Renee Xsie

[luther101]

Bugger me (exclamation, not an invitation)   ....    thirteen pages on 'Reckless Renee'.

Naughty girl    ....     nice bum, though.

[StuartHopkin]

Absolutely bizarre stance in the thread from Camel.

It's very simple. Imagine you were a reg in Luton card room and you were kinda guy to put people in comps. She knows this and is friendly with you, she manages to convince you to start putting her jn tournaments. Meanwhile she's doing the same thing with multiple others too, overselling and making money. (I'm not sure if you realise she also sold to outside investors as well as playing this on stake and didn't pay them either)

Weeks/months go by (God knows how long she's been doing this) and then you catch her. You're playing the next night and feel completely aggrieved. You tell a table mate and their response is "yeah I knew she had done this a few months ago, didn't really want to say anything, she's just a woman and there's worse humans in the field.

How tilted would you be? If threads like this don't happen then scammers will scam again and again. In fact sorry that's wrong, scammers will scam again regardless of threads like this, but because of these threads less people will get fucked.

How tilted would you be if someone started a thread about you and you were innocent?

I know one player whose reputation was completely trashed in a thread like this. And he was entirely innocent.

It was complicated, but I believe in the situation he was in, he did nothing wrong.

Would that be the Ram / Ivey golf bet thread from many years ago Keith ?

I think he was referring to Ched Evans to be honest.

[exstream]

Bugger me (exclamation, not an invitation)   ....    thirteen pages on 'Reckless Renee'.

Naughty girl    ....     nice bum, though.

Pic?

[the sicilian]

I agree it's a distinctly valid point and a very interesting point.

The problem is at some stage society need to draw a line and not give excuses for people to latch onto, no matter how unfair it might seem, people ultimately need to stand tall and take responsibility for themselves and their actions. Mental problems, addictions or fell asleep at the keyboard...where does it end? Once we are happy to make and accept excuses the act becomes acceptable and tolerable. In society these days it's always somebody Else's fault, everybody is a victim of circumstance. As harsh as it seems we need to be definitive about what is right and what is wrong regardless of circumstance, if not we no longer have free will as people we are merely puppets of circumstance.

Might be the first time I've agreed with a Mantis post so have to give it a deserving gif.

Agreed too... we do live in a society where its always someone Else's fault and taking responsibility for ones own action is something to be avoided at all costs

[RED-DOG]

But doesn't that make you responsible for avoiding your responsibilities?

[SuuPRlim]

Distinction between backing and casino credit is certainly inaccurate, because casinos are businesses taking mathematically advantageous positions against their customers (such is their intention anyway) much like lot of businesses, stock markets, supermarkets car dealers.

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

I would say that drawing comparisons to casinos encouraging gamblng addiction is wildly off the mark, most staking operations - and i know BRS are included in this - require a decent amount of proof of winning poker play, or a lot of experience in the games you are requesting staking for before you are able to join, unlike casinos who advertise everywhere for customers.

[doubleup]

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

less of the "business" please - staking is a jolly gamble, entirely for the entertainment of all concerned.

[slinky81]

I'm not sure how this could have been a planned scam, when she has given some of the money to BRS. I'm not even sure why she even gave any of the money to BRS either.

Was absolutely planned , I was with her in DTD all day Saturday , i even brought her a waffle  over from frankies because she was a bit down she had bust , She was waiting to see if the Caribeean Sat to start we were putting her in. She lied to my face , not once did she mention she was through with a huge stack !!!! How is that not planned ? Not only that she was selling action on top of the initial stake I arranged to be sent to her . Shes a theiving horrible woman who deserves everything she gets , I never refused her anything we were close. More fool me but that woman is a scumbag , and I will tell her too her face when i see her.

[slinky81]

If she had any kind of issue either with needing money , we were close enough for her to tell me , I would of gave her the money or whatever she needed. Really it can not be justified what she has done.

[Rexas]

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

less of the "business" please - staking is a jolly gamble, entirely for the entertainment of all concerned.

assume this is a joke?

[doubleup]

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

less of the "business" please - staking is a jolly gamble, entirely for the entertainment of all concerned.

assume this is a joke?

HMRC would I'm sure be interested in a test case to tax a professionally operated staking "business".  In contrast to a mutual gamble where they would have no chance.

[Rexas]

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

less of the "business" please - staking is a jolly gamble, entirely for the entertainment of all concerned.

assume this is a joke?

HMRC would I'm sure be interested in a test case to tax a professionally operated staking "business".  In contrast to a mutual gamble where they would have no chance.

I'm not sure why I'm rising to this, but if you accept that poker is a game of skill (gambling yes but a form which is beatable) then how can you not accept that staking can be a business? You're simply gambling that the people who you stake are good enough to beat the game long term, but you're gambling with prior knowledge of their performance and with informed judgement. It's no different to most other businesses in that sense. Basically every business owner is gambling on their own ability, knowledge of their field and effectiveness of their staff. I'm not sure how you can criticize someones business as a "jolly gamble" which is entirely for entertainment. I mean this is obviously total bollocks, of course it isn't "entirely for entertainment". I imagine your comments are more than a little bit insulting to people who own staking companies, and they are certainly not intelligent or informed.

