Dutch Boyd posting at 2+2

dux · #1 08-20-2003, 04:21 AM

User 'Dutch Boyd' posted in depth about a hand he played against Moneymaker in the WSOP. Is this the same guy who ran away with alot of people's money, some from this forum? If so, weird he's posting here.

Terry · #2 08-20-2003, 12:59 PM

Maybe he's getting ready to pay us the money he owes us -- or maybe he thinks we have forgotten about it.

Rushmore · #3 08-20-2003, 01:01 PM

OK. I'll bite.

As a relative newbie, I don't know what you're talking about.

But it sure is intiguing.

DO tell!

Aceshigh7 · #4 08-20-2003, 01:41 PM

He posts on rec.gambling.poker too. He has responded to comments about the casino he started in the past that went under. He seems like a nice guy but of course if I was one of the people that lost money Id be pissed at him too. He got alot of exposure during the WSOP and this probably angered those people who lost their money even more.

lunchmeat · #5 08-20-2003, 06:18 PM

If Phil Ivey is the Tiger Woods of poker, then Dutch Boyd should be called the Ken Lay of poker.

While I didn't lose any $ at pokerspot, I do find it interesting that one can refuse to pay people back by claiming poverty and then buy in to a 10K entry fee tournament.

dux · #6 08-21-2003, 12:53 AM

I arrived at 2+2 after the pokerspot debacle, but when Dutch Boyd made it to the final stages of the 2003 WSOP, the issue arose again. It seems Boyd was the owner of a poker room which happened to go bust. The players with money left on the site did not get paid. It seems Terry was one of them which I didn't know.

Terry · #7 08-21-2003, 02:14 AM

Yes, dux, I was one of them, but I didn't lose nearly as much as someone who's cats I pity when he sees that post.

sam h · #8 08-21-2003, 04:37 AM

I'm not familiar with how the Pokerspot collapse went down. Boyd may have deceived, manipulated, and lied to players with money at the site. I don't know, but would hardly be surprised.

I do know that one reason why people incorporate their businesses is to protect themselves personally from liability and creditors if the business fails. This is an integral part of spurring innovation and entreprenuerialism in capitalist societies. If leading one failed business left you under a pile of debt that you could never escape, why would anybody take the risk? I can't speak to Mr. Boyd's conduct or ethics. But I think it's naive to expect him personally to pay back Pokerspot's creditors.

In the business media, one often finds feel-good stories about entrepreneurs who finally make it after a series of failed business ventures. Do you think these people then pay back all of the jilted creditors from their previous enterprises?

sam h · #9 08-21-2003, 04:44 AM

Dutch Boyd may well be the Ken Lay of poker. I don't know enough details about how he ran his business.

But let me ask you a question? If you started a business, it went under, and you had a bunch of unpayed creditors to your failed business with very large claims, would you actually pay them back personally even though you were under absolutely no legal obligation to do so?

I probably wouldn't.

Glenn · #10 08-21-2003, 04:48 AM

"In the business media, one often finds feel-good stories about entrepreneurs who finally make it after a series of failed business ventures. Do you think these people then pay back all of the jilted creditors from their previous enterprises?"

These people were not investors or creditors. They were people with funds on deposit. Funds on deposit should not be touched. It was his choice to do this, and thus he should be liable for his own idiocy. He took in deposits knowing that he couldn't pay people, and straight out stole their money towards the end.