calling ironside moved from temp forum

[Ironside]

Posted by: dpommo Aug 16 2005, 11:42 PM
Sorry that my first ever post on this forum has to be of this nature, but read an opinion of yours on the hendon mob forum which puzzled me somewhat. In regard to the player who had backed himself to win tonights Mob forum game, and then offered the other 2 players a deal when 3 handed...

Are you being honest when you say you would sooner see the bookies avoid a massacre than see another punter/poker player pull off a very brave and thoroughly deserved coup? No cheating in any way went on, the player in question just wanted to offer a deal that saw everyone winners, bar your friend the bookies.

Very sad day when other "poker players" take the side of the corporation that is trying fleece us all.

I'm sure I'll be welcomed to the forum with open arms, but your views on this amaze me.  

Posted by: omahahigh Aug 17 2005, 12:00 AM
I disagree entirely, i am involved in the bookmaking industry and it simply is not on.

A bookmaker will offer you odds on an outcome of an event essentially as a wager between two people, bookmaker says this will happen and you say this will happen and he is willing to take you on in a wager.

the fact that millions of mug punters take on the bookies without any decent or well informed opinion on the outcome of an event is their fault, certainly not the bookmakers.

Corrupt betting events in anyway are not the acts of gentlemen, if your playing pool with your friend for a fiver would you cheat to win?

Because it is anonymous it doesn't amke it right.  

Posted by: dpommo Aug 17 2005, 12:06 AM
An unbiased opinion then...  

Posted by: Karabiner Aug 17 2005, 12:12 AM
In all fairness do you not think that it is seriously naive of the bookmaker
to take bets on a tournament where deals are allowed ?

Some sites allow deals others do not.

The bookmaking profession generally are quite happy to take advantage
of situations which arise in their favour, so IMO speaking as a punter,
what goes around comes around.  

Posted by: Dubai Aug 17 2005, 12:16 AM
Pretty naieve to rack up £25k liabailities on a player in a $25 tournament!  

Posted by: omahahigh Aug 17 2005, 12:23 AM
which bookmaker?

it is naive. If a bookie offers a wrong price that is tough luck but to fix the result is wrong.  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 12:25 AM
I had chip lead with 3 left. Suggested deal, Joe Beevers said not allowed. We played on.

That was it.

Got ul came 2nd, and people saying my E/W bet shouldnt be paid!! Even though i was already in last 3, so had landed the e/w already.. Madness.

Stan James bookmaker.  

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 12:39 AM
just read thru the thread, gotta agree the e/w should stand but bookies don't HAVE to pay any bet believe it or not.
Think maybe you shoulda got your money before this was mentioned though.
ian  

Posted by: dpommo Aug 17 2005, 12:41 AM
Ian,

I know new laws were proposed to say that bookies no longer have that option, I was 99% sure they had been put in place now?  

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 12:48 AM
never heard that mate.
i once had a pal who put £10k on a horse that won but the bookies refused to pay out!!
returned his bet though..............  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 12:51 AM
Did you offer the other players more money than could be accepted as a fair deal ? if you didnt then i see nothing wrong in offering the deal... if however you tried to induce them to accept the deal by offering more money than the prizes that were on offer then im afraid you would be a cheat in my opinion.  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 12:52 AM
test  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 12:53 AM

