability to express itself, showed itself in tendencies to violence - not against people , because that isn't in the persons normal behaviour.  But in violence against property.

Please don't carry on telling me this is crap, because the behaviour before and after is conclusive enough for me.  Just because it's not in anyone else here's experiences, please don't tell me what has, or has not happened in my life.

And you can back this up,......how ?

Sorry - I'm not going to go into detail - I don't see why I should.  

But whilst the majority of people might not have any side effects, there are some ( I repeat , some ) that do.

It has nothing to do with them being scum ( as so thoughtfully pointed out by another poster ).  It has everything to do with being susceptible to the drug, taking the wrong form of it, taking it the wrong way ( very heavily for two days , then nothing for 5 ).  

And after many months of this, on about the 3rd or 4th day of abstainace, when the drug seemed to be clearing the bloodstream, there was a huge mood downswing.  This paranoia, and inability to express itself, showed itself in tendencies to violence - not against people , because that isn't in the persons normal behaviour.  But in violence against property.

Please don't carry on telling me this is crap, because the behaviour before and after is conclusive enough for me.  Just because it's not in anyone else here's experiences, please don't tell me what has, or has not happened in my life.

How do you know their problems stem from cannabis and not any other mitigating factor?

Becasue they so? Because you say so?

Either way, I'll stick with the scribblings.

Coming of the stuff? Theres no real come down after smoking. If there beating the crap out of stuff its probably because their scum.

These kids are probably beating the crap out of stuff, have a joint and they all chill out for a few hours, then when it wears off they go back to their anti-social behaviour.

This has never happened to anyone smoking good quality weed/hashies that I know of. i would love to see some evidence of this.

Try googling cannabinoids instead.

I'd really like you to delete this, please.

It is very offensive.

I've seen it with my own eyes. 

I do agree that cannabis isn't a black and white subject. It's more usually green and purple.

WTF, how is this either offensive or warranting a deletion?

No disrespect but eye-witness accounts are notoriously unreliable...especially when there's only 1. The person you are referring to could very well have done this without taking the drugs, simply because he needed to get rid of loads of pent-up agression and was, as the Americans say, in a rather "bad place" at the time. He might have been pissed off that his "crutch" was no longer there but that doesn't mean it's the drugs that caused it.

But it does indeed sound like they are scum. Anyone who, under the influfence of any drug (alcohol included) starts smashing things or people up, is generally scum. The vast majority of intoxicated people don't do this.

I've got two eyes , but one is a little droopy,  ;)

Of course you are right, there's always that possiblity.  And I don't want to say too much because I feel I'm part way betraying a trust.  AND there was other stuff going on as well.

But there was a time before drugs.  Then there was a time of drugtaking.  Then a time ( about a year ) off drugs.  Then another period back on the drugs.

And it was only during the 2nd exposure to the skunk that the scale of the reaction was noticed.  Yes there were periods of anger without violence during the 'clean' ( for want of a better word ) time.

So when the violence returned, it was only when the pattern was noticed, and repeated, many times, that the correlation was made.

Dissapear for the weekend, take loads of skunk.  Reappear feeling loads better.  Then on Tuesday afternoon the mood swing.  And Wednesday the violence.

Again, please let me repeat.  I know this is a one off example.  But it IS real.  And I do know loads of people that don't have the problem.  ( ok not loads, but more than several )

Wow, what a great debate!

I detest drugs use, but I can't really articulate my thinking properly, (ingrained thinking, I've always felt that), so I'll not comment further.

Except to say, I don't care if they do drugs, alcohol, ciggies, whatever. But when the guy is gratouisly offensive to fellow players at the Table, I think action needs to be taken. And I know that's not easy, but forget Drugs, & drug tests - his behaviour was abysmal, but he was allowed to continue without being censored by anyone - except us, the Players.

One female player was described as a "****ing racist", & he made repeated sexually offensive remarks.

Little wonder it's tough to attract non-poker Sponsors into the game, with all that lovely free money - for us - when we cannot police ourselves.

That sounds a lot more like someone with plenty of unresolved issues, who expresses their frustration through anger - and then takes drugs to make themselves more relaxed so that they don't end up being violent.

i.e. it's the skunk stopping them being violent rather than the absence of it causing the anger and violence.

I will happily delete that post if you wish me to do so.

At no point was i trying to cause offence to anyone.

You made your post sound like a group of kids vandalising something, when in actual fact you were referring to someone you know having a violent outburst.

