Jrobb25 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Looks like 60 mins is definetly doing the story. This in no way can be good.http://wickedchopspoker.blogs.com/ Link to post Share on other sites
Ouch-8s 4 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Looks like 60 mins is definetly doing the story. This in no way can be good.http://wickedchopspoker.blogs.com/ everybody get ready to get worried phone calls from your parents. Link to post Share on other sites
AcesOnFire 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 everybody get ready to get worried phone calls from your parents.Oh man, don't even kid... Link to post Share on other sites
Jrobb25 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 everybody get ready to get worried phone calls from your parents.Oh yeah the phone calls will be coming in like crazy. Link to post Share on other sites
bdc30 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 imo I think this is awesome. Right now the only bad publicity the sites have gotten is on the forums pretty much. Sure, it made the news websites (cnn, msnbc etc) but nothing much ever came of it. The more BAD publicity these scamming sites get the better. The government isn't going to hate poker "more" because of it. Link to post Share on other sites
Cappy37 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 This is *very* bad for online poker. Ugh.And on top of it all, every knuckle-dragging stiff on the micro tables who's on LFT because his J8 never "holds" has further proof that the world is against him and he needs to hit the casino and go 17-deck blackjack instead. sigh... Link to post Share on other sites
Cappy37 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 imo I think this is awesome. Right now the only bad publicity the sites have gotten is on the forums pretty much. Sure, it made the news websites (cnn, msnbc etc) but nothing much ever came of it.It's good to see AP/UB getting their just due, but it's not worth it in the long run.The more BAD publicity these scamming sites get the better. The government isn't going to hate poker "more" because of it.Are you high? The majority of actual voters in this country are 55+. The majority of the people who actually watch 60 minutes are 55+... Do I need crayons and a napkin to draw a map on how politicians are going to use this to "gain votes"? Link to post Share on other sites
bdc30 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 what more can they do? ban poker? uigea version 2? Link to post Share on other sites
uncooper 1 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 what more can they do? ban poker? uigea version 2?They can mobilize opposition to bills that would repeal the UIGEA. Link to post Share on other sites
AAsnake88 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 It's good to see AP/UB getting their just due, but it's not worth it in the long run.This is sooooooo true. There are already enough fish that will only play live because they believe online is rigged, this will only decrease the number of fish who play online. I'm pretty sure the perception will be all online sites when the story will be on AP/UB. Sucks. Link to post Share on other sites
Ouch-8s 4 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 This is sooooooo true. There are already enough fish that will only play live because they believe online is rigged, this will only decrease the number of fish who play online. I'm pretty sure the perception will be all online sites when the story will be on AP/UB. Sucks.from the sounds of the article, they are going to deliberately paint all sites with the AP/UB brush Link to post Share on other sites
zimmer4141 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Yeah, if they stress that it's contained to AP/UB then I think it'll be all right, but if the perception is that this happens on every site then this could be very bad for online poker. I think we always tend to overestimate the amount of impact things like this will have though. Link to post Share on other sites
cardcore 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I'll say one thing, working on the business side of this industry, I was PRAYING they didn't do this interview.Even if it was one rogue company (AP and UB) you know that EVERYONE is going to say "Online poker is unsafe." Link to post Share on other sites
simo_8ball 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 "You know, I've played a little bit online and I always suspected there was something not right. Too many strange things happening."The general public will not distinguish between sites. They will see that a gambling site was hacked, and that will be it. It's unsafe to play poker online.Why should they trust FullTilt or Stars when it's obviously so easy for people to cheat you out of your money? Why should they believe cheating happens on one site but not on the others? Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 FREE ADVERTISING FOR ABSOLUTE POKER!!!!! Hopefully this will bring in some new donkeys. Speaking of which, some of you guys should come play on AP (zing). How again is this a bad thing? They were caught and people were refunded, and no advertising is bad advertising right? Link to post Share on other sites
terradawg 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 This is absolutely terrible for online poker. It validates the intent behind the UIGEA. The only people who will not be scared by it are poker players. I will paint a nasty picture of the industry and offer no benefit in return. Link to post Share on other sites
whatgreatis 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 no advertising is bad advertising right?In the sense that it gets Absolute Poker's name out to the public its not terrible, but it's the context which Absolutes going to be framed and unfortantly online poker as a whole, as unsafe. Unless 60 Minutes makes a point of differing Absolute/UB from the other sites the general public (people unfamilier with the details of online poker) won't make the distinction between AP/UB to Stars and Tilt. If I were a industry type I would be trying to get a positive story to the public and start working on damage control with press releases. They need to damn the actions of AP/UB and reassure the public of the safety of online poker and it's benifets.I'm fine with AP/UB getting bad press, which they deserve, but the industry needs to take an offensive role to making the distinction between their sites and AP/UB, instead of just hoping this doesnt hurt online poker. Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 "You know, I've played a little bit online and I always suspected there was something not right. Too many strange things happening."The general public will not distinguish between sites. They will see that a gambling site was hacked, and that will be it. It's unsafe to play poker online.Why should they trust FullTilt or Stars when it's obviously so easy for people to cheat you out of your money? Why should they believe cheating happens on one site but not on the others?But is that an unreasonable reaction? Link to post Share on other sites
Gween65 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 This is *very* bad for online poker. Ugh.And on top of it all, every knuckle-dragging stiff on the micro tables who's on LFT because his J8 never "holds" has further proof that the world is against him and he needs to hit the casino and go 17-deck blackjack instead. sigh...If I had J-8 on that last hand, I would have won... Link to post Share on other sites
makeyourself 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 defiantly imo only bad can come of it. why publicise something like this outside the poker community, which is already a well known story to those that it actually effects. if the site was shut down after this then yes, create a story, show that cheating won't be tolerated but as AP is still alive and kicking this is a story that really won't help poker in the long run. you want good press to bring people to poker, not bad news to increase sales of tin foil hats. Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I will paint a nasty picture of the industry and offer no benefit in return.You son of a bitch! Link to post Share on other sites
terradawg 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 You son of a bitch!lol. i hate myself. Link to post Share on other sites
mase_gotsem 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 lol this reminds me of those old marijuana films "poker play it and you will die " that exactly how 60 minutes portrays everything they dont agree on . Link to post Share on other sites
The Lobster 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 You son of a bitch!i lol'd Link to post Share on other sites
James D 0 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 This all seems a little hypocritical... imo.When the whole AP scandal broke, everybody (and I mean, all over 2+2, p5's etc too, not just here) wanted the most mainstream media coverage possible, to expose 'the scum at AP'. There were many high profile online players voicing their opinion that in order to crack down on cheating/superusers, the whole world had to know. Which I agreed with, in order to gain credibility and, more importantly, 100% assurance that no poker site would operate in anything less than a completely professional and honest way.Yet, now it's happening, it's only all bad news for the poker world? Maybe you have to take a step back, to take two steps forward, sometimes... no? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now