Dubai_Mill> any chance of a deal?
[Observer]JoeBeevers> unlikely lol
> Dubai_Mill, you have 10 seconds to respond
Dubai_Mill> makes sense fo rme to do deal
[Observer]JoeBeevers> BigBrother is watching
Dubai_Mill> thats ok Joe i *ume?
> Neeko7 wins 4,800
Pilf> dont know how we'd work that
Dubai_Mill> i pay u both more than ud think
[Observer]JoeBeevers> dont ask me...but i've never seen it on prima
> Pilf wins 59,780 with a Straight, Ace high
Dubai_Mill> COMegfgbfdgsfd]fsdsdgf
Dubai_Mill> sodfasdp
Dubai_Mill> gsdlpgvfd]g]kfd
[Observer]JoeBeevers> try calling 08000 351139
> Dubai_Mill wins 2,400
Dubai_Mill> LISTENB
Pilf> sorry. a bit
Dubai_Mill> STOP FOR 1 SEC
Dubai_Mill> il PAY YOU BOTH £1000
Dubai_Mill> OK
[Observer]HoneyMonster> 39,27,17,7, now 4th........what position next time?
Dubai_Mill> £1000 each
Dubai_Mill> is that ok
> Dubai_Mill, you have 10 seconds to respond
Pilf>
> Dubai_Mill, you have 5 seconds to respond
[Observer]JoeBeevers> Dubai...i suggest you are careful
> Pilf wins 8,800
[Observer]HoneyMonster> *
Dubai_Mill> Joe its allowed no?
> Dubai_Mill, you have 10 seconds to respond
Dubai_Mill> this is a poker tourny
[Observer]HoneyMonster> you can't do deals like that!
[Observer]JoeBeevers> i dont speak for ...but i would suggest you are careful
Dubai_Mill> OK mate
Dubai_Mill> no rpibs thanks
> Neeko7 wins 4,800
> Dubai_Mill wins 2,400
[Observer]JoeBeevers> i cant say so...you have to ask ,,,and i doubt it if you want to win your bet
Dubai_Mill> ok
Dubai_Mill> fair play
 

Posted by: omahahigh Aug 17 2005, 01:02 AM
bookies are under no obligation to pay any bet out by law although most are members of ibas which is an independent regulation body.

In your case they would not have to pay you and ibas would support their decision probably.  

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 01:02 AM
never affected the outcome so i see nothing wrong, though if they had agreed i think you woulda lost all bets and £2k on top!!
I see what you were doing but i really feel this ain't right, f**k the bookies by all means but it ain't a deal in the poker sense, you aren't offering to split the prize money....offering them money to throw it instead, BIG difference.
Ian
 

Posted by: Davey Newth Aug 17 2005, 01:03 AM
very sad  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 01:05 AM
that makes him a CHEAT im my book !!  

Posted by: Dubai Aug 17 2005, 01:08 AM
But because i have a vested interest in the result, effectively the price fund for me is worth more, so im offering them money from that.

Doesnt matter a deal wasnt done.

So name 1 reason why they shouldnt pay te each way bit?
bearing in mind i was down to 3 which was e/w bit when i offered deal. Complete rubbish im sure they wil pay.  

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 01:14 AM
how can he be a cheat when he didn't cheat?
 

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 01:17 AM
ok, i will rephrase that

That makes him an ATTEMPTED CHEAT !!!  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 01:20 AM
It is a matter of intent. An attempt was made.  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 01:20 AM
It used to be said that a wager was binding in honour only. The betting fraternity accepted this and a strong industry developed. So you have to look at whether, in this case, both parties have acted honourably or has one side tried to, let's say, act less than honourably. Whilst an each way bet has two parts both are linked very closely.

Yes, sad indeed.  

Posted by: Dubai Aug 17 2005, 01:21 AM
I didnt realise any maliciousness in it. Maybe i was naieve offering it. Live and learn, Financially it made sense for me and poker is a business

IM not a cheat. Maybe naieve, but not a cheat.  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 01:22 AM
how about this for a defence I tried to shoot him, but i missed ??


Think about it , he tried to influnce the result of a fair competition in order to gain money, that makes him a CHEAT whether or not he was successful.  

Posted by: Dubai Aug 17 2005, 01:26 AM
In a live tourny,. It is considered fair to finish as u are with 3 left. As long as everyone is financially happy. That was all i was trying to do. it wasnt like i was low stacked and trying to buy the tourny. On some sites you can do deals. i dont play Prima that often and didnt know it was a massive no no.

Nice to see all the crytics as Guests.  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 01:27 AM
nothing malicious? no but certainly greedy.  

Posted by: Dubai Aug 17 2005, 01:28 AM
Yes greedy of course.

All poker players are greedy. I will admit to being greedy and naieve. I am not a cheat though.  

Posted by: Davey Newth Aug 17 2005, 01:33 AM
Please do not attempt to label ALL poker players as greedy. I for one object strongly to that.

