chunky04

Note that I made no attempt to justify Raymers actions, just to try and point out some of the logic they possibly stemmed from.Quite frankly, both DN and Raymer seem quite childish about it, and DN has definitely shown an inclination over the time I've been following him to bear these petty little grudges. Raymer I haven't followed too closely, so can't really comment. I guess someone who inhabited 2+2 or some such could comment there.

Interesting - thanks for that detail.I'd assume the unions would have negotiated a fee for their particiaption, and distributed a portion of that fee to all of their members. Jordan and Barkley would likely have taken the position (and correctly, particularly in Jordans case) that their involvement would be worth more than 1/312th (or whatever number of players was in at the time) of the value.I'd say thats pretty similar to what the 7 are thinking. Raymer and Hachem probably have a higher profile than almost any WPT winner ( maybe Greenstein, Doyle, Gus and DN as the possible exceptions?).May

True about Raymer not necessarily having direct expertise in IP law, but he's certainly a hell of a lot more qualified to judge than DN. Perhaps Raymer = DN was not the right analogy -Raymer = a pretty decent pro but not really one of the absolute best?I don't really understand what PS would have to gain from the suit though?Surely for them the more exposure their players can get the better, regardless of its source? They would need something pretty enticing to go for that over the WPT publicity.From what I've seen of both Raymer and Hachem, I can't them doing this on behalf of PS. They've bot

That is incorrect. I can only comment on the NBA, since thats the only american sporting league I really follow, but I know Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley did not appear in many of the video games with an NBA licence in the 90s. This was due to them having deals in place for their own branded video games.As far as I've been able to discern, the basis for this particular case is much the same. All of the 7 that I'm aware of (Lederer, Duke, Raymer, and Hachem) all have their personal brands associated with a non-WPT videogame. If the WPT release is as stated, it would automatically give the

How about a little non-licking DNs balls perspective.I can easily see why Raymer would get pretty damn annoyed about this.IIRC, Raymer was a patent attorney, thus fairly well versed in the law. He's fairly well placed to assess the risk/reward ratio of the lawsuit based on his skills and knowledge. He certainly wouldn't bother unless its something he feels pretty strongly about. The manner of DNs comments were pretty frivolous, which on its own would be something that would anger someone who felt strongly about the issue.Then along comes DN, who apart from asking other people is pretty much cl

Isiah Thomas is crying at his poker team.

About half the time. Unfortunately I skip B,C etc and go right down to about my Q game for the rest of the time.

Thought I'd give everyone a good beat story for a changeEdit: Sorry, was a bit excited first time round :)Hand #31223208-22636 at Rocky Mount (No Limit Hold'em)Powered by UltimateBetStarted at 09/Jun/06 07:46:19 chunky04 is at seat 0 with $10.65. Manishi is at seat 2 with $10.15. Sharpener is at seat 3 with $6.25. Hotmud is at seat 4 with $9.50. miharan is at seat 5 with $10.10. The button is at seat 4. miharan posts the small blind of $.05. chunky04 posts the big blind of $.10. chunky04: 6c Th Manishi: -- -- Sharpener: -- -- Hotmud: --

Thanks for the review Jarrod.I played the beta, and never got to trying out the online stuff due to time difference (the tournaments just weren't on at suitable Asutralian times).I did try and give it a go in single player however, and I concur with much of what you had to say.Hands do take an eternity in Stacked - probably longer than playing live in fact.This is mostly due to the interface being so utterly terrible.They could have just ported over the Poker Academy interface and it would have been better. How they could have managed to screw up this essential part of the game given are so ma

Meh, I've said it before and I'll say it again, release dates tend to be pretty damn fluid in the computer gaming industry - they should have just adopted the policy of many developers these days and not released a date.For mine, the AI in the game is definitely better than playing for play money. I played play money for quite a while before I decided to put real money up, and its no contest.The problem though is that the user interface for Stacked is terrible. I really don't know how they managed to #%$@ this up considering they had pretty much every online poker site to pick ideas from. When