[arbboy]

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

less of the "business" please - staking is a jolly gamble, entirely for the entertainment of all concerned.

assume this is a joke?

HMRC would I'm sure be interested in a test case to tax a professionally operated staking "business".  In contrast to a mutual gamble where they would have no chance.

I'm not sure why I'm rising to this, but if you accept that poker is a game of skill (gambling yes but a form which is beatable) then how can you not accept that staking can be a business? You're simply gambling that the people who you stake are good enough to beat the game long term, but you're gambling with prior knowledge of their performance and with informed judgement. It's no different to most other businesses in that sense. Basically every business owner is gambling on their own ability, knowledge of their field and effectiveness of their staff. I'm not sure how you can criticize someones business as a "jolly gamble" which is entirely for entertainment. I mean this is obviously total bollocks, of course it isn't "entirely for entertainment". I imagine your comments are more than a little bit insulting to people who own staking companies, and they are certainly not intelligent or informed.

I think you are missing the key point of doubleup's post that all businesses pay tax on their earnings and staking businesses presumably don't in doubleup's opinion.  Therefore it is better to keep staking as a 'jolly gamble' in the eyes of the taxman and not a business.  Think you have been whooshed.

[doubleup]

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

less of the "business" please - staking is a jolly gamble, entirely for the entertainment of all concerned.

assume this is a joke?

HMRC would I'm sure be interested in a test case to tax a professionally operated staking "business".  In contrast to a mutual gamble where they would have no chance.

I'm not sure why I'm rising to this, but if you accept that poker is a game of skill (gambling yes but a form which is beatable) then how can you not accept that staking can be a business? You're simply gambling that the people who you stake are good enough to beat the game long term, but you're gambling with prior knowledge of their performance and with informed judgement. It's no different to most other businesses in that sense. Basically every business owner is gambling on their own ability, knowledge of their field and effectiveness of their staff. I'm not sure how you can criticize someones business as a "jolly gamble" which is entirely for entertainment. I mean this is obviously total bollocks, of course it isn't "entirely for entertainment". I imagine your comments are more than a little bit insulting to people who own staking companies, and they are certainly not intelligent or informed.

I think you are missing the key point of doubleup's post that all businesses pay tax on their earnings and staking businesses presumably don't in doubleup's opinion.  Therefore it is better to keep staking as a 'jolly gamble' in the eyes of the taxman and not a business.  Think you have been whooshed.

Exactly.  The reason gambling winnings aren't subject to income tax is because, in the opinion of a court many years ago, a card player or horse better wasn't a trade, profession or vocation.  Moving this on to staking, we have somebody "putting a few horses in for a sweat" - this as well fine imo and couldn't really be called a business.  It begins to get very grey when you describe meticulous selection of horses etc and even worse when you describe yourself as a business.  Far better to keep it aimed at the entertainment of stakers imo.

[arbboy]

Staking is a mutual business agreement where you're paying to share equity with another business.

less of the "business" please - staking is a jolly gamble, entirely for the entertainment of all concerned.

assume this is a joke?

HMRC would I'm sure be interested in a test case to tax a professionally operated staking "business".  In contrast to a mutual gamble where they would have no chance.

I'm not sure why I'm rising to this, but if you accept that poker is a game of skill (gambling yes but a form which is beatable) then how can you not accept that staking can be a business? You're simply gambling that the people who you stake are good enough to beat the game long term, but you're gambling with prior knowledge of their performance and with informed judgement. It's no different to most other businesses in that sense. Basically every business owner is gambling on their own ability, knowledge of their field and effectiveness of their staff. I'm not sure how you can criticize someones business as a "jolly gamble" which is entirely for entertainment. I mean this is obviously total bollocks, of course it isn't "entirely for entertainment". I imagine your comments are more than a little bit insulting to people who own staking companies, and they are certainly not intelligent or informed.

I think you are missing the key point of doubleup's post that all businesses pay tax on their earnings and staking businesses presumably don't in doubleup's opinion.  Therefore it is better to keep staking as a 'jolly gamble' in the eyes of the taxman and not a business.  Think you have been whooshed.

Exactly.  The reason gambling winnings aren't subject to income tax is because, in the opinion of a court many years ago, a card player or horse better wasn't a trade, profession or vocation.  Moving this on to staking, we have somebody "putting a few horses in for a sweat" - this as well fine imo and couldn't really be called a business.  It begins to get very grey when you describe meticulous selection of horses etc and even worse when you describe yourself as a business.  Far better to keep it aimed at the entertainment of stakers imo.

Rexas has done a great job convincing the tax man they might have a case for taxing his paymaster's operation!!  vwp!