So many walls of text

For those who are dantale fans, do you condone his unethical behavior? He's been involved in several shady spots.

here he scammed HEK: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/19...-tl-dr-372382/

here he colluded in a satty:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...hlight=dentale

Or here where he called a string raise when the player clearly didn't but says nothing when he makes a set and the same player makes a questionable check:

So basically u are a roid raging loud mouth douchebag as well? Is this what u want us to tell? Congtrats!

Yeah, yeah, yeah, mute me or block me then but stop moaning. Also burn all books, magazines and anything else that is over 200 words while you are there.

Just remember you guys are making these two people famous

Hardly. Poker is very, very, VERY, small time in the general scheme of fame and notoriety in the world. It is a game of cards. If there was no money at stake it would be as important as a speck of dust on a planet a trillion light years away.

I'm not sure how you can't be on the Dentale bandwagon. Dude is everything that is right in poker..correction, he is the only thing that is right in poker. Dude is a a good guy, 100% honest, totally upfront, and is fun to be around. If you don't like this guy then you need to take a long hard look in the mirror.

He doesn't get nearly the coverage he deserves and hopefully that changes soon. Poker Night in America should make him the face of the brand and I'd like to see WSOP cover him as well..if he doesn't go deep at least have him say "Shuffle Up and Deal" and bring him in for some final table commentary.

He has refuted some/all of this. I do agree that he appears to be sailing on the wrong side of the line in some of these situations, or he is involved in some grey areas, such as folding in the BB for 0.5 of a blind more which is against etiquette and convention, but is NOT against the rules.

But you have to counterbalance that in his interview he said "yeah I folded deliberately, it's my right to do so." The admission says something about his character and points to him having some good principles, even if they are not principles that fit absolutely everyone else's.

What I feel we have to consider are two things. 1) That poker is a combative thing and that in combat 100% of the people do not follow "The Geneva Convention" 100% of the time. This applies to all players, me, you and everyone else, not just to Mike Dentale.

The very nature of playing poker for money is unethical, win/attain as much money as possible by influencing someone to make bad decisions that will hurt them financially. This pretty much sounds like an exact definition of fraud.

Add into the mix that many, by no means all, "respected" poker players, in the main on line, have been caught and/or admitted to cheating on a wide scale with sometimes very substantial amounts of money involved.

If confession boxes existed for poker players you'd have to cut down the remainder of the Amazonian rain forest to build enough of them.

There is a fallacy lurking there, Sage.

is anyone actually reading sagedonkeys posts ?

That one was blessedly short.

Certainly not the ignorant. Just mute me, simple. I will let forum moderators dictate the rules to me, not you thank you.

nah ill just keep on scrolling past your massive walls of text

Not to rehash an older thread but you have your facts wrong. I don't want to derail so won't go deeper into it other than to suggest reading the facts in the other thread.

Listened to the entire podcast. I'm unconvinced. He seemed like a person who constantly uses his past to rationalize his unsociable behavior. He also throws out very non-specific things that sound like rationalizations but are devoid of specifics that could be verified in any meaningful way. I'm not calling him a liar, I'm saying that his manner of storytelling seems intentionally vague. And to anyone who listened to the entire thing, don't you hear the age old, "some of my best friends are ______ , so I couldn't possibly be __________" or some variant of it, a little too often?

I am fairly certain he straight out said I folded deliberately but it was not collusion, I just wanted to do it, admitting that yes the person was his friend and he wanted to protect her tournament life.

I am sure he is not perfect, nobody is, but it was refreshing to hear someone admit to some of their faults and even apologise for some things. Most people would never do this. I agree that here and there some detail was missing but he was driving a car whilst being interviewed so perhaps it wasn't the easiest task to formulate precise answers to the exact questions.

I don't condone the use of some words but at the same time his point is valid that intra certain cultures or ethnic groups people have terms that are normal/acceptable within their own group but totally unacceptable outside of it. He did admit/acknowledge that he was wrong to use some of these terms in certain settings.

The bottom line is that many, many people assumed he was a certain type of person based on some Tweets and him within poker rooms. The podcast showed that it is much more complex than that when judging a person or really knowing who they are.

He didn't have to call any additional chips in the big blind. His friend had less than his big blind. So he cannot fold there. He must just turn over his cards and let the board run out.
At the time, he said he did not notice Lily was all in for less. Now he says he folded deliberately. Definitely a contradiction.

Disclaimer: I am from South Jersey.

infamous would be the word

The big question is who the **** would I root for if it was Dentale vs. sagedonkey?

Pre-flop is a string raise. He pulls chips from his stack, puts some of them in front of his stack. With some chips in his hand, he reaches out to grab his blind, then goes back to grab the few chips he left in front of his stack, then he tosses the lot in. Definite string bet. Assuming he does not verbalize his raise amount, he has two correct betting options:
- with no chips in hand, pull back your blind, in one motion put out a bet
- with all raising chips in hand, throw them in with your blind

He did neither of these. If he did not reach back to add on, his initial forward motion would not have been questioned, he would not have been forced to put in the chips he left behind. Hence, his action is ambiguous and he should not have been permitted to reach back and add extra chips. Then on the turn, I'm calling that a check. Unintentional, careless, mindless, whatever, he tapped the table, that is a check. His intention is irrelevant and it is not up to a dealer to interpret which taps are checks and which are not.

This MUST be reposted:

http://www.captiongenerator.com/2587...-Cate-Hall-Ato

Dentale seems like your typical lifting roid bro who for some reason likes to play poker and thinks he's a pro. Probably a good guy but not much going on upstairs.

Cate thinks she's actually good. LOL.

these threads always degenerate the same way- 5 randos with nothing to say end up postbombing the **** out of it and making it completely unreadable

Well, at least you're contributing good ****.

^^^^^ oh snap!!! ^^^^^


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+rep_lol and Olaff == HU4ROLLZ?

(See how it starts?)