wtf...is this legal? - Page 5

TimsterToo · #41 05-27-2005, 10:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I can understand why the last two guys in a multi-table tournament might make a deal, but the whole concept of making a deal in a heads up match is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should search for the thread between Daniel Negreanu and David Sklansky on the forums.

Daniel Negreanu is challenging Sklansky to a heads up match and Sklansky won't unless he gets better odds. So it might not be that absurd!

Shillx · #42 05-27-2005, 11:16 PM

Someone asked me to make a side bet a couple weeks ago for 10.00 at a stars HU game also.

Yeah this is pretty disturbing if this kind of stuff is awarded. When you play on the .02/.04 HU tables, you get all kinds of people saying "will you give me a dollar I just lost my bankroll". I wonder if they award those people with your money as well. It would explain why so many people are out there doing it...

Brad

jstewsmole · #43 05-27-2005, 11:51 PM

Thats bull [censored] id be pissed and id get my monye the [censored] out of there. Thats really scary that they could do that [censored]. Is this a joke?

LinusKS · #44 05-28-2005, 01:21 AM

Yes.

Daniel offered 10:9, and David countered with 5:4.

The match was never played, to my knowledge, but if there was an agreement, I'm sure both parties would have honored it.

I can't imagine one of them saying "yes," and then going "PSYCH!"

People offer odds in gambling all the time. There's nothing unusual about it.

It sounds like PS did exactly the right thing.

Otherwise, angle-shooters could agree to give odds to get someone to play, and rip the other player off.

Which it sounds like was what the OP was trying to do.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can understand why the last two guys in a multi-table tournament might make a deal, but the whole concept of making a deal in a heads up match is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should search for the thread between Daniel Negreanu and David Sklansky on the forums.

Daniel Negreanu is challenging Sklansky to a heads up match and Sklansky won't unless he gets better odds. So it might not be that absurd!

[/ QUOTE ]

Freudian · #45 05-28-2005, 03:53 AM

You won the tourney and you learned (in a very cheap way) that Pokerstars will hold you to any deal made at the table.

It is a bit silly but imagine the problems Stars would have with winners saying "but I didn't mean it" after agreeing to a deal at the tables.

MicroBob · #46 05-28-2005, 05:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe you should be careful about BSing other people. This other guy probably thought that you were legitimately accepting a chop/save. If you don't want to, just say no!

I think PS' decision is correct. It protects the players that actually do want to chop. Otherwise, someone could say "yes" to a chop, and then not hold up to their end of the bargin.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah...i think so too but I still am on the fence on this one.

how the hell is Stars supposed to know he was being sarcastic?
yes means yes in a deal.

if it didn't mean yes then one player could always just say, "I said Yeah Sure. I was being sarcastic because I was obviously receiving a bad deal. How can you guys not see that I was being sarcastic when he made that offer?"

How can you enforce the deal otherwise if you always give the players 'outs'?

However - I think the wording "CAN" you transfer me $10.50 is worth exploring perhaps. But I still think it counts.
But it isn't quite the same as a more clearly stated, "Lets make a deal where the winner gives the loser $10.50, okay??"

Also - I too wonder what would happen if I was playing a $10 heads-up match and some guy said, "Lets make a deal?? Loser gives the winner $1,000!!"
and I said, "Yeah!! Sure! Sounds good!!"

As for the 10.50 deal....conceiveably the winner could just feel bad for the loser and give him some money.
Maybe this would happen in cases where one player times-out for awhile and the winner agrees to give him some money back...
or when there is an obvious mis-click and the other player feels bad for him (lets say he called an all-in with the nut-low leaving him with just 1BB and then persuades his opponent that it was a misclick).

There ARE situations where the winner agrees to give the loser some money.

Should Stars have to figure out when "yes" means "yes" as opposed to when "yes" actually means "no"?

I'm not sure.

Because of the $1,000 transfer in the $10SNG example I provided I can honestly say that they probably DO need to make that kind of distinction some of the time in obvious cases.

This bit about, "I was just being sarcastic when I said Yes" does not appear to be obvious enough to me to negate the deal that he entered into.

flawless_victory · #47 05-28-2005, 07:56 AM

if there was an angleshooters hall of fame, i would nominate this guy... so sick. lol.

augie00 · #48 05-28-2005, 12:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe this would happen in cases where one player times-out for awhile and the winner agrees to give him some money back...
or when there is an obvious mis-click and the other player feels bad for him (lets say he called an all-in with the nut-low leaving him with just 1BB and then persuades his opponent that it was a misclick).

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah dude, I wouldn't buy that. He's just setting up an image play by calling all-in with the nut low.

Matt R. · #49 05-28-2005, 02:19 PM

I honestly can't believe the number of posters in this thread that are claiming a fair deal was made and the poster should uphold his "agreement". It is just ludicrous. If you can't see the difference between the transaction that took place in the chat box versus a clear deal with precise terms (e.g. the sklansky/negreanu deal mentioned earlier), then I just don't know what to say. I would think the absurdity of this is obvious, but apparently it isn't. Look, if the other player said something very clear to the likes of, "I would like to make a deal where the WINNER of the match transfers the LOSER $10.50, is this acceptable?" and the poster said yes, then sure an argument can be made that he legitimately owes the money (and even in this case, given that the Stars RULES say that chat can't be used to uphold the agreement, it is iffy). This is quite a bit different than some random player asking his opponent "Hey d00d, mind givin' me $10.50 if I loze the match?!? Thx a bunch br0!"

Do NOT stop harrassing Stars on this matter. This is just stupid. Even if $10.50 was virtually nothing to me, the principle of the matter would prevent me from giving up.

WSOPwinner10 · #50 05-28-2005, 02:56 PM

This money should be yours. If they want to get legal on you, just get legal on them.

"Glassworks If I lose can you transfer me $10.50? 2 5/26/2005 6:58:21 PM
Colombo218 ya 1 5/26/2005 6:58:29 PM"

Colombo218, as far as I am concerned you admitted to being able to tranfer money if you win a match. He said "If I lose can you transfer me $10.50?" You CAN, but your not going to. You have the ABILITY, but you didn't want to.

That and the fact that the deal is absurd, who would make that deal? What an angle shooter...