WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS DEAL?? (semi-long)

[stranger1234]

Hey I'm a member here but I created this new screen name to protect my identity. I have qualified for the WSOP already (not on party poker) but all my friends play on party poker, which have just started their qualifiers today. They want to go play in the main event but Party has decided to make all their satellites at 12:15am eastern, which doesn't work for my friends because they have day jobs. Since I was looking foward to playing party satellites (and winning many of them) I decided to propose this deal. Let me know what you think:

WSOP Contract

I, Joe Shmoe, will offer my help to the undersigned, to qualify for the World Series of Poker’s Main Event. The prize includes a $10,000 buy-in to the main event, 10 nights in a luxury hotel ($2000 value) and $1500 cash. The stipulations are as follows:

1.) The undersigned will deposit $500 into his Party Poker account and allow full use of the account to Joe Shmoe, until the WSOP qualifiers have stopped being offered by Party Poker.

2.) The $500 deposit will only be used to attempt to qualify for the WSOP-ME.

3.) If the initial deposit is depleted in the attempt of qualification, Joe Shmoe will assume no responsibility for the refunding of the initial $500 deposit. Joe Shmoe and the undersigned will then have no future responsibilities to each other for future qualification attempts stipulated by this contract.

4.) Upon qualification, the prize will be distributed as follows:
a.) The undersigned will receive the $10,000 buy-in and the 10 night hotel package.
b.) The $1500 cash will be divided, $500 will be withdrawn to the bank account of the undersigned, as re-payment of the initial deposit. $1000 will remain in the undersigned’s Party poker account.

5.) Upon qualification for the WSOP event, the undersigned agrees to play in the event under the terms that Party Poker has stipulated. Any cash prizes won during the event will be divided, 50% to Joe Shmoe and 50% to the undersigned

6.) The remaining $1000 is agreed to be used for future attempts to play in WSOP qualifiers by Joe Shmoe, in which a second qualification for the undersigned would result in a $13,500 cash prize deposited in the undersigned’s Party poker account. The $1000, along with any other consolation cash prizes won along the way, are the sole ownership of Joe Shmoe and can be transferred to his account at any time.

7.) If a second qualification occurs, the prize will be divided:
a. $12,500 will be transferred to the Party poker account of Joe Shmoe.
b. $1,000 will then be withdrawn to the bank account of the undersigned.

8.) After the second qualification, Joe Shmoe reserves the right to play under the undersigned’s account, with his own money, in future WSOP qualifiers. All prizes won, and/or debts occurred, after the second qualification will be the sole possession/responsibility of Joe Shmoe.


Joe Shmoe ___________________________________

(Print Name)___________________________ (Sign) ____________________________

[Roman]

Seems like a good deal for you...

[stranger1234]

The idea is, because I'm confident in my abilities, that I will win at least two seats, so my friend will get his $500 back, plus the extra $1000 from the second win, and a free seat in the event, where he keeps half his winnings, 10 free nights in las vegas, all without having to put in any effort or late nights and only $500 risk.

[Roman]

I think you are overestimating your ability...

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are overestimating your ability...

[/ QUOTE ]

Same. There are some good posters here, but I can't believe anyone is good enough to expect to win multiple WSOP seats from a $500 bankroll.

[Jax_Grinder]

What state are you in? While, admittedly, I am not familiar with the gambling laws of all 50 states, I am confident that will have zero chance of enforcing this contract via litigation in the event that the other party does not abide by its terms.

This would be a contract for an illegal purpose. Where a contract contains a clause that is illegal, the court will not to enforce the illegal terms, as a contract cannot give validity to an otherwise illegal act, there being no legal remedy for that which is itself illegal.

In other words, write out the terms on a napkin and make it clear in no uncertain terms that if he does not abide by them, you will be breaking both his legs.

[stranger1234]

$500 bankroll = 50 sub qualifiers = 25 wins into single table qual. = about 8 victories (assuming the freeroll for 2nd place). I feel like with 8 tries at the $300+28 tourny i will have a victory. Then I get $100 more cash for the 2nd one.

[dogmeat]

Well, you have to have confidence, I suppose. Good luck.

I don't see this as a bad deal for your friend, but assuming another win for you in those eight shots.......sounds a bit tough to me. Talk to David Ross -

Just out of curiosity, why did you have to "protect your identity?"

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[stranger1234]

On a side note, I was approached by my friend to do this for him, he told me to think of a deal, I in no way need to spend 4 hours a day working to get him a seat, I can make my own money, the only way I saw it to be worthwhile is if I could win the second seat, and/or get half his action. The last thing I want to is waste my time getting him a seat and get nothing out of the deal. But at the same time it would be cool to have him go with me.

