Hendon Mob Responds To Dns Blog

[jjdylan 0]

Just saw this posted over at their forums... http://www.thehendonmob.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13816I have just spoken to Ram who is not best pleased about the innacurate accounts of the dispute with Phil Ivey which has been doing the rounds and have now appeard on Daniel Negranau's blog. Ram has asked us to reproduce this letter here and will be giving his own full version of events at a later date. Daniel. I have just read your blog in which you complain of your friend's treatment and the hands of a couple of “hustlers”. I understand that you have jumbled the letters in their names, although as a chronic dyslexic this makes absolutely no difference to me. As is your intention, the whole world of course knows exactly who you are talking about. I feel that I know you fairly well, both through our meetings across the poker table and through your public persona. I often cite you as one of the people in poker I most admire and I know that your take on any issue connected with poker is always going to be worth hearing. That is why I am particularly disappointed that you have made a public pronouncement on a private matter about which - as you readily accept - you do not have all the facts, and have only heard from one side. I quote from your blog: 'You played for days and days, continued to raise the stake unprovoked, set the rules for the game...' The first two words are spot on, but everything beyond that tells me that your information is not exactly from the horse's mouth, and I don't think we should be playing Chinese Whispers with people's reputations. I do not know your buddy very well but he has always struck me in the past as a good guy. I do not doubt that he feels aggrieved, and I would not dream of making a public judgment about a dispute he is involved in; Particularly when I have never discussed it with him. Notwithstanding the pressure to find regular content for your blog, it is a shame that you do not accord my buddy the same courtesy. Ram is a man of infinite patience and very few words. For the past few months he has maintained a dignified public silence whilst seeing his character attacked and misinformation spread. I know he does not feel under any obligation to respond to the flamers and gossips, and I don't suppose he will thank me for writing this, but I feel it's time I made one very simple observation. Of all the people I have known both inside and outside poker, none is more fundamentally honest and thoroughly honorable than Ram Vaswani. No one who has spent any time with him on or off the poker table would ever seriously question that. This is not to imply otherwise about any other party, it is simply that I know this about Ram to the extent that I would stake my life on it. Even if I did not know the facts of the case I would therefore be quite certain that he would have to have a very good reason, and certainly to be utterly convinced in his own mind, if he were to dispute a gambling debt. I know that this matter is already in the public domain and that you are only repeating in good faith what you have been told. Perhaps by way of balance though, you might feel it would be appropriate to publish this letter. All the very best. Barny Boatman

[Kwest4chipz 0]

Why is everyone speaking through friends? I graduated high school 20 years ago and I'm having some serious flashbacks. Bottom line is the parties concerned need to use a thing called a PHONE, (new technology), man up and deal.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Just saw this posted over at their forums... http://www.thehendonmob.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13816I have just spoken to Ram who is not best pleased about the innacurate accounts of the dispute with Phil Ivey which has been doing the rounds and have now appeard on Daniel Negranau's blog. Ram has asked us to reproduce this letter here and will be giving his own full version of events at a later date. Daniel. I have just read your blog in which you complain of your friend's treatment and the hands of a couple of “hustlers”. I understand that you have jumbled the letters in their names, although as a chronic dyslexic this makes absolutely no difference to me. As is your intention, the whole world of course knows exactly who you are talking about. I feel that I know you fairly well, both through our meetings across the poker table and through your public persona. I often cite you as one of the people in poker I most admire and I know that your take on any issue connected with poker is always going to be worth hearing. That is why I am particularly disappointed that you have made a public pronouncement on a private matter about which - as you readily accept - you do not have all the facts, and have only heard from one side. I quote from your blog: 'You played for days and days, continued to raise the stake unprovoked, set the rules for the game...' The first two words are spot on, but everything beyond that tells me that your information is not exactly from the horse's mouth, and I don't think we should be playing Chinese Whispers with people's reputations. I do not know your buddy very well but he has always struck me in the past as a good guy. I do not doubt that he feels aggrieved, and I would not dream of making a public judgment about a dispute he is involved in; Particularly when I have never discussed it with him. Notwithstanding the pressure to find regular content for your blog, it is a shame that you do not accord my buddy the same courtesy. Ram is a man of infinite patience and very few words. For the past few months he has maintained a dignified public silence whilst seeing his character attacked and misinformation spread. I know he does not feel under any obligation to respond to the flamers and gossips, and I don't suppose he will thank me for writing this, but I feel it's time I made one very simple observation. Of all the people I have known both inside and outside poker, none is more fundamentally honest and thoroughly honorable than Ram Vaswani. No one who has spent any time with him on or off the poker table would ever seriously question that. This is not to imply otherwise about any other party, it is simply that I know this about Ram to the extent that I would stake my life on it. Even if I did not know the facts of the case I would therefore be quite certain that he would have to have a very good reason, and certainly to be utterly convinced in his own mind, if he were to dispute a gambling debt. I know that this matter is already in the public domain and that you are only repeating in good faith what you have been told. Perhaps by way of balance though, you might feel it would be appropriate to publish this letter. All the very best. Barny Boatman

So.It sounds to me like they are not disputing the key point: they lost the cash and don't want to pay up.

