Teffy 0 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 They are 10 people who have never been in my kitchen!That's a true answer, now what do I win?-Bear Ah crap I didn't see this before I replied. nh.-BearThere were actually four replies about kitchens. you weren't even close. Link to post Share on other sites
DB10-2 0 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 OMG!!! Do you honestly believe that these 7 players are in it for "The Principle"??? HAHAHA...Cheers,Gregi never said i believe it, just that it's what i've heard them say. i don't think they're even after damages from the suit as much as they're after the endorsement money a less restrictive release might open up to them. or, gee, maybe it really is principle. but i think most people agree that it's better to stand on a principle that's profitable rather than one that is not. take your own conclusions from that. Link to post Share on other sites
Gargoyle 0 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 Just a couple of questions. Harmon and Juanda have deals with FTP. How does their opposition to the lawsuit effect their endorsement contracts? For Raymer's benefit, Seif is and attorney. Has he made any statements about this suit or why he opposes it? Link to post Share on other sites
Dratj 0 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 Daniel NegreanuMike SextonChip Reese Phil IveyDoyle BrunsonTodd BrunsonBarry GreensteinJennifer HarmanMark SeifJohn Juanda I'm looking for a specific answer, take your best guess.They are all good poker players. ship it. Link to post Share on other sites
Teffy 0 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 Just a couple of questions. Harmon and Juanda have deals with FTP. How does their opposition to the lawsuit effect their endorsement contracts? For Raymer's benefit, Seif is and attorney. Has he made any statements about this suit or why he opposes it?Why on earth would it effect their endorsement contracts?(Lawsuit has no relation to Full Tilt, in fact only stands to HURT Full Tilt.) Link to post Share on other sites
Gargoyle 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Why on earth would it effect their endorsement contracts?(Lawsuit has no relation to Full Tilt, in fact only stands to HURT Full Tilt.)Guess you didn't hear. Lederer owns a chunk of Full Tilt. When was the last time you went public and told everyone your boss made a mistake? I was only asking if Full Tilt has given a standing order to support the suit or shut up. A very legitimate question. Link to post Share on other sites
DonkDonkDOnk 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 ill spit on them for you , they are scum Link to post Share on other sites
blueodum 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 DN:I don't believe that any of the players have publicly stated that it's all about money, however, a reliable source told me that Greg Raymer specifically told his that is exactly what the lawsuit is about- collecting damages that they feel they are owed.I'm sure it's partly about that. If you feel wronged enough to sue someone, you want to see them pay a financial penalty, especially if you think money is the only language they understand. And I don't see anything wrong with this being ONE of their motives. It's only human.DN:There are many, many, more players opposed to the lawsuit, but I only included those that are clearly against it.He says, she says... next.DN:The longer this thing gets drawn out, the worse it is for poker.Just wait till all of the players financial records are revealed in court. Irellevant you say? Not when you are trying to prove damages. The players are claiming financial loss, so the WPT will have every right to open up the books and question in great detail where certain money is coming from.I'm sure they knew the WPTE would use this tactic. So what. They are doing nothing illegal and most of the general population thinks that online poker is not evil. If they were doing something illegal the IRS would be on their backs already.DN:The WPT will go out of it's way to prove that these players are proffiting in a big way from online poker. That's not a good thing, not for them, not for me, and definitely not for the poker world as a whole.Imagine that. People are running a business to make a profit. They are doing nothing illegal. The online poker side of the business takes place outside of the US. Everyone knows this and, aside from a vocal minority on the religious right, no one cares.And don't you think the WPTE has profited from online poker? They've had big online sites sponsor many of their events. Many entries into WPT events have qualified online. Everyone knows this, and the WPT doesn't seem to have a problem with online poker in that regard.As far as online poker goes - it's better to have things out in the open. In that way, the whole business has a chance of losing the "shady" reputation it has in some quarters.I would venture to say that 99.9% of forum members think there is nothing immoral about playing online poker. And I would say that among the general populace that cares, over 90% would agree with that sentiment. It's time for poker players to stop bowing their heads in shame when it comes to online poker. What is really shameful is the attempt made by government to ban it.It really sounds like you (Daniel) are arguing in favor of trying to keep the whole discussion of online poker away from the light of day. As if you and (some) of the other players are ashamed of their connections to online poker. I don't understand this, as I'm sure that you think there is nothing wrong with promoting an online poker site.So is it fear, fear of what the government might do to you that is causing you to cower in the shadows (i.e to downplay your affiliation with FCP, the poker site)?JackHarris:Since the US Justice Dept. is already of the opinion that online poker is illegal, the WPTE can get ahold of financial records belonging to Full Tilt that the Justice Dept. can't get without a warrant. Then the WPTE can give these documents to the Justice Dept., and the JOD can then go after Lederer and Ferguson when online gamining is banned. Could Lederer and Ferguson go to federal prison for running Full Tilt?And then the DoJ can arrest the proprietors of WPTE for accepting sponsorship from "illegal" businesses.Are you really this daft? WPTE is tarred with the online poker brush just as much as these 7 players are. Link to post Share on other sites