I have the WSOP game (got it on special at a price lower than I'd normally pay for the two decks of cards that came with it so I figured why not). The AI is indeed atrocious.Stackeds AI seems quite OK, I just find the interface so frustrating that its a barrier to me wanting to play the game. The interface is obviously designed for consoles, but even then its quite poor.The way it works is there are two different rates of raising the amount you want to bet, a small amount and a large amount. At the start of a tournament, the small one will be $1, so you have to count up in $1 increments. At th

I'd be a lot more concerned with the people who did the interface than the PR team to be honest. Considering the number of examples they have to work off of with all the online poker sites, I find it incomprehensible that they could come up with something that terrible.I played the beta, which I had been extremely pumped up for, but in a very short amount of time I realised that the terrible interface meant I'd prefer to play Free Money at UB than Stacked, regardless of high good the AI might be (and it did seem to be quite nice).

Kobe kills it on defence compared to Lebron.Still no idea who I'd pick for MVP though.

I prefer this one.Dunks

I have to say - I am very underwhelmed by this game so far. I was someone who was very excited about this game, and I feel that especially after the delays it went through, the product I'm seeing is quite poor. The interface in particular puts me off.

The wicket at Lords is probably the best wicket in the world for McGrath though, so predicting his performance to continue in that fashion through the rest of the series might have been wrong anyways. He hasn't had anywhere near the impact in the tests he's played since.Warney dropped that catch, but there were plenty dropped on the other side of the coin that could have been pointed to as well.Pontings decision is bad in hindsight, but you have to remember that he's used to having a gun attack behind him, and at that point it hadn't become completely clear that Kaspa and Gillespie weren't up

Argh! You bloody savage, you can't Tivo cricket man! It absolutely has to be watched live.Also, due to their being so much downtime in cricket, the commentators you're listening to are extremely important.On the Ashes, England comprehensively outplayed us IMO, and it was pretty much Warney and our tailenders batting that gave us more of a chance than we deserved.OTOH, for England to take over as the worlds best, they need to beat us in Australia (possible, but unlikely) much the same way we had to beat the West Indies over there in 95 to be the best.

I believe the above stats are the final ones.

To really appreciate cricket I think you have to be in Australia.Think of a hot day, 100+ in farenheit, when you really don't want to do anything that requires concious thought over your holidays.Now you have the perfect excuse to sit around for 5 days, drink beer, and watch TV. Its awesome.There is also a hell of a lot in the game - apart from golf its about the only game where the changing conditions throughout play really have a tremendous effect on the game, but its far more confrontational.To me baseball to cricket is like checkers to chess - broadly similar, but with a lot less variables

oops, the above post is mine btw.

HellooI found myself in a situation the other night in a 6 seat SNG on UB where I had a two pair against what I was pretty sure was a flush draw (I was right as it turned out).There 3 players left, myself and the villain on around 2K (I just had him covered), and another guy on about 4K.I wanted to get all of his chips, so I went allin after the flop, thinking it was 4 to a flush. Naturally the 5th card for the flush came on the river.My question is, would I have been better off playing this another way?Making a decent raise on the turn, and then going all in on the turn with one to come - thi

It would have been $100 000 on each run - two players capped it at $100 000 each (plus blinds if they weren't the blinds) works out right for the number. Its just the sentence preceding the number doesn't mesh.

Thats a bad thing? I get that all the time - doesn't seem to be any common thread as to why either, it just happens sometimes. I kinda enjoy it actually.

Between this and the WPT legal post I somehow think DN doesn't believe its over at all. He seems to delight in cutting down the guys abilities at every turn - very out of character.

I've been having a bit of a strange problem when it comes to tracking my results.I've only started playing online fairly recently, and started out doing my best to be good Citizen Poker Player by running Poker Tracker, as well as keeping a bit of a log during sessions, with start/finish times,end results, and commentary on hands (I think of it as my donk log).Problem is, I found myself concentrating far too much on results when I was playing like this, and was haemorraging through my initial deposit. The process was making me lose focus on making good decisions.I stopped doing it, and my focus