Poker - it's a messy business.....

[maldini32]

PS Suffolk your guy must have been either minted or high on weed to say no to the 20k.

[mondatoo]

there is a huge difference between winning a seat in a satellite and being staked/sponsored. Tiffany was only in the event because she was put in by tony g and lisandro so they should imo have been part of any "extras" she got for getting deep. She wouldn't have been in the event but for them putting her in so I reckon its not unreasonable for them to be involved in other sponsorship negotiations. Tony G doesn't want to be associated with UB and has banned all adds from them on his site so you can see why he should be miffed when she appears in their logo next to his.

Lets just say Julian had bought me into the main event and given me william hill shirts to wear in case I got deep and I finalled. Would you all think it ok for me to turn up for the final in a DTD shirt with a william hill cap on? Julian hasnt got me to sign a water tight contract and rob offered me a few quid to get his logo on tv so wheres the harm in it? Anyone who thinks it would be ok doesn't know how things should be done. in the above situation I would speak to Julian and say robs asked me to wear DTD wear and offered 100k for me to do so, as you bought me in thats 50 large a piece so what do you reckon? If Julian says nah I would rather you wear will hills gear then I wouldnt dream of wearing anything else. Tiff should realise who gave her her shot, if she really believes she has done nothing wrong the very least she could do is give a share of any of the extra dosh she got to tony g and lisandro as she wouldnt have been in a position to get the extra dough if they hadnt bought her in.

Greed is a horrible trait

bet post ever by Russ - FACT

Perfect Post IMO Very well said, you should start a diary 

[ItsMrAlex2u]

Tiffany's response is a disgrace IMO. Basically she has had her lawyers crawl all over the small print to confirm she did nothing illegal to be in breach of contract. That may well be the case, but Tony G's point is a moral one, not a legal one. She is way out of order to fck him over like that.

She didnt put up a single cent of her entry, so to turn her back on the person that put her in that position is a disgrace. Glad she didnt final.

[Colchester Kev]

Tiffany's response is a disgrace IMO. Basically she has had her lawyers crawl all over the small print to confirm she did nothing illegal to be in breach of contract. That may well be the case, but Tony G's point is a moral one, not a legal one. She is way out of order to fck him over like that.

She didnt put up a single cent of her entry, so to turn her back on the person that put her in that position is a disgrace. Glad she didnt final.

I kind of wish she did final, so the story would continue ... if we had until November to see what happens, it would make a really interesting story.

[portfolio]

Tiffany's response is a disgrace IMO. Basically she has had her lawyers crawl all over the small print to confirm she did nothing illegal to be in breach of contract. That may well be the case, but Tony G's point is a moral one, not a legal one. She is way out of order to fck him over like that.

She didnt put up a single cent of her entry, so to turn her back on the person that put her in that position is a disgrace. Glad she didnt final.

I kind of wish she did final, so the story would continue ... if we had until November to see what happens, it would make a really interesting story.

i disagree


the less attention ppokerwhores get the better.


rip brandi

[Jon MW]

I've thought of another scenario:

If there is a site that you genuinly play on all the time and you think they offer the best poker on the web - they're the best (hypothetically we could call them 'SuperPoker')

And there is another site that you think is really dodgy, offers rubbish structures and you don't entirely trust them to be fair (hypothetically we could call them Abso 'ScummyPoker')


A magazine freeroll gives you the chance to win a seat in the Main Event from 'ScummyPoker' without having to make a deposit.
You enter, you win the seat, they send you to Vegas and you make it to the Final Table.


Now 'SuperPoker' offers you some cash to wear their stuff at the Final Table instead of 'ScummyPokers' stuff.

The amount is irrelevant
- do you promote the site that you don't like but who sent you there?
- or do you promote the site you think is the best, but had no influence on you being there to start with?

[ariston]

listen the ammounts involved are quite commonly known- poker royalty the agents offer deals usually about the 100-200k mark for making the final table and stepping up to 1million to the winner (paid in cash not sponsorship). This is to wear full tilt logos. If in the above scenario absolute came to me and offered 5 milliion to wear their logo it doesnt matter how much of a cheating site they are its 5 million. What I would do is say to Julian (again we are going from the above scenario where a friend had backed me) listen mate its 2.5 million each- what do you think? Again if Julian had said no then I would accept his decision and turn the offer down. Can any of you put a price on a mate? I certainly dont think its worth losing mates for any ammount of money. To accept the 5 million and say stuff you julian you are only in for half of anything I win is totally taking the piss. no matter how much she dresses it up tiffany has been very foolish here and nothing but a greedy cow. I am so happy so she got her few pieces of silver and has managed to fk herself in the process. She better hope she never has a bad run as she wont find many friends willing to help her out.

[MANTIS01]

I've got another scenario. Play for you. And play for you alone.