I have no scientific evidence but my view is that the violence must have been there in the first place. The weed may have bought it to the surface but it did not create it.

Wow, what a great debate!

I detest drugs use, but I can't really articulate my thinking properly, (ingrained thinking, I've always felt that), so I'll not comment further.

Except to say, I don't care if they do drugs, alcohol, ciggies, whatever. But when the guy is gratouisly offensive to fellow players at the Table, I think action needs to be taken. And I know that's not easy, but forget Drugs, & drug tests - his behaviour was abysmal, but he was allowed to continue without being censored by anyone - except us, the Players.

One female player was described as a "****ing racist", & he made repeated sexually offensive remarks.

Little wonder it's tough to attract non-poker Sponsors into the game, with all that lovely free money - for us - when we cannot police ourselves.

Also i think the info your looking for is pretty straight forward.

Skunk, weed etc normally refer to the leafs of the plant unprocessed, just dried out.

Hash, is the thc, mixed with all kinds of crap and processed into little bars that you burn and crumble.

Dont think it matters whether the plants are inside or outside.

I dont know that much about hash because its horrible! imo

and to quote the first sensible reference in this thread i will refer to a group of welsh researchers who wrote a song about their findings during researching hash

it tastes like sh!t and makes you cough and its the f*ucking rubber in it that gets you off yeah i smoke soapbar with lots of bits of plastic i leaves mine in it cause it tastes fantastic skunk costs too much i cant see the appeal
of smoke pork rocky soapbar or gold seal you smoke rocky in a bong like in a hot night or bake it in a cake for you mam as a suprise i smoke screen and its gone in an instant but soapbar lasts cause its f*cking consistent



The strenghth/thc of a weed plant is normally chemically altered these days, the seeds from these plants are then hybrids.

I dont know the first thing about cannabinoids!!!

But luckily i know a man who does  ;)

agreed. i have no problem with ppl doing drugs tho, but i was on said table for a time and his actions were way over the line. not only was he offensive to players, but at times he broke actual poker rules (trying to encourage calls when he wasnt in hand etc). it didnt overly bother me (not least b/c i bust after 40mins of getting to the table), but i can see why it could cause a problem to others.

FWIW he pretty much admitted he was doing coke, but i am fairly sure that wasnt poppers he openly did. but like i say, i couldnt care less what drug any1 does whilst playing poker - how people conduct themselves at the table is how i would judge them.

Anyone tried that modafinil stuff yet ?
[/quoteoikl0000000000000]
Caffeine cheaper, same effect.

Must be easier subjects to hit the min posts required for staking

Caffeine cheaper, same effect.

How very dare you?

Tell you what i think this thread has given me an idea.

Blonde Bash 7

We will split into teams, drunks, stoners, cokeheads, people chasing the dragon, and ravers.

Obviously depending on your team, you will have to keep yourself in enough of a mess on your teams drug.
Anyone who actually passes a random drugs test will be removed from the tournament.

Now that would make for an interesting scientific study!

Oh go on then, I'll try a sniff of caffeine then.

Just the one, mind.

Must be easier subjects to hit the min posts required for staking

I started to post a reply to this at 5.00 pm with my experiences of smoking and growing weed over the last 20 years and correcting some of the ill-educated untruths being bandied about but after a few smokes and about 20 attempts to write a coherent post I can't be arsed anymore.
What was the question again?

Wow, what a great debate!

I detest drugs use, but I can't really articulate my thinking properly, (ingrained thinking, I've always felt that), so I'll not comment further.

Except to say, I don't care if they do drugs, alcohol, ciggies, whatever. But when the guy is gratouisly offensive to fellow players at the Table, I think action needs to be taken. And I know that's not easy, but forget Drugs, & drug tests - his behaviour was abysmal, but he was allowed to continue without being censored by anyone - except us, the Players.

One female player was described as a "****ing racist", & he made repeated sexually offensive remarks.

Little wonder it's tough to attract non-poker Sponsors into the game, with all that lovely free money - for us - when we cannot police ourselves.

also from someone who has used recreational drugs of all kinds (never injected though) I can safely say I would never play poker on any form of drug. It would effect your play IMO and make it too easy to make a mistake. I know people who do but that's their prerogative. I would love to play on a table full of stoners or coke heads, would be very easy to take their chips the same way I would like to sit on a table full of drunks.

