Game is in a right mess. Greedy casinos doing whatever they can to squeeze short term profit out of a market that's shrinking is never going to end well. G have laid off a bunch of staff, resorts is going strong but there have been other Gentings closed to cover it, DTD is now closed Monday/Tuesday. Reg fees are getting higher, some places are attempting to force people to play higher stakes, overall standards especially on food have dropped humongously since I started playing seriously around eight years ago. Online is a state, stars are as greedy as ever, party have given up any chance of challenging their monopoly, every other week there seems to be some new scandal. Everywhere else I've looked at pools seem to be shrinking and I can't think of the last time I heard properly good news from any site. Maybe I'm just turning into a cynical old man, and I think live poker will go cycle back round after a while longer of decline. But I can't see online poker recovering. I can't see America coming back to the global market, increasingly the good games are moving to more and more dodgy sites.

I still play, I still do ok, I still love the game, but as far as online goes I'm not optimistic for the future.

As a side note, does anyone think that May did anything worthwhile in her tenure?

What exactly is it that they're teaching? I don't remember being taught about same sex relationships outside of the biology of it, and I think if we're going to judge what is and isn't appropriate we need to know the content of the lessons.

Wow. Amazing. What do you think they’re teaching? What on earth couldn’t be “appropriate”?!

What on earth about sex and relationship education might be inappropriate to teach at a primary school? Hmm, let me think about that one, you know I can't come up with a single thing! Let's get all the pictures and the horror stories out!

What exactly is it that they're teaching? I don't remember being taught about same sex relationships outside of the biology of it, and I think if we're going to judge what is and isn't appropriate we need to know the content of the lessons.

I'm a bit behind the times with tournament strat off effective stacks that are this short, but why have a limping range from the small in the first place here?

I think everyone, especially the card rooms, underestimate how much value the updates added.

Value in general enjoyment of a subset of players and spectators, or value in measurable ROI on the money spent?

Prove part 2 and i'm sure they'd be back in action! I suspect it was pitched based on fluffy assumptions a few times, but as the poker money train slowed down everyone was less willing to buy the story.

The updates made me want to get involved in the tournaments.
They sold the atmosphere of a weekend.

I agree. It was because of the buzz of going deep in a tournament that was covered properly, with updates and a commentated live stream, that I really got the bug for the game. I've done hundreds of thousands in rake at DTD, and I had a group of friends that would regularly come with me who have done a similar amount between them. They really added something to it, and it was touching to realise how many people that I knew outside of poker had seen it. My point is that they only need to get one person like me every now and then for it to make them loads, but it's not something you can quantify properly. I am 100% sure that having a good team updating tournaments and having a properly run live stream will bring you more customers in the long run. But since when did any casino in this country give a shit about the long run, which I guess is why proper tournament coverage is getting more rare.

Chaos at Manchester BNR today by all accounts........

Not enough dealers and players having to alternate on available tables.

Half the field played the first level, then sat out while the other half played the same level.

Madness!

Feels like a sinking ship, doesn't it?

[What can a court case prove to you that we don't already know?]

What terrified me was British girl shrugging off severed heads rolling around in the back yard.

Pretty sure the folk moaning about fair trials etc, are the same that moan about austerity and our Government clamping down in all the wrong areas........

I’m trying to figure out what you mean. You’re saying you’ve identified a link between people who support human rights and people who disapprove of government policy that punishes (often kills as discussed extensively itt) the poor and vulnerable while favouring the very wealthiest? I hope you weren’t working on that for long, it’s not exactly Sherlock Holmes.

You know exactly what I mean, but as ever, your efforts to try and prove yourself,smarter(probably), funnier( not a chance), and more compassionate(misplaced) override everything.

I am all for fair trials, but not for wasting money when the evidence is clear cut and for all to see.

Man filmed running kid over on crossing. Sounds pretty cut and dry. Could be a multitude of reasons. Give him a fair trial. Correct.

Girl who openly tells the world she wants to leave the country because she hates it and believes in the cause of terrorism, then wants to come home, and in interviews isn't sorry for what she saw and was involved with, is a no brained.

It's a waste of money that can be used to bridge the austerity gap. Deep down, you know it, but have to twist it round to try and wriggle out of it because you know I'm right.

Let's deprive some kid of his cancer treatment so we can waste tens of thousands on a trial we all know is wrong and the outcome obvious.

Nice ethics KKK

That’s embarrassing. Our system of justice is one of the last things we should abandon. You support the government that is responsible for austerity, I know it is an entirely unnecessary political weapon and oppose it at every opportunity.