[showstopper24 0]

So.It sounds to me like they are not disputing the key point: they lost the cash and don't want to pay up.

I picked this up also. It just seemed like he was mad at Daniel for making it public, he didn't really dispute anything.

[iowahawk09 0]

Might as well just start sending people notes like we did back in high schoolWill you forgive me and not make me pay my debt?Check one:YesNoMaybe

[Kwest4chipz 0]

lmao, Iowa.

[Guero 0]

Might as well just start sending people notes like we did back in high schoolWill you forgive me and not make me pay my debt?Check one:YesNoMaybe

LOLOL

[vbnautilus 48]

Seems like the dispute boils down to 2 issues:1) Did Ivey lie about his handicap? 2) If Ivey lied about his handicap is he still entitled to the money? Not much we can say about #1, but #2 we can certainly discuss...I'm not involved myself in these kind of bets, but it seems to me if the terms of the bet are found to be fraudulent thatwould nullify the arrangement.

[iowahawk09 0]

I don't know, but I would have to be very rich to ever bet this kind of money on my shaky golf game

[Kwest4chipz 0]

I used to play golf with my business partner, as of 2003 I still owe him something like 46 million...I hope i never win the lottery cuz than i might have to pay. It went something like this....I'd lose one bet for 50k and then it would be double or nothing, til we got to 46 million and i realized, I have no golf game....I'm not paying either.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

I picked this up also. It just seemed like he was mad at Daniel for making it public, he didn't really dispute anything.

I replied privately to that letter in an e-mail. I was not the one who made this public, and I would not have if Goodwin didn't first write a blog calling Ivey out as a hustler. When that happened, this ceased to be a private matter. One side of the story was made public by Goodwin, and now the other side of the story has also been made public.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

Seems like the dispute boils down to 2 issues:1) Did Ivey lie about his handicap? 2) If Ivey lied about his handicap is he still entitled to the money? Not much we can say about #1, but #2 we can certainly discuss...I'm not involved myself in these kind of bets, but it seems to me if the terms of the bet are found to be fraudulent thatwould nullify the arrangement.

1) No.2. Yes.

[iowahawk09 0]

lesson to be learned here children, do your homework before you gamble

[ariston 0]

1) No.2. Yes.

Danny I have emailed both you and kirk about this but will say a few things on here. You have gotten Phils side of things just like I have Ram and Marcs side of things . Nobody knows exactly the conversation that was had apart from those involved but as marcs is the only version on public record that is the one we should beleive. If Phil wants to call Ram and Marc liers by saying he didnt claim to get 10 shots off eric then fair enough let him say it on a forum instead of you to get involved. Cheating at golf is the same as cheating at poker and anybody who cheats with his handicap (and is later found out to have done so) shouldnt be paid. If he played cards with a marked deck would it be fine? Branding one of the UKs best known players and gamblers a welcher without having heard his side of things is very shortsighted of you and will make you look bad to many who look up to you. As for everyone defending Ivey as being the salt of the earth never hurt a fly type I dont know how many of you know the story of the guy who taught him to play chinese poker many moons ago. This guy won a good few quid off him. Ivey went away and improved and now takes great player saying how he didnt just win his money back he totally broke the guy who now drives a taxi. He didnt just want to win a few quid he wanted to destroy him completely and is quite proud of the fact he did. Again this is only heresay as who knows whats true in poker tales etc but i really think they should be left to sort this and you should keep out of it.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Seems like the dispute boils down to 2 issues:1) Did Ivey lie about his handicap? 2) If Ivey lied about his handicap is he still entitled to the money? Not much we can say about #1, but #2 we can certainly discuss...I'm not involved myself in these kind of bets, but it seems to me if the terms of the bet are found to be fraudulent thatwould nullify the arrangement.