[stranger1234]

For one thing, I don't necessarily need a "contract" with my friend. But who knows what can happen if he were to win 5 million. I protected my identity because I'mm not really sure if its legal to play for other people to win them seats.

Plus the fact that in order to win these satellites, there may be some form of collusion necessary, you are fooling your self if you don't think peple have multiple names, have other people playing for them etc. on party and there is no chip dumping going on. You have a much better chance with 2 entries into 1 qualifier than playing both entries separately.

[Jax_Grinder]

So, in addition to contemplating an illegal contract, you're a cheater? No wonder you sought to protect your identity.

[Nottom]

The deal itself seems perfectly fair if your actually ability is even remotely close to as good as you think it is. I have no clue who you are, but am willing to accept that you are a very good player and would likely be happy to enter into a similar deal if I really wanted someone else to qualify for the WSOP for me. That said, I certainly wouldn't expect to have a seat when all is said and done no matter who was doing the playing.

[ThreeBeers]

Not for nothing but anyone who will cheat to win is a tool. Furthermore, the "Contract" will not help you if you win since you will not be able to enforce it. Jax Grinder is correct is correct with regards to the illegality of the Contract. However, I do see why the two of you do not trust one another since you are willing to cheat.

ThreeBeers

[stranger1234]

I apologize for my post before, I did not type my thoughts correctly, I did not mean to say that I will be cheating in any way to qualify, although i re-read my post and I saw how people interpreted it, I meant that for other people it may be necessary, and it does happen, I was just trying to defend my right to play for someone else under a different screen name, which may be considered collusion, but not as bad as the other ways i described. I'm not sure how the contract would be illegal, On line gaming is not illegal, nor is playing in a poker tournament. Please clarify what specifically is illegal about the contract.

[Jax_Grinder]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure how the contract would be illegal, On line gaming is not illegal, nor is playing in a poker tournament. Please clarify what specifically is illegal about the contract.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Yes, online gaming is illegal in every jurisdiction that i am aware of. There is insufficient space here, and insufficient time on my part, to "prove" this to you, but you can either take my word or not. Suffice it to say that the absence of a specifically worded prohibition against online gambling is not dispositive of the issue.

2. Playing in a poker tournament, at least in Florida, has been found by the state Attorney General, to be in violation of Florida's criminal statutes (except where otherwise allowed by statute - i.e., dog track poker rooms). There may be other states where, under certain defined circumstances, where poker tournaments without a house fee are legal, but, again, I do not know where you reside.

3. The contract is illegal because its purpose is to obtain and allocate profits from an illegal activity. If you insist on holding to your belief that online gambling is not illegal, then this won't matter to you.

Rare is the principle of law that is unassailable, but I would certainly not like to be the one who tests this theory with significant money at stake only to have the judge luaghingly dismiss my claim.

[ThreeBeers]

Jax Grinder is correct. On a side note, the "Contract" could be used in a criminal proceeding agasint the two parties since the "Contract" would qualify under the "statement against interest" hearsay exception.

ThreeBeers

[Tim H]

it is illegal to run a online gaming site in the states.
it *currently* is not illegal to wager online (federal statutes)

[Jax_Grinder]

I do this all day at work, so this will be my last word on the subject.

True, there is no federal statute that prohibits gaming activity. This is why gambling cruise ships can travel outside state jurisdictional waters (3 miles) and host gaming activities. However, there is no prohibition in federal law BECAUSE regulation of gaming is a STATE issue (as are nearly all criminal matters). Go read your state statute on gambling and you will see why online gaming is illegal in the jurisdiction from which the wager is placed.

If you are suggesting that there is a federal statute that expressly permits gaming, along with the necessary provision that the federal government has deemed it appropriate to trump states' rights on this issue, then please provide the citation.

Finally, if you violate the criminal laws of your state by placing a wager, and that wager is transmitted across state lines, then you have, in fact, violated federal wire laws (which have their basis in the regulation of telecommunications - an issue which has been preempted by the federal government).

If you still disagree, good luck with that.

Cheers,

H4MM3R

[adanthar]

Playing armchair lawyer here is not necessary since this is a $500 contract and nobody is going to sue over 500 bucks. (Furthermore, if the friend needs somebody else to qualify him into the WSOP that badly, he's dead money and will never cash in this event to start with.)

However, as one of the better (but by no means the best) players in the SNG forum, if you think you have a 'good' chance of getting one seat from $500 and two from $1500, you're...extremely overoptimistic is the way I'd put it. I think there's a decent chance that, with very good play and some luck, you can get *3* seats into the 328's from the first 500 bucks, but qualifying from there is going to take a lot more than 3 tries on average.

If you get 2 seats off $1500, consider yourself spectacularly lucky.

