Big Ethical Debate Regarding Bellagio Bet

well, i don't know the people involved in this bet, but it seems to have become more than expected. if i were to give you advice on this matter, id say you should call the bet off if your relationship with this person matters to you. if not, don't stoop to his level of campaigning for public opinion by printing out ou responses on here. its a dumb move in the first place, so don't follow suit. if the guy welches on this bet, don't ever bet with him again. i assume that the money you are betting is pretty inconsequential for both of you.

Howard,


I find this proposition bet interesting. Were there any provisions made when the bet was agreed on that would force the bet to be voided?


Not to be funny or anything, but I'd hate to be the guy that had breast implants, and then have someone welch on the bet after it was done. I've heard some of the strangest stories that have happened to be true. But, now since this story is public, it will make me think twice about side bets with anyone.


I would like to know the real story and outcome.


Anyway, I was playing a satellite a few years ago with a guy named Johnny Walker, and he told me Jim Beam was at the other table. I thought it was a joke.


Good Luck


Mark

Could he be privy to inside information? He just married one of the higher ups in that poker room. I guess it is possible LOL that he could have been privy to inside info. Plus Doug Dalton loves him because they juice Doug Dalton evertime a "whale" comes in and dumps a few milion. Remember the guy 6 months ago when they were playing 20-40k and 30-60k limit holdem? Doug always gets a piece.

Howard,


1. "Jim" did not print out the posts, they were printed out by someone (David I think, I did not ask who), and were given to him. He never reads these forums. I asked him what Two+Two was on the net and he had no clue what I was talking about.


2. I really don't see how you can fairly have this arbitrated, because most arbitrators would laugh at something as silly s this argument over a bet by word of mouth. If you would have put it in writing, then you might have a case.


3. You are blaming this thread on "Jim". He did not give permission to David to post here. David asked him if he cared if he posted, and "Jim" said no. I do not think you have to give David permission to post anything. He pretty much posts his opinion regardless.


4. No need to comment, we both agree.


5. The only reason "Jim" wants no bet is becasue the stipulations of the tournament prize has changed. There is no other reason. He was not winning or losing the bet at that time.


6. Obviously when you made it simple, you made room for something like this to happen. You ask who would be a judge of something like this then you say you want arbitration? Well, what is it? Make up your mind already.


7. Technically you lose. Pay up. Since the bet was simple and clear, there should be no argument for disputing this, tight? At least thats what you claim.


8. "Jim" has one simple arguemnt. The tournament entry has changed. I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE YOU STOP MAKING UP STUFF TO MAKE "JIM" LOOK BAD.


9. BTW, I hope you donate the money to charity when 75 people show up, and "Jim" refuses to take your money.

For those of you who will beleive anything printed, you can stop believing that "Jim" printed out the posts from here.


A third party printed them out and gave them to "Jim". "Jim" never reads this forum, and never has posted here.


Last time I was as his house, his computer was so dusty I wrote "WASH ME" on the computer monitor.

CardNut,


I have made nothing up. And "Jim" doesn't need any help making himself look bad on this issue.


The merits of who is right or wrong are no longer of consequence. The only issue is this. I am willing to arbitrate even though I think I am right. "Jim" is not willing to arbitrate. Arbitration is the ONLY solution in situations like this. And if "Jim" is unwilling to arbitrate, I can conclude that I misjudged his character all these years.


This has nothing to do with the money, it is now a matter of principal. You can disagree with me on whether the bet should stand, but saying that arbitration is not the answer, goes against all that I know to be ethical in gambling.


One more thing, you should be more careful about whom you accuse of being a shot taker. A charge I do not take lightly. I have taken no shot. I simply want something that approximates justice here.


Howard Lederer

it looks like your only recourse is to bad mouth 'jim' to his peer group.


the funny thing is that against civil people that this doesnt come naturally to, jim is pretty much on a freeroll.


brad

Howard, if you read my first post regarding this matter, I suggested as one possible solution to this an adjustment in the lay price (kinda like sportsbooks do when they have pitching changes), so I don't want you to think that I did not think that arbitration was not a possible solution, even though my opinion was to cancel the bet.


No matter what is said or discussed here, the only thing that really matters is what you and "Jim" ultimately decide upon. If it happens that "Jim" does back out of this bet entirely, all I ask is that you do not let this one situation sway you from your opinion of him and his character, as we had talked about before. I probably wouldn't like it if I were in your spot, but I wouldn't risk losing a friend over it.


This will be my last post regarding this matter, as I really do not want to be caught in the middle of it. There have been many things said and not said that I do not know the full extent of, so as far as I am concerned, this is the last of it for me.


I wish you the best in whatever happens with the bet, I apologize to you if I upset you in any way on here with my opinions, and I promise that you will never hear another word about it from me here or on any another thread.