Did you read this?This was writen by one of the guys who lost. He doesn't accuse Phil of lying about his handicap (how many amateurs know their handicap?). They asked how many strokes he gave to E-Dog. Not the same thing. And if Phil hadn't played with E since he'd improved.......well you get the point.Plus they quit and refused to pay BEFORE hearing that now Phil doesn't get 10 strokes from E anymore.Bottom line, even after reading the other side of the story, I don't have any sympathy.The following is from:http://www.blondepoker.com/index.php?q=node/7225Since the Aussie Millions a few weeks back, rumours have been circulating that, in the bluntest of terms, Phil Ivey hustled fellow poker players Marc Goodwin, Ram Vaswani (left) and Erik Sagstrom out of over one million dollars.The most infamous splashing of such gossip came in the form of a thread on an American forum, and commenced with the following line: Heard the following the other day from a friend of Ram Vaswani, who plays golf regularly with Phil Ivey in Vegas. The post then went on to claim that Phil Ivey lied about his handicap, feigning weakness when in fact (according to the source), he had 'spent the last few months practising around 3 hours a day and getting the best coaching.'Finally, the account suggested that the three infuriated players lost the round emphatically and ended up owing a combined total of 1.8 million, Ram Vaswani owing the most due to being the only player who completed the course.Of course, what ensued was the usual hogwash of who paid up, who is still friends with who and, most crucially, did Phil Ivey indeed deceive his firends.Well, no longer do we need to listen to the tomfoolery of forum guesswork, as today one of the individuals involved responded directly to the thread, subsequently posting their own account of what happened.So, with that, I present to you Marc 'MrCool' Goodwin's version of events... "On the basis that the original post begins self-indulgent, semi-successful, boastful etc, don't ask me how but I had an idea how his post may go, in poker terms he gave his hand away. If he had read I was the cause of climate control and poverty in the Third World I guess he would have just jumped in and slagged me off. Sorry I digress, but I feel better!! It is difficult to know where to start as the original post is so factually incorrect: I last saw Eric Sagstrom (below-left) in Vegas in April 2006, so he never walked off after 9 holes and he may deserve an apology on the basis that "he had no intention of paying" for a game he never attended.At the start of the game, we said to Phil that as we haven't played for 3 months and he must have improved we need to adjust the handicaps. We could not agree and we were doomed to no game until Ram said, "Does Eric Lingdren still give you 10 shots" to which Phil replied "yes"!! On that piece of information we had a game. As we always ***** about handicaps throughout the match, Phil suggested that we agree to play 18 holes with no adjustment and then adjust for the next series of games. We agreed. I had 7 pars and a birdie back nine (even though i stormed off after 7 holes in a rage) and we lost 8 holes as they were 9 under for the last 7 holes. As anyone who plays golf would know, when playing better ball doubles it is very hard to win by 3 or more holes, they finished 14 up lol. We have had the better of Phil in golf games over the last year but our biggest victory was 3 up. We had been spanked but arranged a new revised game later that week. We went out together that night (even though we have severed ties and have all this supposed ill feeling). Later on we met Eric who informed us that he gives Phil NO SHOTS. We therefore felt aggrieved and Ram asked Phil for an apology. As to whether we pay or not will be discussed in Vegas in April when we next meet. Let me put this question to you all. If I had turned up with a pro golfer, said we get 10 shots off Erik, before playing and winning, should he pay even a penny? If you think that he has been hustled not cheated and it's just unlucky then you must be of the opinion that we should pay. In saying that, if when we meet and we cant agree we will probably pay and sever ties. To gain an edge, yes, to win at all costs, no thank you. I will let you all know the outcome this April."

[Big Mike Watters 0]

I'm a DN(and Ivey) fan...but I don't see how, IF he lied about his golf handicap, he could possibly expect to get paid on a bet that had weight based on his word. We're speaking theoretically here, as none of us were there.

[iowahawk09 0]

lol, who are all these people crawling out of the woodwork saying they know all these pros involved?

[DanielNegreanu 141]

Danny I have emailed both you and kirk about this but will say a few things on here. You have gotten Phils side of things just like I have Ram and Marcs side of things . Nobody knows exactly the conversation that was had apart from those involved but as marcs is the only version on public record that is the one we should beleive. If Phil wants to call Ram and Marc liers by saying he didnt claim to get 10 shots off eric then fair enough let him say it on a forum instead of you to get involved. Cheating at golf is the same as cheating at poker and anybody who cheats with his handicap (and is later found out to have done so) shouldnt be paid. If he played cards with a marked deck would it be fine? Branding one of the UKs best known players and gamblers a welcher without having heard his side of things is very shortsighted of you and will make you look bad to many who look up to you. As for everyone defending Ivey as being the salt of the earth never hurt a fly type I dont know how many of you know the story of the guy who taught him to play chinese poker many moons ago. This guy won a good few quid off him. Ivey went away and improved and now takes great player saying how he didnt just win his money back he totally broke the guy who now drives a taxi. He didnt just want to win a few quid he wanted to destroy him completely and is quite proud of the fact he did. Again this is only heresay as who knows whats true in poker tales etc but i really think they should be left to sort this and you should keep out of it.

