absurd annie duke quote

[Monster_Josh 0]

HEY! There shouldn't be any gayness in the forum. This is not a place for it. That's my opinion.

[elkang 0]

annie duke's post is classic and pretty smart I think. Yes, she could have said it is like indentured servitude (which is more fitting) but it lacks the rhetorical appeal. I applaud her the same way I applaud any accomplished demagogue.As for the money thing and how it drives people to watch, someone mentioned Ken Jennings on Jeopardy as a counter argument - but it actually is a great example of how money drives ratings. I suggest watching the movie "Quiz Show" to drill home this point. Until Daniel's fans number in the hundreds of thousands and not just thousands(?) there will be no pull over tournament money. I'm glad enough that it is growing as is and just hope that the fights over money does not ruin this emerging spectator sport like for instance hockey. The rhetoric is nice, but the real action will still be on the tables and in the side deals that top players get.The only "union" I see as having value is a large players guild or organization that provides a means for the large mass of poker players (meaning 50,000+ not just the top 500 pros) to lobby for their ideas to industry movers and shakers. I also see a huge value in the growth of poker overall by skillfull promotion of this mass appeal guild. Does anyone else feel this way?

[Monster_Josh 0]

I don't like the way she handles herself at the table either. Why is she always so rude to other players? She is not cool.Sorry elkang, you went and gots too sofisticated for me on that one.

[minorityreport 0]

Critique of Pure Reason aside; I'm a Bertrand Russell kind of guy.Smash has a point here. Everything he's said on this topic is on point.Name "pros" are a hilarious, presumptuous lot sometimes. A union? HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.I love poker, but poker is not exactly deserving of this dialectic.

[SplashMaster 0]

They should be allowed to endorse who they want. We see ads everywhere else, what's the difference.The difrence is that the people watching TV ONLY CARE ABOUT THE MONEY.  THEY DO NOT, I REPEAT NOT, CARE *AT ALL* WHO WINS IT Hence, no leverage for the pros.  Don't want to play?  Ok, we'll just televise some bartender winning 3 million and get the same if not better ratings, don't let the door hit you on the way out.The only way for pros to fix this is to host their own events.  Period.  Untill that happens they have no leverage at all.  Zero.  None.

he is ummmmmm 100% right.

[Makavelli 0]

Still love you, Smash... gayness.

yeah, that, or I'm a gentleman who can disagree with someone he respects and KNOW that it won't be taken personally... or gayness...

Or you're just paranoid that you might censored him off so you continue to kiss his @ss like 99% of the people who like him do. You can't simply say that you disagree with him. You'd think if you really KNEW it wouldn't be taken personally, you wouldn't have to go out of your way to prove that you don't take it personally by saying that you love him. Gayness.

... or I'm a gentleman, when I respect someone. Was the "I still love you" the only part of my post you were able to understand? Everything else I said in that HUGE post was in direct contraction-- oh, sorry... uh... "not kissing the @$$ of"-- the man in question. Yes, I think he's wrong here, but no, I don't need to resort to insults because I DO respect him. (Again, these concepts seem _really_ hard for you to grasp...)Try http://thesaurus.reference.com if you need help with some of the bigger words.Mak, the gentleman (See, I don't even respect you, yet I'm being a gentleman...)