blueodum 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Miss Idaho wrote:Do you report your winning to the IRS? The WPT is going to drag their financial records through the courts to prove that they haven't suffered because of the agreement, and while doing so, these players are going to have to divulge EVERYTHING to the courts. It will hurt them unless they all have never not reported a days worth of poker winnings and eventually it will affect the rest of us. Once they start going after gamblers for not reporting their winnings, we will all be affected.If you make your living playing poker and are a US resident you'd have to be insane not to report your winnings. The penalty for getting caught far exceeds what you would save. I'm sure all these players have their financial house in order and it's probable that some of them have been audited in the past (since they are known players).And several low level pros that frequent 2+2 have reported that the IRS has taken an interest in them. It is already happening and will continue to (just ask Ed Miller). The IRS is going to look at all the "name" players at some point, but will randomly look at small timers, obviously due to limited resources.So that particular horse is out of the barn. This suit will have no lasting effect on pro poker players as regards the IRS.Some people seem to think that now, because of this piddly antitrust lawsuit, suddenly the whole governmental apparatus is going to come down hard on the poker world. This is a (il)logical leap of absurd proportions. You people must really be living in a climate of fear. Are you also afraid of crossing the street?What the feds are doing right now in their legislative attempt to wipe out online poker started a long long time ago and will continue even if the WPTE disappears tomorrow. What the IRS does regarding professional gamblers started a long time ago and will continue. This suit isn't even as much as a pothole on this long road.It may not be "right" to bite the hand that feeds you and so on. I'm so sick of this characterisation. The WPT and pro players have both contributed to the success of each other. That statement is, I think, indisputable. The players pay JUICE to enter these tournaments. If they make the TV show they gain economic advantage (by means of media exposure). The WPTE ALSO GAINS by having well-known players on their broadcast. This should be a win-win situation.But instead the WPTE insists on this stupid release that really amounts to exploitation and has refused to negotiate the amendment of it. Finally frustrated, these players decided it was worth challenging in court.How is this biting the hand that feeds you? It's more like biting the hand that has stabbed you in the back.Greg X wrote:Sure it doesn't hurt, but Daniel could know just as much if not more about the case by having sought legal advice from a lawyer that specialized in areas pertaining to the wpt lawsuit.Do you honestly think Negreanu has a better grasp of the legal issues at stake than the people who are actually involved in the lawsuit? It's hard to avoid the conclusion that you are a sycophant parroting Negreanu's arguments.Gargoyle wrote:For Raymer's benefit, Seif is and attorney. Has he made any statements about this suit or why he opposes it?That's just it. No high profile player, except for Negreanu, has spoken out against the lawsuit publicly. Sebok and Smith have spoken out against the WPT in this matter on a few occasions on "The Circuit". The 7 players involved have made very general comments about Negreanu's position, citing the need to keep specific commentary out of the public domain because that is prudent when you are involved in in a lawsuit.Let me also point out that with the exception of Juanda, every player on that list plays in the big game and therefore is an associate of Lyle Berman (major stakeholder in WPTE), or employed by WPTE (Sexton- WPT; Seif - PPT). Link to post Share on other sites
DonkDonkDOnk 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 bs ... i hate when they are both ignorant and stubborn Link to post Share on other sites
kakon2 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 they only doing it for the money?and why do you even play poker, to help little kids? sure they want to make it profitable for them everything is about the money, its buissnes, come on you cant blame them for that. i agree its a bad move but dont try to make it like their bad people or something. Link to post Share on other sites
Big Mike Watters 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Not for nothing...as I am against the lawsuit for my own reasons...but don't the FTP guys(at least..I can't speak about the PS and UB folk) actually "work", if you can call it that for TiltWare, LLC., which make a software product "Full Tilt Poker"(not .com mind you), which they sell to whatever entity runs FullTiltPoker.com.Nothing illegal about writing and selling a computer game, right? Link to post Share on other sites
markovit 0 Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 Daniel NegreanuMike SextonChip Reese Phil IveyDoyle BrunsonTodd BrunsonBarry GreensteinJennifer HarmanMark SeifJohn Juanda I'm looking for a specific answer, take your best guess.-Against the wpt lawsuit-All Appear on the WPT-Champeens of poker-All play online poker-Millionaires-Math wizzes Link to post Share on other sites
Stylin_Fish 0 Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 No.......not........them.......too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Obviously my answer is the best one, give me the prize please. Link to post Share on other sites
Jeff Madsen 0 Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 They're not the 2006 WSOP Player of the Year. Link to post Share on other sites
Teffy 0 Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Guess you didn't hear. Lederer owns a chunk of Full Tilt. When was the last time you went public and told everyone your boss made a mistake? I was only asking if Full Tilt has given a standing order to support the suit or shut up. A very legitimate question.many folks have pieces of full tilt, including Ivey, who i believe has more than Lederer. As i said, the 2 have no correlation, as i'm sure more FT shareholders are against the lawsuit, than for it. Link to post Share on other sites
