WSOP raffle update #26

[krazyace5]

[ QUOTE ]
Would it be possible to make a brief staking contract that everyone agrees to before signing up? I think in the original thread, every participant who didn't win received (1/#participants)*(50% winnings). Something that could hold up legally.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt many people would participate with these terms.

[TruePoker CEO]

Personally, I think this is a mistake, keep it a simple raffle prize, not a joint venture.

[ttleistdci]

[ QUOTE ]
Would it be possible to make a brief staking contract that everyone agrees to before signing up? I think in the original thread, every participant who didn't win received (1/#participants)*(50% winnings). Something that could hold up legally.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought someone determined that gambling contracts or agreements like this one cannot be legally binding?

[Tuco]

David.

Thanks for your interest! I dont even remember if I have an account here or not, but I will certainly try your site again as thanks for helping us.

As far as the conditions go, I would offer these suggestions.

Conditions 1 through 3 seem fine to me. Condition 4 should be changed to if there are more than 100 entrants, then we should award a seat for each 100 entrants, with the remainder eligible for a cash draw. So that if there are 264 entrants then there is a draw among the first 100 registrants for a seat, then the next hundred for a seat, then a draw for $6400 for the last 64 that register.

We will pump this up. I'll advertise on my radio show and website and I would expect other 2+2 er's will do their best to advertise as well.

FYI I won't be entering as I have a seat already, unless maybe Truepoker would let the winner use the 10K in other WSOP events.

How does all this sound?

Tuco.

[Shoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would it be possible to make a brief staking contract that everyone agrees to before signing up? I think in the original thread, every participant who didn't win received (1/#participants)*(50% winnings). Something that could hold up legally.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought someone determined that gambling contracts or agreements like this one cannot be legally binding?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think, a contract that involves a LEGAL poker tournament such as the WSOP would be legally binding, however, it would be extremely difficult and time-consuming to enforce (if someone broke their word).

As for the other poster, who suggested that if there were 264 entrants, that an additional $6400 would get raffled off to another contestant, I think it would be better if this money would be split amongst the 2 winners in this scenario to cover airfare, hotel, etc.... maybe cap it at maximum $12,000 per winner or something. For example, if there were 164 entrants, the winner would get WSOP + $2,000 to cover expenses. The remaining $4,400 could either go to 2nd place or split amongst the next 5 winners or something.

[Tuco]

bumpage for David!

Tuco.

[danobee]

IMO True should add soemthing to the total $$ amount in the raffle.

If this goes through they're going to not only get some "free" pub,but some new sign-ups and no doubt some "new" rake.

[krazyace5]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO True should add soemthing to the total $$ amount in the raffle.

If this goes through they're going to not only get some "free" pub,but some new sign-ups and no doubt some "new" rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or they could say why bother and not even do it.

[o0mr_bill0o]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO True should add soemthing to the total $$ amount in the raffle.

If this goes through they're going to not only get some "free" pub,but some new sign-ups and no doubt some "new" rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, and in return they facilitate the raffle... no need for them to contribute anything.

[BISCO]

just making an "i told you so" post before someone runs off with the cash, or someone gets caught rigging the raffle.