I didn't make this public, Marc did. If he hadn't, I never would have posted that blog, What we had was one side of the story posted on the internet, but the other side of the story wasn't posted. You make one claim that I find odd, you say that, since Marc's is the only version on public record that is the one we should believe. Huh? Why? That simply makes zero sense at all. So because Marc trashed Phil in his blog with his side of the story, we should simply believe him because Phil Ivey, who doesn't even have a blog, didn't post his side of the story? I can understand losing more money than you can handle and it causing you to freak oout a little bit, but this whole thing is one of the most ridiculous stories I've heard in a long time. Did they, or did they not, play 72 holes over two days? Did they, or did they not, ask to up the stakes throughout play? Did Phil not pay when he lost money to them? If they would have quit after 9 holes, or cried foul then, and stopped playing, that would be understandable. However, when you continue to play 36 holes for two straight days you lose all credibility when it comes to crying foul. I mean really, are we to believe that these guys thought they had the worst of the match but continued to play, and not only play, but raised the stakes?

[ariston 0]

lol, who are all these people crawling out of the woodwork saying they know all these pros involved?

probably english players who know the men involved and arent just random blog readers/worshippers. For somebody who wasnt involved I am suprised that DN has got involved in this although it will get more traffic to his site. And before anyone suggests it I aint a DN hater and have ready all his blogs and articles over the years ( I was even supposed to be playing a basketball challenge with him in Vegas last year that was sorted at the aussie millions but it never came off). DN why don't you take the time to contact Ram or Marc about this and get their side of things? Its hardly like they are hard to get hold of.

[iowahawk09 0]

Lol, DN why do you even waste your time arguing with these people on your forums. They never ever concede a point or drop it

[xmykro 0]

If those welching bastards AGREED to the bet and rules before the match - They have to pay. Simple as that. The fact that they CONTINUED to play is enough evidence that they are welchers.

[Kwest4chipz 0]

I'm wondering if i'm sposed to take offense to that blog reader/worshipper comment.

[DCJ001 0]

Just saw this posted over at their forums... http://www.thehendonmob.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13816

This Hendon Mob link was already posted at the below FCP thread:http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...t&p=1820480

[iowahawk09 0]

Yeah I'm an American player and a apparent RANDOM blog worshiper/reader.Sorry next time ill respect you and your 13 posts on our random site

[ariston 0]

I didn't make this public, Marc did. If he hadn't, I never would have posted that blog, What we had was one side of the story posted on the internet, but the other side of the story wasn't posted. You make one claim that I find odd, you say that, since Marc's is the only version on public record that is the one we should believe. Huh? Why? That simply makes zero sense at all. So because Marc trashed Phil in his blog with his side of the story, we should simply believe him because Phil Ivey, who doesn't even have a blog, didn't post his side of the story? I can understand losing more money than you can handle and it causing you to freak oout a little bit, but this whole thing is one of the most ridiculous stories I've heard in a long time. Did they, or did they not, play 72 holes over two days? Did they, or did they not, ask to up the stakes throughout play? Did Phil not pay when he lost money to them? If they would have quit after 9 holes, or cried foul then, and stopped playing, that would be understandable. However, when you continue to play 36 holes for two straight days you lose all credibility when it comes to crying foul. I mean really, are we to believe that these guys thought they had the worst of the match but continued to play, and not only play, but raised the stakes?

wasnt in marcs blog he took time to answer on a forum similar to this one when people who had heard the strory 5th hand started making accusations. This is the only thing that has actually been written on the subject by any of those involved and there are some huge threads on this topic a couple of months ago. To drag this up a couple of months down the line when they are supposed to be sorting it out when they are at the Bellagio face to face in a few weeks is bad taste. I thought you were above this sort of thing Danny and I personally think Phil is manipulating you to be his mouthpeice before there meet in a short while. It may be good to get all the boys on Phils side before they come over but do you honestly think this is going to help the matter be resolved?