The issue with this guy isn't that he was off his head the problem was he was an obnoxious tool.

if the habit is not affordable, then it leads to crime.

well the government subsides alcoholics to the tune of £60 a week for beer, but thats a whole different thread

How do you hide the smell once the plants start to bud?

I don't know Tank...but this seems to do the trick

http://www.carbonscrubber.com/

Glade plug-ins just don't cut it do they.

Glade plug-ins just don't cut it do they.

You'd never guess (well you would) what that I was just about to post...

Oh yes I did..... and I had money on a follow up by Boldie.

Late to the thread, but...

If players are ejected from the premises midway through a tournament what happens to their chips?

Genuine question - it happened recently in a game I was involved in.

Late to the thread, but...

If players are ejected from the premises midway through a tournament what happens to their chips?

Genuine question - it happened recently in a game I was involved in.

Good grief!

What did he/she have to do to get ejected? Murder? Arson?

Good grief!

What did he/she have to do to get ejected? Murder? Arson?

Good grief!

What did he/she have to do to get ejected? Murder? Arson?

Wow, what a great debate!

just to confirm you're talking about the previous 14 pages? LOL

A huge percentage written has been absolute nonsense, written by people who are either purporting to know what they're talking but i would imagine are genrally accepting this is a subject about which they know very little or people who seem to think they have an informed opinion to impart when in fact from what ive read have nothing remotely accurate or coherent to say.

Unless the next three pages are spectacularly insightful this was not anything near approaching a great debate.

I'm embarrassed for some people that have posted on this thread

, he was as high as a kite, & grossly offensive to his table companions, including a young lady.

In my case, having never touched recreational drugs in my life (cigarettes excluded)

Tony, do you not consider alcohol to be a recreational drug then? an interesting viewpoint when you do put cigarettes into that group

or was it just an age related oversight?

Tony, do you not consider alcohol to be a recreational drug then? an interesting viewpoint when you do put cigarettes into that group

or was it just an age related oversight?

I don't get - what on earth makes folks want to do it?

So some guy wins the WSOP main event but you as the TD thought he was a bit jumpy, so test him. Turns out he's on Coke, speed, Nootropil and Valium, having taken them at different stages of the tourney. What do you do?

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:9A4awoExoZUJ:www.eurad.net/mary/Cannabis%2520and%2520Mental%2520Illness.pdf+CANNABIS+MODERATE+USE+MENTAL+ILLNESS&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=13


So some guy wins the WSOP main event but you as the TD thought he was a bit jumpy, so test him. Turns out he's on Coke, speed, Nootropil and Valium, having taken them at different stages of the tourney. What do you do?

-They find life boring
-They are trying to block out unpleasant feelings/memories
-Peer pressure
-Once they start, they're addicted

Not really an issue, is it? the problem was that the guy was an arse..not that he was stoned, no?

The problem was that he won a sport of mental performance while using mind-enhancing and mood-modulating drugs. Obv the extent to which this can help you WIN is well open to debate but:
-a lot of people (inc myself) consider poker to be a sport. Albeit a sport that heavily uses your mind (at times). Other sports ban athletes who attempt to gain an unfair edge by chemical means, why does poker get off?

If the main event runs a LONG time, then u see how tired is everyone is getting, the guy who decides to resort to illegal stimulants will often have an edge, ceteris paribus.

I'm just throwing this out there as an idea, I don't really have a strong stance on it either way.

Sport" means all forms of physical activity which, through casual or organised participation, aim at expressing or improving physical fitness and mental well-being, forming social relationships or obtaining results in competition at all levels.

The problem was that he won a sport of mental performance while using mind-enhancing and mood-modulating drugs. Obv the extent to which this can help you WIN is well open to debate but:
-a lot of people (inc myself) consider poker to be a sport. Albeit a sport that heavily uses your mind (at times). Other sports ban athletes who attempt to gain an unfair edge by chemical means, why does poker get off?

If the main event runs a LONG time, then u see how tired is everyone is getting, the guy who decides to resort to illegal stimulants will often have an edge, ceteris paribus.

I'm just throwing this out there as an idea, I don't really have a strong stance on it either way.

edit before the whole "poker is a sport" nonsense debate kicks off.

http://www.sportdevelopment.org.uk/html/eucharter.html definition of sport, let's not argue that poker is a physical activity please.

-Once they start, they're addicted

But it was too late......