I do feel the events that unfolded were indeed very sad. Very sad because of the effect that these events may have on poker, a game that many people (myself included) have spent a number of years promoting.

 

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 01:35 AM
on most sites you can do deals, but yours was hardly a deal, you were actually bribing players to take a dive, now sorry if you dont like the word CHEAT but what you did was try and CHEAT the bookies out of money.

Naive ?? perhaps
Foolish ?? probably
greedy ?? definately

Cheat ?? going by the dictionary definition, im afraid you are.  

Posted by: Robert HM Aug 17 2005, 01:43 AM
Hi Dubai. Cutting away from the main part of the problem.

What I do have an incy wincy problem with are the comments at the end of the comp, I was there, knocked out in 7th as The_Brief. You say that the poker is a business, yes it is for some players and you are a talented player who has played for a while it seems, and you certainly are aware that you should have been quoted at a lot shorter price So why can't you take the beats in your stride and act professionally, what you said to a fellow player was a "tad" over the top, calling his plays into question and describing him, amongst over things, as pathetic. I think it was also wrong to tell the other player HE had lost you £20k.

I got knocked out as second chip leader, only just covered by another player, I got my chips in when ahead but got stuffed, I probably lost a few hundred dollars by that bit of bad luck but my reaction was different.  

Posted by: Dubai Aug 17 2005, 01:47 AM
Just emotion mate, had rough time recently. Just built up frustration. Of course bad losing is unacceptable, id never say anythign live but i bet everyones been there.

I did say on THM forum well played to the other player and of course didnt mean what i said. Id happily buy him a pint if i met him.  

Posted by: Robert HM Aug 17 2005, 01:47 AM
QUOTE (dpommo @ Aug 16 2005, 11:42 PM)


I'm sure I'll be welcomed to the forum with open arms, but your views on this amaze me.  


By the way... welcome, missed that in all the fuss.

Now lets say lessons have been learned and interesting questions posed and get all lovey dovey again  

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 01:57 AM
QUOTE (Guest @ Aug 17 2005, 01:22 AM)
how about this for a defence I tried to shoot him, but i missed ??


Think about it , he tried to influnce the result of a fair competition in order to gain money, that makes him a CHEAT whether or not he was successful.  


huh? you won't get done for murder if you miss mate.

Anyway, i agree with Dubai in one thing.......come on folks show your faces.
Welcome all, it is a friendly place to be honest  

Posted by: Davey Newth Aug 17 2005, 02:03 AM
I think the point the poster was making is that you would be still guilty of a crime albeit the lesser one of attempted murder.  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 02:03 AM
huh? you won't get done for murder if you miss mate.



exactly, but you would get done for ATTEMPTED murder

its about intent, at the end of the day the guy ATTEMPTED to cheat, end of/full stop/case closed.

NEXT !!!!!!!!!!!!  

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 02:11 AM
all i am saying is that he didn't cheat, tried to yes but didn't.
not guilty.
just to make my position clear, when i said i saw nothing wrong i was referring to the payout for the e/w bet.
I too believe it was totally wrong, but i'm not sure if i could resist what he did to make £20k, but then i like to think i'm honest enough to admit that.
Ian
 

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 02:20 AM
all i am saying is that he didn't cheat, tried to yes but didn't.
not guilty.



I too believe it was totally wrong,





you will make your mind up one day.
 

Posted by: James Aug 17 2005, 02:22 AM
Flame me to death, but he tried to make a deal in a poker comp. So what???

Players do deals in poker all the time, yet i never hear people saying they are cheats. I really dont understand how this guy has 'cheated'. It is comon to win tournaments through a deal. So why does the fact that the guy had money on himself suddenly make him a cheat???  

Posted by: Ian Aug 17 2005, 02:25 AM
i think it was the fact that e offered them £1000 each, which i think was more money than was in the pool...

 

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 02:28 AM
my mind is made up if you read what i said.
anyway this is blonde now mate, we have a happy and friendly environment here and we all work hard to maintain that.
So if you would like to continue our debate, sign up and PM me.
Ian  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 02:31 AM
no need ifm, im not having a go at you, just suggesting you look up INTENT in a dictionary
 

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 02:34 AM
and from what you are saying , i assume that you believe that because the deal wasnt accepted that its ok, but if the deal was accepted you would horsewhip Dubai through the streets with a banner round his neck saying CHEAT !!!