[Jax_Grinder]

Simply for the purpose of protecting my bonafides, I will tell you there is nothing "armchair" about my lawyering...

Insofar as the poster went through the exercise of drafting a contract of sorts (and seemingly put some work into it), it is certainly apropos to his request to advise him that the document is meaningless.

[stranger1234]

Thanks for the posts guys!!

[usmfan]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing armchair lawyer here is not necessary since this is a $500 contract and nobody is going to sue over 500 bucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But wait and see what happens is the friend places in the money.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
Go read your state statute on gambling and you will see why online gaming is illegal in the jurisdiction from which the wager is placed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Jaxgrinder, if you are saying that in every state it is illegal to play online poker, then you are wrong. In New York, for example, it is not illegal to play online poker.

[oneeye13]

seems like if you are that good you are wasting your time that could be better spent making you money

[Jax_Grinder]

Sigh.....

If you are going to make such a declarative statement, please provide some form of citation or credential. Gaming of any sort is specfically prohibited by Article 1, Section 9 of the New York State Constitution (execept as expressly permitted by that secion). And unless there has been some dramatic change in the law, can you explain to me how the AG was able to go after PayPal for "facilitating illegal gaming transactions" (which resulted in a settlement in '02)?

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are going to make such a declarative statement, please provide some form of citation or credential.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2004/mar/15/516529004.html

"While it is illegal to run an Internet gambling operation in the United States, state laws vary as to whether the bettor is committing a crime. New York, for instance, prohibits operation or promotion of an unlicensed casino, but it does not make the act of placing a bet a crime, said Kenneth M. Dreifach, chief of the Internet bureau for the New York attorney general, Eliot Spitzer."

[M.B.E.]

Jaxgrinder, although you may be a lawyer, your credibility suffers because you are posting advice based on what you think you know rather than actual legal research.

Your statement that a gambling contract is not enforceable by the courts in any state is correct, I believe, but not for the reason you gave (illegality). Traditionally, gambling contracts are not enforceable at common law because to do so would be against public policy. That does not mean such contracts are illegal (although they are illegal in some, but not all, states).

Instead of posting legal information off the top of your head, why not defer to an expert in gaming law, I. Nelson Rose: Is It a Crime to Play Poker On-line? (http://www.gamblingandthelaw.com/columns/159_internet_poker_long.htm)

Also have a look at this thread from the 2+2 archives: Is online poker illegal in any state? (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=469714&page=&view=&sb=5&o =&fpart=all&vc=1)

[randommuppet]

even in the uk where there is certainly no questioning the legality of online gaming any gambling contract is unenforceable by law

even a lottery syndicate where one person makes off with the cash are unable to sue as it is viewed as being frivilous, trivial and a waste of an important bodies time (the courts in this instance)

but then were not as litigious as you lot..........

im interested as to why you think you have a "right" to play on party on someones elses handle when this is expressely forbidden by them? (please correct me if im wrong)

or am i being terribly naive here and everyone is doing it?

although as party allow you to change your handle every 6 months what possible benefit does this have apart from collusion (admittedely of a fairly minor nature)?

[M.B.E.]

Here is a detailed discussion of gambling law in New York state:

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=401540

Among other things, this article reaches the following conclusion:

"As directed, the State legislature “has legislated in the field of
gambling and by the Penal Law, delineated the conduct to be prohibited
throughout the state.” Wilkerson, 342 N.Y.S.2d at 942.
Significantly, “[t]he only gambling activities which are prohibited
are promoting gambling (PL §§ 225.05 and 225.10), possession of
gambling records (PL §§ 225.15 and 225.20) and possession of a
gambling device (PL § 225.30).” People v. Melton, 578 N.Y.S.2d 377,
378 (N.Y. Sup. 1991). Therefore, playing or engaging in its play are
not explicitly prohibited by New York penal laws."

[M.B.E.]

One other site I should have mentioned, with lots of information and articles on U.S. gaming law, by lawyers much more knowledgeable about the topic than those who have posted in this thread:

http://www.gambling-law-us.com/

[Jax_Grinder]

Since you have seen fit to challenge not only my conclusion, but my credibility, I feel compelled to respond.

First, do not mistake your ability to quickly retrieve topical information online as a substitute for the ability to digest and understand that information and apply it to the issue at hand. As you will recall, my original post addressed two issues: 1) whether or not the contract would be enforceable based on 2) my conclusion that internet gaming (in this context, wagering on the outcome of a hand of poker) is likely illegal. Perhaps I should have inserted the phrase most likely in front of the term illegal in my original post, but I wrongly assuemd that anyone reading the post would derive that caveat from the context of my post. You will also note that I expressly stated that I was not familiar with the laws of all 50 states (though I was then, and remain now, confident that my position is the majority rule).