Poker is a game that takes place over a long period of time.  Therefore people with better stamina will be able to concentrate longer and better.  So younger, fitter guys and gals will be able to outlast old dribbly farts.

Try playing poker without any form of physical activity.    It gets a bit dull.

Think of all the ex sportsmen who are top class poker players.  Theres Antonius, and Benyamine for starters.  Ivey was a world champ pacman player ffs.

Atheletes at every turn.

-They find life boring
-They are trying to block out unpleasant feelings/memories
-Peer pressure
-Once they start, they're addicted

"Sport" means all forms of physical activity which, through casual or organised participation, aim at expressing or improving physical fitness and mental well-being, forming social relationships or obtaining results in competition at all levels.

everyone on Red Bull could have an edge as well.




p.s. Poker is most definitey not a sport...although some poker players i know would love to be classed as Athletes, they most certainy aren't.

edit before the whole "poker is a sport" nonsense debate kicks off.

http://www.sportdevelopment.org.uk/html/eucharter.html definition of sport, let's not argue that poker is a physical activity please.

I doubt that there is a drug out there that would have a positive effect on someone's poker skills. A poker player like Ivey (to name but one) is good for a lot of reasons, one of which is his mental attitude. That would be altered if he took cocaine or something like that thus making him more inclined to bugger up.

Again as many people have said before it's the same as asking why do people drink alcohol?  They drink it to make them feel good and give them confidence, for the most part.  Drugs make you feel good, and quite often without the nasty hangover that alcohol brings.  Obviously a lot of people might say "Well if you are happy with your life then you shouldn't need to use drugs to make you feel good."  Whilst it's true that unhappy people are most likely to become alcoholics or drug addicts, for many people drugs are an experience.  A friend of mine once told me about something called Saliva which is a legal drug originating from Mexico (I think) which Shamans used to use to obtain a higher level of consciousness.  Two of my friends tried it once at home.  One of them was convinced that they were actually a floorboard, and the other fell in love with a giant Winne The Pooh which was behind the sofa.  All safe experiences but an experience that you are never going to be able to have otherwise (although not an experience everyone will want to have I'm sure...), and I think the whole point of life is to experience as much as you can while you're here.  The problem is when the addiction comes along.

Like I said previously, the worst drug I have ever done is smoked weed, nothing that serious.  I remember one night I had been at one of my local casinos playing a comp when a few of us decide we were going to go back to one of our friends house to carry on the night with some more poker and booze etc.  It just so happened that this guy was a drug dealer, mainly in the form of growing and selling weed.  So we went to his house and he produced this huge box full of weed, never seen anything like it before, and just basically said help yourselves.  As the night went on some coke was produced from somewhere, and my boyfriend of the time asked me if I wanted some.  Although personally I think I would like to experience some of these narcotics in my life, I'm fully aware that I get addicted to stuff extremely easily.  I smoke and play poker for starters!  So I declined on the basis that if I liked it, I know it could easily turn into a habit and I'm not ever going to let that happen.  

I can understand the people who hate drugs and alcohol, are tee total, and want them both to be banned.  But I cannot understand the people who think drinking is ok - and smashing up windows and people's faces, and threatening people and throwing up, and killing people in drink driving accidents - but that cannabis (and others) is not ok.  And in my opinion this all comes from the fact that the governement tells us alcohol is ok (because it's legal) and that drugs are not.  Drugs are bad and we all have that drilled into us from when we are old enough to go to school.  They tell us about the extreme cases, kids dying from taking one E, coke addicts becoming prostitutes, people getting HIV from sharing needles, Amy Winehouse, and this becomes the public perspective on drugs.  But if anyone cared to actually think about it for themselves for a while and considered the possibility that the government isn't always right, then their perspective might change somewhat when they see that for the most part drugs aren't actually like that at all.  For example I asked a friend (completely tee total, anti drugs, anti everything) last night if they would rather be sat next to a drunk person or a person on drugs in a poker game.  They immediately said "Drunk" as a reflex, but once they'd thought about it said "Oh actually I'm not too sure."  

lol@ the suggestion that "because Tony G says so we should all think that Poker is a sport"

Pokerplayers are not althetes, really honest to God they are not. there might be athletes that play poker but that doesn't make every poker player an athlete.


Hell, I am almost starting to think this is a level.

Paranoia, see?

Wasn't Tony G formerly head coach for the Russian Cycling Team?

again, there are athletes that play poker...that doesn't make every poker player an athlete...nor does it make poker a sport.

they are Ex- athletes that are now poker players...that doesn't make poker a sport.

you try doing cross words for 8 hours a day...does that make people doing cross words athletes as well?..