Double standards mate.  

Posted by: Robert HM Aug 17 2005, 02:37 AM
QUOTE (Guest @ Aug 17 2005, 02:31 AM)
no need ifm, im not having a go at you, just suggesting you look up INTENT in a dictionary  


Oii!!!
3 years studying for a law degree, post grad course at the College of Law, articles, years setting up a defence firm and you waste all of that by looking "intent" up in a dictionary. You could at least offer to pay me to look it up for you!!

Sheeesh, I don't know.  

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 02:38 AM
sorry robert, send me your bill and i will see what i can do  

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 02:38 AM
I am quite happy to explain a few things to you mate, but not on here as it is not the place.
Ian  

[Ironside]

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 02:53 AM
explain on here, i am genuinely interested in your opinion as to why you think there is a difference in trying to cheat and actually doing it.

the bottom line is this. If he had kept his bet to himself and as chip leader had proposed a deal which fairly reflected the prize structure, nothing would have been said and he may have had a nice touch and good luck to him. However his ego got the better of him and he boasted of this bet on an open forum. He then proceded to try and BRIBE the other players into making the deal and as such he attempted to influence the result of the competition for financial gain.

I call this CHEATING and in my opinion the bookies are well within their rights to suspend his account and prosecute him for attempted FRAUD.

but im sure Robert will tell us if they could have a case 

And I am available for work Robert if you need an assistant   

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 02:58 AM
lol i think the first line says everything
OK, what i actually said was he didn't cheat, and he didn't.
he tried to, attempted to, meant to, intended to and wanted to but he didn't, that is all i said.
Intent is not the same as doing, to use your previous analogy, if you try to murder someone but miss you are not a murderer only an attempted murderer, the difference between life and death in some american states..........
Can you please stop picking on me now?  we actually agree on the judgment just not the sentence.
Ian

 

Posted by: Guest Aug 17 2005, 03:09 AM
ifm, can i try and explain it to you in a different way ?

What if someone tried to steal your chips while you were on a break in a comp, but they were seen and told not to do it.

Would that make them a cheat ?? or would you still say that he hasnt actually taken them so he cant be a cheat ??

All i am trying to do is understand your point of view, and im sure others reading this long thread are interested, i think its a valid discussion. the big question is When is a cheat not a cheat ?? 

Posted by: Robert HM Aug 17 2005, 07:55 AM
QUOTE (Guest @ Aug 17 2005, 02:53 AM)

but im sure Robert will tell us if they could have a case 

And I am available for work Robert if you need an assistant   


Firstly, not on your nelly, the facts have been aired and you can make your own individual decision, and as all sides had had there say you might as well keep your your own counsel as nothing more can be gained by cluttering up this thread, pounds of flesh have been taken in excess.

I propose a new thread along the lines of "poker players and their pets", that should be kinder to the eyes and let our good sides show, tikay has his cats, I'll tell you all about my chickens and Mrs RED-DOG has her Mr RED-DOG.

As for the job application, I pay one guinea an hour, you provide your own quill pen and dictionary. 

Posted by: Neeko Aug 17 2005, 10:12 AM
So I was in the final 3. Totaly out of my league, what should I have done? although in the end i suspect silence was the best policy. 

Posted by: BlueWolf Aug 17 2005, 10:42 AM
Interesting topic here....

Looks like its been established that this guy didnt actually cheat but seemed to have been attempting to by suggesting a deal that was way over the top of the pool in order to gain a favourable outcome to the tournement.

From what i understand the player in question had n each way bet on himself yes?
and was in the final 3 when this "deal" was suggested, so therefore surely he would have collected anyway???

In a live tournement situation if a player was seen to be offering a deal like this in order to gain a favourable advantage of any kind then almost certainly the players involved would be reprimanded and possibly disqualified. There is no obligation for any bookmaker to pay out nay bet tho and i wouldnt be suprised if were to pay out on this.

