Should he pay?

Player one (p1) is seated next to me at the table, when player two (p2) comes up to talk to him. I think almost all of you would recognize p2's name, if not his face.


He says that when p1 had a piece of his action in the 1000-2000 game, he lost $50,000. Therefore, p1 owes him $5000, since he took 10%. Makes sense, right?


But p1 says that was 2 1/2 years ago, and that at that time he asked p2's dad how p1 did in the game. Dad said p2 broke even. So p1 never gave it a second thought. Besides, he is easy to find, since he plays regularly at two or three LA cardrooms, and he is at the WSOP every year. Why hasn't he heard about this before?


P2 adds that he has been on a huge winning streak, winning $3 million in the past 6 months, so he isn't asking to be paid because he needs the money, he just wants what he is owed. He also offers to take a polygraph to prove he actually lost the money.


P2 is very angry that p1 won't pay him immediately rather than think about it. What do you think?

I am just a lowly low limit recreational player but also an attorney. From a purely legal standpoint, p2 should not have to be paid. I understand that the world of poker is different and there are rules and customs that may dictate a different result, but, you just can't come asking for money after 2 1/2 years, especially holding no evidence that you are in fact owed any money.

2 1/2 years ago? and he's seen him since then and NEVER mentioned anything about it?

that's gonna be tough to get that money.

Why would he offer to take a lie detector test? Because there is no good science behind their use, and jest results can be jiggered any way the payee, takee or taker desires. Perhaps P2 thinks P1 isn't too brainy, or world-wise.


Is there any reason to think that P2 hasn't actually lost 3 mil in the last 6 mos?

I didn't say they had seen each other. What I was trying to say is that P1 hasn't been hiding, he's been around and is easy enough to find.

this was one of those (many) posts where i started to write something and then realised that i didnt know what i was talking about so i deleted it.


so now ive typed this. which means id like to hear what someone with real experience in this sort of situation has to say.

He obviously has no integrity and I would not only not pay him, but tell him what a jerk he is. What kind of a person comes up to you 2.5 years after the fact AND winning 3M recently and asks for money. Giving him the extreme benefit of the doubt and assuming he actually did lose the money, he erred in not contacting the backer immediately after booking the loss to collect. At the very least he should have thought the situation over, realized he messed up by allowing so much time to lapse and let it go. The way he handled it, not only does he not have the money, but he has proven himself to be a bonafide ass to even ask for it after informing the guy that he booked three million in six months. Totally classless guy.

A guy is owed 5 thousand... and he doesn't get it for years? A guy has a stake in a big money game... and doesn't know what happened? A guy knows a guy enough to take that kind of a stake and then just lets it slide and they don't see each other for years?


I think there is much more to the story.

Not much more that I know about. I really don't know where I come down on this.


When P2 came up to P1 to talk, P1 didn't want to leave the table to talk. Made some excuse about not wanting to leave the game short. That suggests to me that he knew what was coming. If I were in his position, I would have found out immediatley after the game whether P2 lost or not. Given his rep, I would have expected a payday. But P1 says P2's dad told him P2 broke even.


OTOH, if P1 owes P2, he owes him. I run into people all the time who owe me money, but seem to think that since they never paid, the debt is forgiven. NO WAY. But why did it take P2 so long to track down P1? The only reason I can think of is that $5K is a small amount to P2 and he just figured he'd get it whenever he saw P1.


One last thing. When P2 approached P1, he began by saying something like, You might have heard I broke even in that game, but...


Murkier and murkier.

nm

whenever i hear someone say he is (or finished up) even, then i figure that means he lost.


if he says 'about even' then i figure hes lost real big.


brad

He should pay...


But the other guy is clearly a lowlife expecting to be paid after this period of time.


If it was me... I would pay and never trust the guy again. (and let it be known to everybody what has taken place)


Keith

I am ashamed to admit I do.


Everyone whatever their reputation has my trust until they abuse it.


Then, I would be a fool to trust someone again after they have ripped me off.

I would determine what I think are the chances he's telling me the truth and pay him that much of the $5k. It would be almost totally based on my past experiences with him and perhaps a little bit based on his reputation as I've heard it from others.


In other words, if I thought the chances he was telling the truth were about 50/50, I'd give him $2500 and call it even.


As a poker player, he should understand that.


natedogg

If you conclude that there is a grain of truth to his story, then it is incumbent upon you to pay him every dime.

I just don't believe 1. That the man has any credibility to have waited that long to request payment when the other guy is in poker rooms all the time. 2. He is a slug to preface his request for payment with "I have won over 3 million in the last six months. Either way, he is someone to distance yourself from.


I would never lend nor borrow money in a poker room. It is a lose/lose situation. At best you break even. Realistically you get beat out of your money.

Sounds dodgier than a week old vindaloo to me. If he waits that long to collect his debts, then he is a fool. When you add the things he said, it seems to me like the guy is just full of it. I wouldn't give him a cent, but then again i would never have been part of the action unless i was there watching.