Being in good physical shape always helps no matter what you do..saying that being in good shape helps is therefore not an argument as to why Poker is a sport.

Being in good physical shape always helps no matter what you do..saying that being in good shape helps is therefore not an argument as to why Poker is a sport.

Illegal drugs are just that - illegal.
Like it or not they are. I don't care if the majority of the time they are alright and cause no harm.
If a casino did decide to clamp down on drugs and you knowingly took illegal drugs and were caught and were thrown out of any tournament or casino then you don't have a leg to stand on.

I best stop injecting while I'm in a hand then..

I best stop injecting while I'm in a hand then..

Tony, do you not consider alcohol to be a recreational drug then? an interesting viewpoint when you do put cigarettes into that group

or was it just an age related oversight?

Yes, it was an oversight, age-related or not.

In mitigation, I have not touched alcohol for 39 wonderful years.

 

Yes, it was an oversight, age-related or not.

In mitigation, I have not touched alcohol for 39 wonderful years.

 

Yes, it was an oversight, age-related or not.

In mitigation, I have not touched alcohol for 39 wonderful years.

 

I think the official definition is that anything that you can do sitting down while drinking beer is NOT a sport

that's discrimination that is.

you're basically saying that Ironstein will never be able to compete in any sport unless he puts his pint down first

I assumed that was just an oversight

but what about the follow up question re caffeine? do you not consider that to be a recreational drug?

I'm really interested in how people put this big divide between legal and illegal substances

Some drugs do of course transend the barrier of medical vs recreational, like cannabis and alcohol.  They have medical purposes as well as recreational ones, and opium as well while I think about it.

So too does coke when we go to the dentists :)

I prefer to do my own fillings now

Strip snap is still a sport though.

So too does coke when we go to the dentists :)

I prefer to do my own fillings now

...  Caffeine isn't at all dangerous in the amounts people generally consume,... 

Again as many people have said before it's the same as asking why do people drink alcohol?  They drink it to make them feel good and give them confidence, for the most part.  Drugs make you feel good, and quite often without the nasty hangover that alcohol brings.  Obviously a lot of people might say "Well if you are happy with your life then you shouldn't need to use drugs to make you feel good."  Whilst it's true that unhappy people are most likely to become alcoholics or drug addicts, for many people drugs are an experience.  A friend of mine once told me about something called Saliva which is a legal drug originating from Mexico (I think) which Shamans used to use to obtain a higher level of consciousness.  Two of my friends tried it once at home.  One of them was convinced that they were actually a floorboard, and the other fell in love with a giant Winne The Pooh which was behind the sofa.  All safe experiences but an experience that you are never going to be able to have otherwise (although not an experience everyone will want to have I'm sure...), and I think the whole point of life is to experience as much as you can while you're here.  The problem is when the addiction comes along.

Like I said previously, the worst drug I have ever done is smoked weed, nothing that serious.  I remember one night I had been at one of my local casinos playing a comp when a few of us decide we were going to go back to one of our friends house to carry on the night with some more poker and booze etc.  It just so happened that this guy was a drug dealer, mainly in the form of growing and selling weed.  So we went to his house and he produced this huge box full of weed, never seen anything like it before, and just basically said help yourselves.  As the night went on some coke was produced from somewhere, and my boyfriend of the time asked me if I wanted some.  Although personally I think I would like to experience some of these narcotics in my life, I'm fully aware that I get addicted to stuff extremely easily.  I smoke and play poker for starters!  So I declined on the basis that if I liked it, I know it could easily turn into a habit and I'm not ever going to let that happen. 

I can understand the people who hate drugs and alcohol, are tee total, and want them both to be banned.  But I cannot understand the people who think drinking is ok - and smashing up windows and people's faces, and threatening people and throwing up, and killing people in drink driving accidents - but that cannabis (and others) is not ok.  And in my opinion this all comes from the fact that the governement tells us alcohol is ok (because it's legal) and that drugs are not.  Drugs are bad and we all have that drilled into us from when we are old enough to go to school.  They tell us about the extreme cases, kids dying from taking one E, coke addicts becoming prostitutes, people getting HIV from sharing needles, Amy Winehouse, and this becomes the public perspective on drugs.  But if anyone cared to actually think about it for themselves for a while and considered the possibility that the government isn't always right, then their perspective might change somewhat when they see that for the most part drugs aren't actually like that at all.  For example I asked a friend (completely tee total, anti drugs, anti everything) last night if they would rather be sat next to a drunk person or a person on drugs in a poker game.  They immediately said "Drunk" as a reflex, but once they'd thought about it said "Oh actually I'm not too sure." 