In regards to the Intent description, it is possible to be charged with intent to defraud an orginisation out of something and it has been done in many sports (football match fixing etc) and it is possible that if thought this was the case they definatley would poursue this line legally.

Dont get me wrong i dont know all the facts here and i'm not passing judgement on anyone as to wether or not they have or havn't cheated but i've never been a fan of deals in poker online or offline because of circumstances like this being involved 

Posted by: Ironside Aug 17 2005, 11:11 AM
ok first off i said on THM that dubai tried to cheat the bookmakers i stand by that he did try and cheat the bookmakers. he also tried to cheat any punter who had a bet on another player by offering an unfair deal.

if it was final 3 of this years wsop and a player said hang on a minute i am getting $50 million if i win this from a bet can i pay you 2 $7.5 million each to dump this tourny to me, who would pay the 1000s of punters with there $20 bets on the other 2 players?


stan james made a big cock up by allowing such a heavy bet in first place, but here again dubai cheated by using numerous accounts to place the bet this alone will proberly see the bets declared null and void.

why bets of this size should not be accepted on a tourny is simple with so much at stake there is nothing to stop a player getting all his mates into the event to protect him and dump chips to him with only 50+ players in the field then by getting 10 players to help out you have a huge advantage and if your stacks in trouble there will always be a friend around to dump chips to you.


now to conclude i am not saying dubai did infact cheat in this event i am saying he attepmted to cheat the bookie with 3 players left this is not in doubt and when joe told him to becarefull as might not payout he took the hint and ended talk of the deal. i would be shocked however if stan james paid out on this bet, i would be even more shocked if in future events they have such a good market available 

Posted by: snoopy1239 Aug 17 2005, 11:23 AM
May I ask a few of questions? Aplogies if I sound naive/stupid or if these queries have been answered. I'm just curious.

(i) Is the general consensus that he (attempted to) cheated the bookies, other players, or both?

(ii) I don't know who the bet was made with, but isn't there some kind of small print that refers to such a situation arising? Was this bet made online? Is there no agreement between the two parties? This is an honest question from someone trying to learn more about the topic, but where do the bookies outline how a player should reach the desired placing?

(iii) Lol ? Started off as a call to Ironiside. Where?ve you been son?

Some thoughts:

(i) Trying to influence other players for financial game is not cheating in my eyes. That's part of poker and is something that happens in deals every day. You try and get the best deal you can. If anything, any potential cheating here is the player swindling the bookies, not the player cheating his opponents.

(ii) Please don't encourage this thread to end or divert onto something else. Arguments have been well structured and relatively well mannered. Agreed, this is a friendly natured forum, but the odd heated debate doesn't do any harm. Plus, it's bloomin' interesting to read.

(iii) I agree that, if it is determined to be cheating, attempting to cheat is just as bad as successfully cheating. That?s just me though. I also think that attempted murder should have the same punishment as successful murder. I don?t think the outcome should make it less of a crime. I?m probably alone on that thought though.

(iv) Just maybe betting on the outcome of tournaments isn?t a great idea.
 

Posted by: Ironside Aug 17 2005, 11:30 AM
snoopy 1st

i was in bed man the forums were dead my cards were colder than a snow ball in the artic and there was nothing on the box

2nd i have never claimed that any of the players were cheated the people that were cheated were the bookies and any other punter with a bet on the outcome 

Posted by: dpommo Aug 17 2005, 11:33 AM
After sleeping on it, I can see a lot more clearly now why there is all the fuss.

I would just like to clear up though, Dubai did not put HIS money on through other people's accounts. A lot of people backed him, the same as a few months ago a lot of people backed him in this tourney and he finished nowhere. I had £150 e/w with Stan James, but this was my money and my bet, Dubai was recieving none of the winnings if the bet comes up. We were just taking advantage of what we viewed as a ridiculous price to win a 50 runner tourney. I'm still amazed that allowed such huge liabilities on a $25 online tournament.