All this talk of logos, contracts, agents, back-stabbing and politics is far removed from the reason I play the game, and the reason I love the game. When I play I enjoy the Mantis Vs the field feeling. Mantis+Stars+UB+TonyG doesn't have the same appeal to me anyway. I was sponsored once in The Midlands Masters and hated every second of it. Final tabled as well and when I paid the guy it wounded me. I would really love to hit the FT of the ME not wearing any logos. I know that sponsorship has a lot advantages for a lot of people, but my god what a mess of a feeding frenzy. People are sellings bits of themselves left right and centre. As talented as you may be in poker the talent of integrity in life is much more difficult to achieve. So I agree with Ariston and his views on this topic. Being an honourable gentleman/lady is massively important and something every one of us can realistically achieve.

I would say pimping and whoring yourself to the highest bidder isn't the only way to go and playing purely for yourself is a really appealing proposition for some. A bit confused by the ethics of some pimps though. Wearing a Full Tilt logo at the FT when you have had no connection with them up until then but not wearing UB logos because you have morals is WTF imo.

[ariston]

fair point- its a question of being a "clean" media whore (ie stars or tilt) or a dirty media whore (absolute/ub). There is a big difference in my eyes as one of the sites has been proved to be run by a firm of cheating bastards and the other sites are market leaders.

I am not adverse to media whoring/staking etc as anyone on here knows- I just think this is a completely different scenario as tiffany was staked into this tourney by two friends and colleagues. This makes it wrong imo to turn them over and try to look after yourself. If you are backed you are a partnership and they should have been involved in other logo discussions and should certainly have been entitled to their share of the extra booty.

Tiffany in my eyes is no different to Jamie Gold and his "what 50%?" argument.

[GreekStein]

There's a lot of preaching going on on this thread and I'm sure everyone is whiter than white of course but if someone comes up to u and says here's 20k, pop this little thing on ur t shirt and have a nice day gl, most people are going to take it unless they are legally bound not to.

While I'm not defending Tiffany Michelle's actions, these guys are all grown ups and willing to fling about thousands of dollars without any signed agreements. Not like they are the first guys in poker to get screwed over...they should know better too.

[MANTIS01]

The thing is though if someone asks you to wear a logo at the FT, just before the FT, doesn't that make you a cheating bastard? Why are they asking you to wear it? Because every Tom, Dick and Harry tuning in at home sees you at the FT with logo and makes an association. But there is no association. Or at least there wasn't until 5 mins ago. You could say that you are playing your part in a con really.

Posted by: GreekStein

There's a lot of preaching going on on this thread and I'm sure everyone is whiter than white of course but if someone comes up to u and says here's 20k, pop this little thing on ur t shirt and have a nice day gl, most people are going to take it unless they are legally bound not to.

What if that little thing was a badge saying "Man Love Rules OK!"

[GreekStein]

I'm probably the least gay person you've ever not met but for 20k I'll wear any logo you want! do your worst lol

[MANTIS01]

I'm probably the least gay person you've ever not met but for 20k I'll wear any logo you want! do your worst lol

What if Full Tilt wanted you to do a photoshoot where you had to put Mike Matusow's dick in your mouth for £1m? Would you do that?

I think I would. I mean when I was 18 I wouldn't, no way!! But, well, I'm 35 now, and that sort of deal sounds more appealing. I mean how bad could it be. In fact get the whole Full Tilt team down, Ivey, Lindgren...at £1m a pop I'd make a damn good job of it as well. Even spending 10% on mouthwash and counselling still returns a damn good profit.

Anyways the point is that it's difficult to judge what you'd do for money and therefore probably impossible to judge other people's decisions in this area. If someone breaks their word for money that's who they are. But it's not who I want to be.

[ariston]

think this debate has definately taken a surreal turn.

you cant put a price on integrity or honour for me. Anyone who doesn't follow a certain code in poker should be treated with the contempt they deserve. How many of you would want to be involved in a % swap with tiffany? How many of you would want anything to do with her now?

[Longy]

I'm probably the least gay person you've ever not met but for 20k I'll wear any logo you want! do your worst lol

What if Full Tilt wanted you to do a photoshoot where you had to put Mike Matusow's dick in your mouth for £1m? Would you do that?

I think I would. I mean when I was 18 I wouldn't, no way!! But, well, I'm 35 now, and that sort of deal sounds more appealing. I mean how bad could it be. In fact get the whole Full Tilt team down, Ivey, Lindgren...at £1m a pop I'd make a damn good job of it as well. Even spending 10% on mouthwash and counselling still returns a damn good profit.

Anyways the point is that it's difficult to judge what you'd do for money and therefore probably impossible to judge other people's decisions in this area. If someone breaks their word for money that's who they are. But it's not who I want to be.

Hahahahahah