I think youre showing your age a wee bit pocketlady.I couldnt care less if people use drugs but to say governement tells us alcohol is ok isnt correct.Common sense tells us what would happen if they banned alcohol  ,they can't ,its too late.Alcohol is a big problem to the governement with money spent on the nhs and police but not as bigger problem as drugs.Drugs are not legal and your friendly drug dealer dosn't really know what hes selling you.So one week youll get one thing and another something else.Thats where most od's come from the strenth changing and substance and the user not knowing. They would like to ban alcohol so how could they now make drugs legal?Drugs are far more dangerous.In most cases if you drink to much you end up in bed with the hebejebies.Many drugs you take too much of you dont live to tell the tale.

I would be hiding now, if i were you lol

I'm really interested in how people put this big divide between legal and illegal substances

caffeine is probably one of the drugs with the best claim to being a 'wonder drug' precisely because it isn't dangerous and does have a profound effect - unfortunately none of us can make use of that effect because we're all so used to it day in day out.

I think youre showing your age a wee bit pocketlady.I couldnt care less if people use drugs but to say governement tells us alcohol is ok isnt correct.Common sense tells us what would happen if they banned alcohol  ,they can't ,its too late.Alcohol is a big problem to the governement with money spent on the nhs and police but not as bigger problem as drugs.Drugs are not legal and your friendly drug dealer dosn't really know what hes selling you.So one week youll get one thing and another something else.Thats where most od's come from the strenth changing and substance and the user not knowing. They would like to ban alcohol so how could they now make drugs legal?Drugs are far more dangerous.In most cases if you drink to much you end up in bed with the hebejebies.Many drugs you take too much of you dont live to tell the tale.

Is that true ?  Or is it that they don't care what they're selling you ?

And is it fair to tar all dealers with the same brush ?

Is it true that until recently, getting caught supplying grass was a couple of years inside.  Supplying heroine is 10 - 15 years.  But now they've changed the law so that supplying grass gets the same stretch ?

If so that seems really, really stupid to me.

I know I'm addicted to caffeine.  I drink about a litre of diet coke a day.  I don't notice the effects of the caffeine unless I go without for a while.  If I don't have any for a period of as little as one day I start to get tetchy and irritable (very similar to nicotine withdrawal).  In that respect, I suppose I'm making use of the effect because it's keeping me 'normal' :)

 Is Claw's addiction physical, or mental ?  Does it matter ?

Why?

the caffeine thing is definitely physical.  I first noticed it after I'd run out of diet coke and didn't get out to buy any more - didn't feel a need to as I didn't realise until I wasn't drinking it the effect that not having it would take.  In fact it took me a while to realise that the reason I was so restless and irritable was because I hadn't had any diet coke in a bit.  Scary stuff really.

But are you likely to cut down, and wean yourself off it ?

Or cut it out completely ?

Or just carry on taking it, just making sure you keep your 'supplies' up ?

...Contrary to an urban myth a cup of tea does not nearly have as much caffeine as a cup of coffee does.
...

A cup of tea can have nearly as much caffeine as a cup of cheap instant coffee, that's where the myth came from.

But if you're drinking cheap instant coffee then you don't deserve any sympathy for your lack of caffeine.

But are you likely to cut down, and wean yourself off it ?

Or cut it out completely ?

Or just carry on taking it, just making sure you keep your 'supplies' up ?

the last one :)

I used to drink regular coke Boldie - too much of it.  Landed me in hospital with a nasty kidney infection when I was younger though :o

the last one :)

I used to drink regular coke Boldie - too much of it.  Landed me in hospital with a nasty kidney infection when I was younger though :o

Diet coke really is just as bad (actually worse)

I think youre showing your age a wee bit pocketlady.I couldnt care less if people use drugs but to say governement tells us alcohol is ok isnt correct.Common sense tells us what would happen if they banned alcohol  ,they can't ,its too late.Alcohol is a big problem to the governement with money spent on the nhs and police but not as bigger problem as drugs.Drugs are not legal and your friendly drug dealer dosn't really know what hes selling you.So one week youll get one thing and another something else.Thats where most od's come from the strenth changing and substance and the user not knowing. They would like to ban alcohol so how could they now make drugs legal?Drugs are far more dangerous.In most cases if you drink to much you end up in bed with the hebejebies.Many drugs you take too much of you dont live to tell the tale.