While what he did was morally wrong, in the climate of deals being offered at final tables, I know that he in no way saw it as cheating. If you know there is a £25k liability with the bookies on you and you are 3-handed, can all of you honestly say you wouldn't offer a deal to take 1st place? I don't like seeing him labelled a cheat when all he was trying to do was secure a bumper payday in the heat of the moment after playing down to the final 3.

 

Posted by: Ironside Aug 17 2005, 11:36 AM
i wouldn't have gotten myself into that postion by betting on myself to win as it would affect the way i played 

Posted by: snoopy1239 Aug 17 2005, 11:36 AM
Sry Ironside - i was directing my post at you.

I agree with you with regards to the 'potential' cheating being from player to bookies. 

Posted by: snoopy1239 Aug 17 2005, 11:37 AM
Argh! that should read - I WASN'T directing my post at you.

I'm always making that silly typo.   

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 11:38 AM
you can find the small print on another forum, but to my reckoning it doesn't convict him, he has a good argument against it.
I didn't say cheating and attempted cheating should be viewed differently, i said he didn't cheat, but it seems a bit difficult for some folks to grasp.
As for the murder thing, are you having a larf? 
Ian 

Posted by: dpommo Aug 17 2005, 11:41 AM
"i wouldn't have gotten myself into that postion by betting on myself to win as it would affect the way i played"

But he had confidence he could win the event, 40/1 about him in a 50 runner event we thought was a ridiculous price, if we have this bet 10 times we figure we get at least one big payout. 

Posted by: snoopy1239 Aug 17 2005, 11:45 AM
A kid writes notes on his hand with the intent of cheating in exam. Supervisor spots this at the start of the exam. He hasn't used the notes yet, and is yet to fulfill his chating intentions. He should still be punished in the same way though, shouldn't he? 

Posted by: dpommo Aug 17 2005, 11:48 AM
Lol, so you honestly think he should be hung, drawn and quatered over this?

On a side note, should there really be adverts at the bottom of the page offering how to cheat at poker and see your opponents cards   

Posted by: Ironside Aug 17 2005, 11:51 AM
thats google for you

the forum is temp when the real forum comes back there will be no adverts 

Posted by: ifm Aug 17 2005, 12:05 PM
QUOTE (snoopy1239 @ Aug 17 2005, 11:45 AM)
A kid writes notes on his hand with the intent of cheating in exam. Supervisor spots this at the start of the exam. He hasn't used the notes yet, and is yet to fulfill his chating intentions. He should still be punished in the same way though, shouldn't he? 


I really don't see the problem with this.
All i say, (and keep saying) is there is a difference between cheating (actually doing) than trying (attempting it without succeeding), the punishment may well be the same but the offence isn't.
I actually think that in your analogy taking notes into an exam is in itself cheating so doesn't compare, but what if he was found scribbling notes on his hand an hour before hand, 2 miles away, would the supervisor be able to punish him then??
Ian 

Posted by: RED-DOG Aug 17 2005, 01:05 PM
This is a very Hot topic and it seems people have strong views on this subject, I would just like to congratulate all concerned for making it a flame free, well reasoned and very interesting debate

If you take the time to listen to the other persons point of view, its rare that their argument has no value at all, I only wish all differences of opinion could be aired in such a gentlemanly fashion

Well done guys 

Posted by: Colchester Kev Aug 17 2005, 03:09 PM
After a good nights sleep and a re read of this thread, I have decided to put my name to my "guest" posts last night.

Ian "ifm" im sorry for posting anonymously, It started of as a pure oversight by me forgetting to add my name to the post, but as the converstaion deepened, It became apparent that if i did put my name then the debate would probably die and points of view and opinions would probably not have been aired.
I also apologise if you think I was picking on you, I wasnt, I was merely trying to understand your point of view, and although i dont agree with you, it made a good and healthy debate.

Robert one guinea an hour !!! even i earn more than that playing online poker, be careful, you may be getting a visit from the ghost of christmas past soon 

Finally I would like to add that i stand by my posts of last night/early morning and in my opinion Dubai attempted to gain an unfair advantage over the bookies by offering BRIBES to the other finalists to do a deal that wou;d see him collect. the fact that he didnt try and cheat the other players is immaterial in my mind, he tried to cheat the bookies, and however you look at it, that makes it CHEATING.

