A question: The fundamentals of backing

[TheAmp]

Some players find their fish on the poker tables. Some find them here on the poker forum...

Don't you have ANY shame?

[GauchoFish]

Gaucho,

Unfortunately, you're running into a group that strongly favors Irie here. And I think most are being blind to what seems pretty obvious to an outside observer. Without any terms and conditions otherwise (and it sounds like there may not be any), then let's look at Irie's original backing post:


Irieguy's Original Post

From that post,

Quote:
The good news is that you don't pay if you don't win, so it's a freeroll.



How can there be any debate as to what the offer is here? If Gaucho loses the roll, it's over. It was a freeroll.

Whatever he does afterward is irrelevant. What if won back $ playing $50 Party HoldEm SNGs with his own roll? What if he won back $ playing $10 Omaha SNGs on Paradise? Hmmm, what if he won back $ at the dog track? IT DOESN'T MATTER. If it was a loan, then it would get paid back, but I don't see how anyone can mistake a freeroll for a loan.

[GauchoFish]

come on man, you're smarter than that. What is supposed to be assumed from this? What is the 'freeroll' he is referring to then? The last few SNG's of a profitable players career? This will be the last harah of a person, who by the qualifying standards, must be a 40% ITM player with over 300 SNG's logged. This person is going to 'freeroll' a few SNG's and if they lose, quit forever?

I find it very interesting that EVERY SINGLE poster whose name I recognize as having read QUITE OFTEN agree's with Irie, and all of the people who agree with me are people who I don't recognize all that well. Seems you 'lifers' are a tight knit group.

Raptor, SuitedSixes, Atticus, Scuba Check, Stuipid Sucker...can anybody come up with a list of six names who post more on this forum? Seems comraderie, familiarity and the lack of (forgive me but its late and i'm quite tilted over this) a productive life outside of this forum, overrides all sense of logic and reason.





WD

[david050173]

[ QUOTE ]
Some players find their fish on the poker tables. Some find them here on the poker forum...

Don't you have ANY shame?

[/ QUOTE ]

Shame has nothing to do with this. The backing agreement should have clearly specified what happens if the roll is lost. Personally I would have expected it to act like a hedge fund than a loan (ie the investor takes all the risk but only gets half the money. The manager gets half the money for thier time investment). There are definitely some significant downsides to that type of arrangement. This individual agreeement can obviously be different. Specific discussion is pretty meaningless unless some post the specific part of thier agreement.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
come on man, you're smarter than that. What is supposed to be assumed from this? What is the 'freeroll' he is referring to then? The last few SNG's of a profitable players career? This will be the last harah of a person, who by the qualifying standards, must be a 40% ITM player with over 300 SNG's logged. This person is going to 'freeroll' a few SNG's and if they lose, quit forever?

I find it very interesting that EVERY SINGLE poster whose name I recognize as having read QUITE OFTEN agree's with Irie, and all of the people who agree with me are people who I don't recognize all that well. Seems you 'lifers' are a tight knit group.

Raptor, SuitedSixes, Atticus, Scuba Check, Stuipid Sucker...can anybody come up with a list of six names who post more on this forum? Seems comraderie, familiarity and the lack of (forgive me but its late and i'm quite tilted over this) a productive life outside of this forum, overrides all sense of logic and reason.





WD

[/ QUOTE ]

This is quite frankly the most disgraceful thing you have written in this thread (and that IS saying something). You appear to ask an honest question about a potentially confusing situation, and then get answers you don't want to hear and decide to attack members of this forum who do nothing but contribute postives.

You should be ashamed of the way you have gone about this and the good people you have put in the middle and critized along the way.

Once this is resolved (If it ever is) I hope you never post on, or visit 2+2 again, and especially this forum.

You have just crossed lines that are unexceptable in my books with your latest accusations and comments about good members of this forum whom you barely know.

[TheAmp]

1) The legal aspect - I remember from my law school days that when the contract does not state exactly how to resolve a specific situation, the implied intentions of the sides are used to fill up the contract's missing parts . I think the "gambling code" should be used here. Even though this code has never been formally expressed, you can get a good idea about it in this connection from the replies so far.

2) The moral aspect - This is where the shame comes in...

[Hood]

[ QUOTE ]
come on man, you're smarter than that. What is supposed to be assumed from this? What is the 'freeroll' he is referring to then? The last few SNG's of a profitable players career? This will be the last harah of a person, who by the qualifying standards, must be a 40% ITM player with over 300 SNG's logged. This person is going to 'freeroll' a few SNG's and if they lose, quit forever?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, without trying to rehash what everyone else has already said, I'd like to contribute:

* Why did you post this thread in the first place? What was your aim? People have disagreed with you, so you get on the defensive. Your mind is already made up. The title of this thread is "A Question:". I think the answer has been pretty clear.

* Yes, I can kind-of see your point of view. I think you are honest in that you actually thought this 'backing' was a 'freeroll', and from that perspective, in theory you shouldn't have to pay it back. However, why on earth did you take the backing in the first place if you're such a successful player? The offer clearly wasn't targetting at people like you. That was dumb.

* If you're such a godamn great player, just pay back the money. You clearly make such a SNG killing that the few bucks make little difference to you. YOU misunderstood the terms. Do the right think and pay it back (which brings me to point #2... WHY did you do this in the first place?)

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
You have just crossed lines that are unexceptable in my books with your latest accusations and comments about good members of this forum whom you barely know.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess when people accused him of simply pocketing the money on not even playing no line was crossed there.

Paul

[Mr_J]

"he backing agreement should have clearly specified what happens if the roll is lost."

Didn't need to be. I remember the original post stated that the deal only ends when the backee buys Irie out. If the backee read that post or Irie told him this then he owes Irie his stack and 50% of the profits.

"Personally I would have expected it to act like a hedge fund than a loan"

The arrangement is obviously a loan. The 50% of profits is interest until the backee pays back the loan.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You are 100% correct that he would be well-advised to use a written contract. Were I his attorney, I would have insisted upon it. He apparently deemed you an honorable enough person to make the contract unnecessary. So far, your position on this matter leads me to believe he misjudged you, and that's a shame.

[/ QUOTE ]

atticus, im no lawyer (but my father is, and biz law was one of my fav. classes) but didn't irie and op enter into a contract due to the fact that there was an agreement, consideration, capacity, and legality? im sure that the emails exchanged would be more than enough to prove in court that a contract existed between the two parties.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they have a legally binding oral contract at the very least. It's just easier to prove the terms of an explicitly written contract.