Drugs are not legal and your friendly drug dealer dosn't really know what hes selling you

What i mean by age is you wouldnt remeber Prohibition.Please expand if there is something else you would like to say.)

Yes that's a fair point, but hypothetically there could be a limit set on how much of a certain drug people could buy in a given timeframe.

Yes that's a fair point, but hypothetically there could be a limit set on how much of a certain drug people could buy in a given timeframe.  Obviously that would be complicated.  

For cannabis yes, but it's pretty difficult to overdose on weed.  You just whitey and that's that.  But for other drugs, say they decided to legalise ecstasy, I'd imagine it's a lot easier to overdose on that, and what's to stop someone going to one shop, buying X amount, and then going to another shop and buying another X amount.  It's all about whether people would be responsible enough not to, but at the same time I guess it's similar to them limiting the amount of painkillers you can buy in any given shop.

Anyway, I'm for legalisation.  Why am I putting obstacles in the way!!

Yes, they currently have a similar system of limitation on the purchase of Paracetamol, you can only buy a certain amount in one store. This is to put a serious obstacle in the way of those considering buying large quantities in order to kill themselves. The downside is loss of Boots Advantage Points, obv.

Yes, they currently have a similar system of limitation on the purchase of Paracetamol, you can only buy a certain amount in one store. This is to put a serious obstacle in the way of those considering buying large quantities in order to kill themselves.

Bollocks

They also sell irony supplements.

Lol missed that.

Seeing as a lot of your posts on this thread, even when you offer links as evidence, are to my mind bollocks and not consistent with peoples actual experiences of the subject being discussed I assumed you were being serious when you posted.
For my benefit could you please use a smiley next time you are being sarcastic
 :)

What trials that I listed do you dispute and why? Why do you choose people's subjective reports of the drug risk and why? Which people do you choose as your sample? Do you consult people with mental illness and see what they think? If you were put in a job which required you to apply science to determine the relationship between cannabis/similar and the possible associated health risks, how would you go about it and why would you choose a method different from the strategies outlined by the scientists quoted in the links I submitted?

Regular coke much better for your performance, if you're learning something.

Ideally the body wants and needs plain water. Room temperature and little and often.

Ideally the body wants and needs plain water. Room temperature and little and often.

I've googled but could only find weird mumbo jumbo stuff like you shouldn't drink water during the 2 hours before you go to bed

Ideally the body wants and needs plain water. Room temperature and little and often.

No, one disagress with the Rt Hon ( & very good to see his return) Bolt.

It IS a great debate, specifically because.....

It's an awkward & emotive subject to Debate - but everyone kept their cool, kept it civil, & despite a huge diversity of opinion, there has not been the need to Delete a single Post. That's a good debate.

You are certainly right about many of the Posters - me especially - not knowing what they/we are talking about. But I don't see that as a problem, because it helps those of us ignorant of drug-culture to better understand.

In my case, having never touched recreational drugs in my life (cigarettes excluded), it was a bit of an eye-opener to see how many people do partake, & to learn about new things - "poppers", amal nitrate, coke, etc. I disagree & disapprove of every aspect of recreational drugs, but that did not detract from my fascination with the subject. Not the least, there is one, single thing I never understood about drug use - why do people do it? I'm none the wiser, even now. Any more than I know why I smoke cigarettes, by the way, so I'm not being holier than thou, it's just one of life's questions I don't get - what on earth makes folks want to do it?

As to the subject of the debate - the guy who caused it - my view was that he should have been excluded, or penalised - but not becauser he did drugs, but because he marred so many people's enjoyment. Because, as it happens, he was as high as a kite, & grossly offensive to his table companions, including a young lady.

Most responses on the thread come from an angle - being that the Posters approve, or disapprove, of drugs. I am no different, nor, I suspect, are you. We simply debate from our respective positions.

Anyway, where you been?

have you got any links about this? I've googled but could only find weird mumbo jumbo stuff like you shouldn't drink water during the 2 hours before you go to bed

I couldn't find anything either but I haven't spent a lot of time looking tbh- its all to do with how the tissue is affected by the temperature of the water. Cooler water tends to tighten the tissue which can inhibit absorption, warmer water keeps the tissue more maleable (sp?) or softer and absorbtion is better. (Try running a breast of chicken under cold water and warm water and see how the tissue reacts - it's the same principle.)

