Doyle's a scumbag? - Page 4

MCS · #31 10-06-2005, 12:52 AM

Thanks. So Barry's official position is that D+C are not cheaters.

Barry talks a lot about creating good gambling environments for fish.

flair1239 · #32 10-06-2005, 01:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If you think it's improbable that people would try to cheat while "being watched" in a casino, look at the stock market. The SEC & Company "watches" the stock market a lot more closely than anyone watches poker games. And even Martha Stewart tried to cheat the stock market.

In fact, there are no doubt some people trying to cheat both at poker and at the stock market. It's just the way some people are.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a bit slimy.

I don't know Doyle Brunson, and don't really care what he does or what he has done. Nor do I really care what any player does as long as I am not affected.

But for a person of your status, to throw around such thinly veiled insinuations, without any proof to back it up...borders on slander.

This is kind of beneath you.

MCS · #33 10-06-2005, 02:04 AM

I didn't take it as a sling at Doyle so much as a sling at Mid-to-High-Limit_Poker_Players.

flair1239 · #34 10-06-2005, 02:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you think it's improbable that people would try to cheat while "being watched" in a casino, look at the stock market. The SEC & Company "watches" the stock market a lot more closely than anyone watches poker games. And even Martha Stewart tried to cheat the stock market.

In fact, there are no doubt some people trying to cheat both at poker and at the stock market. It's just the way some people are.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a bit slimy.

I don't know Doyle Brunson, and don't really care what he does or what he has done. Nor do I really care what any player does as long as I am not affected.

But for a person of your status, to throw around such thinly veiled insinuations, without any proof to back it up...borders on slander.

This is kind of beneath you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I took the stock market reference as a jab at the rumour that Brunson was part of a group to purchase the WPT from Lyle Bermans group.

No wrong doing has been proved. The reference and implications of cheating were slimy and out of line.

Ed Miller · #35 10-06-2005, 02:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I took the stock market reference as a jab at the rumour that Brunson was part of a group to purchase the WPT from Lyle Bermans group.

No wrong doing has been proved. The reference and implications of cheating were slimy and out of line.

[/ QUOTE ]

You jumped to conclusions. I don't know anything about Doyle Brunson except what is in his books.

flair1239 · #36 10-06-2005, 02:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I took the stock market reference as a jab at the rumour that Brunson was part of a group to purchase the WPT from Lyle Bermans group.

No wrong doing has been proved. The reference and implications of cheating were slimy and out of line.

[/ QUOTE ]

You jumped to conclusions. I don't know anything about Doyle Brunson except what is in his books.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been known to do that. However with the subject matter of the thread and the WPT rumour being relatively recent, it did not really seem to be coincidental. But maybe I am wrong.

Luv2DriveTT · #37 10-06-2005, 04:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I have been known to do that. However with the subject matter of the thread and the WPT rumour being relatively recent, it did not really seem to be coincidental. But maybe I am wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats not a rumor, there was a press conference where Doyle made the announcement of his intentions to work with his undisclosed backers. I saw the video, he looked like a deer in caught in headlights (George Bush).

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Ed Miller · #38 10-06-2005, 04:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I have been known to do that. However with the subject matter of the thread and the WPT rumour being relatively recent, it did not really seem to be coincidental. But maybe I am wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

*shrug*

My comments don't refer to any specific person or situation (except Martha Stewart).

This is a PSA for 2+2'ers who believe everything they hear on TV and in magazines and interviews. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Just because you see someone on TV, and they have the reputation of being an excellent poker player and a standup person doesn't mean that either is true. They might be a bad poker player and a cheater. In fact, in my opinion, the large majority of "TV poker personalities" have been presented with a serious layer of spin. They're not all cheaters by any means, but most of them are not the "poker geniuses" the shows would have you believe they are. Some are hustlers, grifters, cheaters, beggers, and the like. Most of the other ones are just some boob who plays poker ok and is running good.

I read the WPT forum occasionally, and it makes me laugh how so many people parrot what they saw on a poker TV show or read in an interview. They don't question it at all... they buy it hook, line, and sinker. That goes for many things in our society, but I happen to know more about poker players than I do about, say, White House officials, so it's more amusing to me to see the delusion.

Living in ignorance is fine as long as you don't sit at the table with these people. But when you enter their territory... the big games... you'd better have your wits about you.

4_2_it · #39 10-06-2005, 04:46 PM

Ed,

Do you think that we will see an expose by a news organization (Dateline, 60 Minutes, etc.) about a poker player or the poker world in general? I'm not asking you to name names or speculate, just to render an opinion on how easy it would be for a decent investigative reporter to put something juicy together.

(For the record, I am not a reporter nor am I affiliated with any news organization. I am just curious.)

Ed Miller · #40 10-06-2005, 04:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that we will see an expose by a news organization (Dateline, 60 Minutes, etc.) about a poker player or the poker world in general? I'm not asking you to name names or speculate, just to render an opinion on how easy it would be for a decent investigative reporter to put something juicy together.

(For the record, I am not a reporter nor am I affiliated with any news organization. I am just curious.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it would be easy for an investigative reporter to put anything like that together. That's because cheating at poker can be a technical and subtle enterprise, and even if someone "blew the whistle," there's no evidence to present. There are no incriminating memos and no easy way to "catch them in the act." Only way to really "get the story" would be to become an accomplice and get an under cover story.

I have not, and will never, accuse any specific player or group of cheating, nor will I accuse any specific cardroom of harboring cheating. Those accusations are serious business, and I'm not qualified to make them.

But people do cheat at poker sometimes, and you shouldn't assume that just because you are in a large cardroom or major online room that it can't possibly be happening.