Do you remember that "hole in one" coup a few years ago when bookies were offerring crazy odds about a hole in one at a major golf tournament ? some shrewd guys noticed that, and had amazing bets and duly collected...... There is nothing wrong in sticking your money in on a bet where you perceive the bookies have overpriced it, and you feel you are getting unbelievable value... but to try and collect by affecting the outcome of the result is CHEATING.

Once again, sorry for the anonymous posts, but i think it helped the debate by not putting my name to them.

Kev. 

[Rod Paradise]

Do you remember that "hole in one" coup a few years ago when bookies were offerring crazy odds about a hole in one at a major golf tournament ? some shrewd guys noticed that, and had amazing bets and duly collected......

Kev. 

Kex, as I remember it those guys only got a fraction of the bets paid out once the bookies realised they'd made an arse of it.

[snoopy1239]

are they allowed to do that? Seems unfair to me.

[ifm]

ahhhh, all is revealed.
I actually thought you were one of those nuisances from THM coming here to be abusive, i bit my tongue there as i felt like shaking you by your ears and shouting all sorts of expletives!!!
Maybe i didn't come across correctly but hey ho!
Ian

[Dubai]

Ha nearly the greatest coup of all time

[Dubai]

Cant believe no-one even mentioned the first time we tried the coup, was couple months before and first time prices went up- had even more on

from THM report

"Sponsors, Stan James, had made a book on the event and were very pleased, and a little surprised, with the amount of action that they took. Many observers were having bets as well as those taking part. One player, Dubai_Mill, was the subject of a significant gamble from 66/1 to 33/1 and reportedly laid to lose a six figure sum.

Dubai_Mill was still going very well and was definitely in with a favourite’s chance when he came up against BellyBuster. BellyBuster played a pot very trickily when he made Jacks full and took a 31000 pot off the best backed player in the event. Two hands later Dubai was out in 15th and the odds compilers went and put the kettle on!"


we then had to wait weeks before they pushed the price back out again. If won the first time would have netted £125,000 in a $25 60 runner event hahaha- 2nd time was obviously more ul having lost hu but we would have only won £50,000 i think combined

[Dubai]

Couldnt even get 2k ew on a 66-1 shot in the Derby anymore. The good old days........

[gatso]

lolz @ davey neweth taking the moral high ground

[Ironside]

Wow I can just about remember this thread still wondering about title of thread as my views don't really mean much amongst gamblers as I am not one, can I ask if you guys still think its ok to cheat punters who might have.bet on the other players involved in the deal, trying to read this on my phone while waiting for discharge from hospital will try and reread tonight I think it still has ramifications and why poker betting is only ever small ball

[Dubai]

No-one had bet on the other players, that was pretty clear throughout.

Thing is even these days firms lay books on events where deals are done- generally i think it should be in the T+Cs saying any deals and win bets are void

[GreekStein]

Gave up trying to read this thread as it's a clusterfuck.

lolz @ davey neweth taking the moral high ground

Cliffs pls

[Dubai]

Thehendonmob decided to run a league on their forum- $25 entry, 1st one got like 50 runners i think- Stan James then decide to run a book on the 2nd one, bearing in mind its mostly middle aged forum posters- They put me in 66s, we bet it to win £125k or so i think, might have been more with the ew part of the bet. Was chip leader came 15th. Had to wait till the 7th league game before they priced up again, i was 40s and we bet it until they suspended the market. I had 500ew myself and im sure others had similar total. Was chip leader 3 handed with 75% chip in play- took beat and was now still cl but was closer. I asked for a deal, and then offered the other players £1k each to deal. 1st place was about $500 in the tournament. In the end i got 3 outtered in massive pot and lost hu. Stan James reviewed all the bets and the entire hh from my tournament and paid us the each way part. Some people accused me of cheating my offering a deal and should be banned from poker (Ironside was one, but ive forgiven him since )

Would have epic in a $25 tournament against people sitting in their slippers drinking cups of tea

[Dubai]

oh they never laid a proper bet on an online tournament ever again

[GreekStein]

ha awesome