Obv cold water is better than none at all but room temp is optimum for hydration purposes. When exercising water is used for cooling so if you want cold water then it's fine to help cool the body - but do drink room temperature water afterwards to help rehydrate.

how do you know this to be true? who told you?

it just seems weird that you state it as a fact but can't find one other (sane) person on the internet who says the same thing.

a lot of nutritionists are complete wack jobs IMO

there seem to be a few websites saying that colonic irrigation is quackery, for example

http://www.docshop.com/2008/06/23/colonic-irrigation-for-detoxification-and-weight-loss-healthy-hydrotherapy-or-hucksters-hype/ (http://www.docshop.com/2008/06/23/colonic-irrigation-for-detoxification-and-weight-loss-healthy-hydrotherapy-or-hucksters-hype/)

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/gastro.html (http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/gastro.html)

from wiki

Enemas used in alternative medicine and in holistic health are referred to as colon hydrotherapy or colonic irrigation and involve the use of substances added or mixed with water in order to detoxify the body. Practitioners believe the accumulation of fecal matter in the large intestine leads to ill health,[2] and false urban legends about fecal accumulation circulate on the internet.[3] This use is not supported by western medical practitioners and governing bodies,[4][5][6] who recommend the use of enemas only in cases of constipation,[7] though its use to treat a variety of ailments has persisted in popular use despite lacking scientific support

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enema (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enema)

I wouldn't even bother with all this if you occasionally put in an "IMO" or "I think" or something similar, it's just when you state things as fact that I feel like having a bit of a google....

Blatant 'I'm going to be on TV' brag post IMO.

Can anyone remember the name of the annoying drugged up king cnute who played in the Luton main event last year? I think he's back again this year.

The guy who is annoying everyone this time is called Scott Chaudhry. I'm not sure if it's the same guy as last year, or if he is on drugs, but he is seriously annoying.

Christopher Kyriacou was the guy from last year.

The guy who is annoying everyone this time is called Scott Chaudhry. I'm not sure if it's the same guy as last year, or if he is on drugs, but he is seriously annoying.

Please let him make day 2 ... :)

I know several people who have ulcerative colitis, and have been told by 'consultant specialists' that diet is not related at all to ulcerative colitis.  He couldn't tell me what did cause it (in the first place, or what causes flare ups), but could tell me what didn't cause it.  In fact, these consultants merely prescribe medicines to deal with the symptoms of colitis - nothing to deal with the causes.  They just dish out NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) like they're going out of business, rather than actually address what could be causing the symptoms and dealing with that.

This is him - I will never forget him.  http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=31518

I doubt that is his profile...he is never older than 30!

I doubt that is his profile...he is never older than 30!

I guess the words 'I will never forget him' passed you by then? Thats him!

Don't think it is. He's never old enough to be playing poker in 1994

Similar to a fella, on the 1/3 cash game at Luton this morning around 3am.

He has decided to become the nosiest player in the card room and at the table, and tilts pretty much the whole table, raising every pot pre with out looking to either £17 or £22 depending on how many limpers and was also 3 betting blind pre... If he hit 1 card on the flop or a flush draw or straight he was putting them all in after letting themself raise the pot or something...

I dont know if its just his game or not but made about £500 in 45 minutes and did 1, with only showing 1 hand down, which if i remember rightly was  6c 3s which was the nuts, after re raising pre, blind...

Doesnt sound like the fella though, He was tall, stocky, and from Essex i think he said...

No offence if its yourself and a member of the forum...

No, Im not him, But i was at the table, the big fella, smashed the fella in seat 7, and pretty much run riot over the table for the short time he was involved?

Was you at the table...

What were your thoughts on his play? bit OTT?

And he upset Ding.

Sigh - ok - well the picture is right - definitely - ask Tikay and eventually Flushy who joined the table and tussled with him. The pic is of him. Who knows about the rest of the info - ask the Hendon Mob!

I know I'm a bit late with this but Oi!   ;grr;

I am currently filming a tv programme which will air in November and two of the guys I am working with are GB weightlifters who adhere to the water recommendations without any reference to me. It was what was recommened by their coach so I guess he's a wacko too!

things like colonic irrigation does have a logical and testable scientific grounding.