It’s just a simple fact that you don’t know the evidence in the Begum case, none of us do and that’s why it should be tested at trial. If she’s guilty of crimes by all means punish her. Let’s not get distracted by hysterical people who get scared and irrational every time they hear the word ‘terrorist’.

Proving again you dont read what I said.

I mentioned before their threat doesn't bother me. It doesnt inhibit my travelling etc.

What evidence do you need in the Begum case to say that she should be welcomed back then smartarse?

Don't disappear for the day, and hope it gets lost in the the next 24 hours.

What can a court case prove to you that we don't already know?

Did you read the papers when she left? Her statements and those of her friends? Her interviews when trying to come back?

Tell me what you think a trial will prove please. "her innocence" wont wash.

Excuse me, what? So what has been reported in the media should decide someone's guilt or not? Our legal system is based on needing to prove someone's guild before a court of law, it's not a perfect system but it's a hell of a lot better than what you've just suggested. This isn't about Begum and shouldn't be about her, it's about the integrity of our legal system. Once you start saying it shouldn't apply to someone because it won't prove anything, you start deciding where that line will be drawn, and it's a line that should never exist if our freedom is worth anything.

Human beings got to grips with this stuff ~ 804 years ago, it seems we’ve taken a backward step.

If you took cookies out the jar as a child knowing that was wrong your mum would scold you

Even if a dog shit on the carpet the owner would say NO! BAD DOG! with some semblance of authority

That's what humans have been doing for eternity

A calm reaction being offered to this situation, accepting that joining a murderous terror group is just an error is a weak message to send out to others thinking of similar conduct.

I wouldn't buy a dog or you will sustain one shit shower of a carpet mate. 

OK, I was trying to point you in the direction of the Magna Carta.

I'm a bit of a history buff mate and as far as I recall King John was jokes and everybody broke the magna carta before the ink was dry

and yet there was a part about the importance of everyone having a right to an unbiased trial, overseen by a professional judge that seemed to go down well and has been a cornerstone of the judicial system in western civilisation for a very long time.

Just like a lot of your stuff it’s only a theoretical notion. In reality history post Magna Carta is jam-packed with the complete opposite of the above.

Virtually every monarch oversaw a system of biased trials overseen by corrupt judges who produced the desired predetermined result.

Kinda why I resist the fairytales and rainbows rhetoric of liberals.

So we shouldn't fight for a strong justice system just because it hasn't properly existed yet? Your arguments baffle me, and remind me why I don't participate in these threads :p

But you're totally cool with taking what you read in the paper as absolute truth and only allowing our justice system to work for people you like?

Loads of folk vilifying Michael Jacko and not playing his music

When did he get a fair trial

I guess his chances of a fair trial were mainly compromised by him buying the witnesses.

I guess Begum’s chances of a fair trial were mainly comprised by her flying to Syria to join ISIS

This is a terrifying thing to read. You're saying that someone's right to a fair trial should be determined by the crime they're accused of? This is proper 1984 type stuff. Our justice system fails completely if this attitude is taken. This should have nothing whatsoever to do with Begum and everything to do with the integrity of our legal system. What if someone randomly accused you of being a terrorist? If someone stuck in article in the Daily Mail with a doctored picture of you holding a gun to someone's head in some middle eastern looking place? You'd be happy that your right to a fair trial is simply taken away? Because that's where this sort of talk leads. Taking away a person's rights without due process can never, ever be acceptable if we're going to protect ourselves from the same thing happening to us.

Otherwise, who decides who gets a fair trial?

This is the clincher for me. It's really easy to say people at the far end should have their citizenship revoked, and that they have forfeited rights like the right to legal aid, but where do we draw the line and who decides? The idea of someone just deciding another person isn't worthy of the same rights as the rest of us should be a chilling one, and it frightens me how happy some people are when they see other's rights being taken. I'd think it much better to avoid drawing that line in the first place, to protect our own rights as much as anyone else's.

I was genuinely surprised at how many people had traveled from abroad to play.

Indeed, was very impressed by the Norwegian number plate in the car park. On a Tesla.

That actually belongs to a total hero who used to be a dealer at DTD and now does the chip room at a bunch of tour stops, so that was a staff member :p

I'd take that with a pinch of salt, surely that would have been reported earlier if it was the case? Feels like they're just trying to keep the story alive to get a few cheap views...

Grosvenor usually only runs Friday and Saturday, although on those days it get 2+ tables regularly. Alea is your best bet Monday/Tuesday.