Dratj 0 Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 -Against the wpt lawsuit-All Appear on the WPT-Champeens of poker-All play online poker-Millionaires-Math wizzesI don't think they are all math wizzes. Link to post Share on other sites
jigsawinc 0 Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Daniel NegreanuMike SextonChip Reese Phil IveyDoyle BrunsonTodd BrunsonBarry GreensteinJennifer HarmanMark SeifJohn Juanda I'm looking for a specific answer, take your best guess.Hey DanielHave you ever considered maybe you should step back and not be so public about this lawsuit? I’m not asking this to be negative but rather as a player and someone that is as heavily involved I would think that you would see that in the long term this can only benefit you. Its a classic case or attacking the big stack bully at the table so they will stop rolling over you, weather they have a case or not, win or lose at the very least it will send a message to the WPT that the players will not just sit back when they think something is wrong and maybe they will take the player into consideration in future decisions so as not to have any bad press form which can potentially damage the game.I seen an interview with you on inside poker where you were talking about player unity, this will not happen if players are flaming each other on message boards and interviews when the so called ambassadors for this sport should be focused more important issues like legalizing online gambling in the US so that revenue is not going offshore or raising the legal age of gambling so people are not dropping out of collages to play poker which in the long term is to not just damaging to the sport but also the country.Personally I think they will lose but at the very least they will make the WPT blink and you have to be supportive of that, I know you think that these players wouldn’t be around if it wasn’t for the WPT and its “biting the hand that feeds you” but where would the WPT be without the players?Just something to think about I would love to know what you think. Link to post Share on other sites
GeneralGeeWhiz 0 Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Oh boy, I can't wait to see what people say... Link to post Share on other sites
Teffy 0 Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Hey DanielHave you ever considered maybe you should step back and not be so public about this lawsuit? I’m not asking this to be negative but rather as a player and someone that is as heavily involved I would think that you would see that in the long term this can only benefit you. Its a classic case or attacking the big stack bully at the table so they will stop rolling over you, weather they have a case or not, win or lose at the very least it will send a message to the WPT that the players will not just sit back when they think something is wrong and maybe they will take the player into consideration in future decisions so as not to have any bad press form which can potentially damage the game.I seen an interview with you on inside poker where you were talking about player unity, this will not happen if players are flaming each other on message boards and interviews when the so called ambassadors for this sport should be focused more important issues like legalizing online gambling in the US so that revenue is not going offshore or raising the legal age of gambling so people are not dropping out of collages to play poker which in the long term is to not just damaging to the sport but also the country.Personally I think they will lose but at the very least they will make the WPT blink and you have to be supportive of that, I know you think that these players wouldn’t be around if it wasn’t for the WPT and its “biting the hand that feeds you” but where would the WPT be without the players?Just something to think about I would love to know what you think.One of the main concerns is the negativity that this lawsuit brings to poker at a time when the Government is attempting to ban online poker. The lawsuit is bringing bad press to the poker world, not the WPT............... Link to post Share on other sites
finztotheleft 0 Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 No, DN is bringing negative attention to poker by bringing this up every chance he gets. I may have to rethink my position though, I can't believe that I am in agreement with jigsawinc. Dear God, what is the world coming to ????? Link to post Share on other sites
Teffy 0 Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 No, DN is bringing negative attention to poker by bringing this up every chance he gets. I may have to rethink my position though, I can't believe that I am in agreement with jigsawinc. Dear God, what is the world coming to ?????one differnce :target audience.The only people (at this point) hearing Daniel are insiders. Poker players and poker enthusiasts.The WPT Lawsuit is being heard by Congress and mainstream media. Link to post Share on other sites
Hector 0 Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Daniel NegreanuMike SextonChip Reese Phil IveyDoyle BrunsonTodd BrunsonBarry GreensteinJennifer HarmanMark SeifJohn Juanda I'm looking for a specific answer, take your best guess."What do they have in common?"Poker players who stuff their money in the mattress? Link to post Share on other sites
jigsawinc 0 Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 One of the main concerns is the negativity that this lawsuit brings to poker at a time when the Government is attempting to ban online poker. The lawsuit is bringing bad press to the poker world, not the WPT...............Its no different than the UFC, it go lots of bad press at the beginning and now its on prime time.No, DN is bringing negative attention to poker by bringing this up every chance he gets. I may have to rethink my position though, I can't believe that I am in agreement with jigsawinc. Dear God, what is the world coming to ?????simple minds think alike Link to post Share on other sites
DB10-2 0 Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 simple minds think alike wow. i didn't think you'd still be around. i thought this was a jopke account. amazing... 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