That said, the following quote leads me to question your reading comprehension skills:

[ QUOTE ]
Your statement that a gambling contract is not enforceable by the courts in any state is correct, I believe, but not for the reason you gave (illegality). Traditionally, gambling contracts are not enforceable at common law because to do so would be against public policy. That does not mean such contracts are illegal (although they are illegal in some, but not all, states).

[/ QUOTE ]

I simply did not say that the making of the contract itself was an illegal act. I said then, and will repeat now, that the contract is unenforceable because it seeks to impose legal obligations upon the parties arising out of an underlying illegal purpose (i.e., internet gaming). The public policy you speak of is the policy against enforcing contracts with an illegal purpose. In your reply, you agree to what is the proper conclusion, but wrongly imply that my initial analysis was faulty (and as evidence of that you simply restate my original position - thats just silly).

Finally, if you take the time to read even a portion of Prof. Rose's writings on this topic, you will see that his conclusion re: internet poker (and gaming in general) is "Noone is sure." He repeatedly references the absence of governing law on these issues and, not surprisingly, concludes that any lawyer offering advise to a client as to criminality of internet gaming (from the players perspective - this post never has been about hosting) must warn the client that such activities may certainly be found illegal under application of current, general gambiling statutes.

Money quote from your link:

[ QUOTE ]
The only way to know for sure is to check the laws of your state. I do not know of any state which has passed a law stating that players can play poker online. The best you can hope to find is that the state simply has never made this form of gambling [expressly] illegal.

[/ QUOTE ]

(emphasis and edit are mine). I could go on and on about this. Suffice it to say that the next time you poke your nose into a thread for no other reason that to question another posters conclusions or credibility, you better come with better ammunition. As they say, you made the mistake of bringing a knife to a gunfight.

PS: I have not bothered to reread my original post, but I recall that I may have used the term "illegal contract" and that may have confused you. "Illegal contract" is a term of art, and if you were knowledgeable on the subject, you would know that illegal refers to the intent of the parties to the contract rather than the act of making the contract.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
One other site I should have mentioned, with lots of information and articles on U.S. gaming law, by lawyers much more knowledgeable about the topic than those who have posted in this thread:

http://www.gambling-law-us.com/

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting site. I've been reading up on the law in my state, and it's full of things like this:

[ QUOTE ]
(b) Prohibited.- A person may not conduct or operate with pari-mutuel betting, or with any similar form of betting, wagering, or gambling:
(1) the game, contest, or event commonly known as "jai alai"; or
(2) any other game, contest, or event.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish I could make stuff like that up.

[Jdanz]

i worked breifly for the NYPD, this is not true in practice, i don't any of the statuettes, but i know we've busted people for playing in NYC poker clubs, and for playing numbers.

-JDanz

[M.B.E.]

Jaxgrinder, sorry if I bruised your ego. I never disagreed with your statement that the OP's contract is unenforceable; in fact I expressly agreed with you on that point.

In response to a statement that online gaming is not illegal, you posted (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Number=2058538) "Yes, online gaming is illegal in every jurisdiction that i am aware of." You also referred to gambling online as "an illegal activity".

Later you said (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Number=2058632), "Go read your state statute on gambling and you will see why online gaming is illegal in the jurisdiction from which the wager is placed."

I didn't want anyone to be misled by your statements, because the reality is that only about half the states make it a crime to make bets in some circumstances (according to the article by I. Nelson Rose that I linked to).

Later, you challenged me on my statement that playing online poker is not illegal in New York state.

I would have expected an apology from you after I backed up my statements, but instead in your most recent post you do your best to back away from your earlier statements without appearing to do so, all the while maintaining the arrogant, condescending tone.

Your explanation about the public policy rule in contract law is also inaccurate (you suggest it is inherently linked to the contract being for an illegal purpose), but I don't propose to discuss that point with you in detail on a poker forum.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
The idea is, because I'm confident in my abilities, that I will win at least two seats

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. So you are expecting to win at least 2 $13,500 seats from a $500 stake. Good lord. Where do I sign up to stake you?

You are f'in delusional.

[Jax_Grinder]

In re-reading my post, I will admit that there were comments that were unnecessary as they related to the substance of the discussion. That was not constructive, I hate it when others do that, and I will work to avoid doing so in the future.

That said, I believe that we simply disagree on the issue, but perhaps more importantly, that disagreement may arise from approaching such a complex issue from different angles from which there are bound to be perceived differences (whether real or not). This is especially true given the space and time limitations inherent in posting messages online.

I suppose until someone decides to start prosecuting online user activity (beyond child pornography) this is all a moot point anyway.

Cheers