In 7 words, which is very unusual for me:
Gambling is a vice, golf is not.

Trying to compare an industry that facilitates the deaths of millions of people worldwide to one that ruins tens of thousands of lives (through personal choice, mind you) is ridiculous. I guess if Cate was accepting an award for the best female CEO of a company that produces alcohol, she would have no right to use that as a platform to bring attention to a pervasive problem in our society as it relates to that industry.

edit: And you were just bashing someone for taking a moral high ground, lol.

I think you know that was not how I was making the analogy, but yes on the alcohol industry example I agree.

The word I could easily use about a lot of this is hypocrisy and I would apply this also to the current fad of super wealthy poker pros giving lots of money to charity and shouting from the tree tops that they have made the donations, and structuring it in such a way so that they can also grab a lot of the credit for other people's donations who they have subtly brainwashed into making a donation because a successful poker parasite suggested it to them, rather than the person making a donation of their own volition.

This makes the people who are donating to these charity drives look a bit stupid and mentally inadequate IMO, if they are either unable to or not of the mind to make a donation to charity without a poker player suggesting it to them........... oh but sorry, poker players are paragons of virtue, so anything they say should be viewed as if it came out of the mouth of Mahatma Gandhi himself.

I often wonder if for these super successful, super wealthy poker players if this is a conscious or maybe sub-conscious penance on their part. If not, then it is a form of egomania IMO.

Genuine people who give money to charity don't do it to massage their own ego, they do it because they think it's the right thing to do and most of the time they do it quietly or anonymously and without fanfare.

The REG charity I would not include in my standpoint above as I think they are doing what they do reasonably quietly and without much fanfare. And yes I know that some of the charity drives then did donate part of what they raised to REG, so that is a paradox for my argument that I'll just have to live with!

I understood the point you were trying to convey with that analogy, but that doesn't really make it any less absurd.

It's really quite presumptuous to assert that even a majority of poker pros are only doing this to serve their own self-interests. Are there big name poker pros who do this just because they're narcissists and want people to view them favorably? Absolutely. But I'm certain that there are just as many, if not more, players who do this because they actually have a desire to help others, and they're able to do so with the wealth they've amassed. In addition, regardless of their intent, these pros are bringing a greater awareness of noble causes to a wider audience.

This notion you have of all poker players being immoral parasites is clouding your ability to assess this objectively.

Finally, something I absolutely agree with.

edit: Most people who do give to charity, though, aren't able to use notoriety to bring about a greater awareness of these charities.

I don't think i've ever made a decision based on a nose twitch. A bloodhound can detect whether a player is bluffing or has it with close to 100% accuracy based on the odors the player is emitting.

There are a lot more players in this spot than you think.

I am not saying that all professional poker players are immoral parasites, I am saying that the *activity* itself of playing poker professionally is parasitical and yes could well be judged as immoral when done to the degree of aggressively trying to achieve as much monetary gain as possible at the expense of others.

My guess is that poker players as people are probably no more or no less immoral than the wider population, it is the activity of gaining one's income through poker that I am scrutinising, in relation to players then taking the moral high ground on other issues, particularly when they do so in a very overt way, such as making thousands of politically based Tweets, or when a player is setting out to elevate themselves on to a pedestal of virtue by using their money as a tool to achieve this, i.e. the "I will match your donations" charity drives.

lol at pulling the sexism card. Everyone calls bs on dan bilzerion but his statements are more ridiculous. Really it doesn't matter if she made that or not. Even mentioning the number is classless and opening oneself to trouble although I could see how she could be pressured into revealing that in an interview. I was always taught don't talk about your financials cause people will either think you're a liar, be jealous, and/or look down on you. Unless you're running for president... then you should disclose your tax statements to the public

There's simply no way to win when you're breaking the mold for what close minded groups expect for your potential based on your demographics. This reminds me of the "birther" movement.

First black president and a vocal minority cannot seem to comprehend that he's a real American. They insist on seeing a birth certificate. And then even upon seeing it, still have their doubts and claim it's fake. But of course that wasn't racist and didn't have anything to do with him being black.


First female poker pro to have left a lucrative career to pursue poker and a vocal minority insists on proof of her claim (which she was coaxed into admitting in the first place). And then upon multiple people doing 5 minutes of internet research and proving she's litigated large cases in higher courts, still insist on more proof. But of course that's not sexist nor does it have anything to do with her being a woman.

Now, admittedly Cate's situation is much less aggregious than the birther movement; but it has similar flavors and is born out of similar prejudices "This person has achieved more than I can comprehend, (because I've underestimated this person's potential) so I'm just going to call BS instead of offering congratulations or taking their word for it, or even just keeping my consipiracy theory to myself"

let the flaming begin. I'm ready to be called a snowflake and a SJW, plus a few other gems.

This is a lot more clear.

I guess then you take more issue with the fact that she can come across like she's only doing these things to to feel morally superior to people that don't agree with her, and portray herself as such?

I honestly see no issue with playing poker as a profession and supporting and speaking publicly about causes you believe in. I think there's way to do that nobly and respectfully, and to not largely serve one's own self-interest. I do concede that it's certainly possible that this isn't totally the case with Cate.

obv hyperbole on my part friend. I think you can get the picture

Lawyers are overpaid. A friend of mine who retired 20 years ago from a large London law firm and who was in an administrative role, still gets invited to the Christmas party every year with all travel and expenses paid and receives a £500 Christmas bonus, even though the bonus was never part of her contract after she left or part of her retirement package.

This is an indicator of how much these law firms are over charging their clients, when they can afford to toss around money like it is confetti. There are several hundred people at their Christmas party each year, most of whom don't even work there any more!

So I can well believe that lawyers get paid huge amounts of money, although I *might* not go far as saying that their business activity is parasitical! Lol

No way I believe she gets a £500 bonus without seeing some proof.

Shes an annoying tournament player with recent success and way too much unearned confidence because of that. Being a girl just displays this in a spotlight a lot brighter than the 100s of guys that are in the exact same spot as her get.

This politicizing at every opp is getting really really old.

A lot of professionals who attend college for 8+ years and pursue limited entry graduate degrees get paid a lot. I mean I'm not even from a major metropolitan area and where I'm at Dentists and surgeons are frequently making $250k- $400k a year and I'm not even talking about the most famous ones or the most high end practices.

No I don't think all lawyers make $500k a year nor do I think all dentists make $500k per year....but if a dentist told me he or she made $500k a year I wouldn't doubt it for a second. Even if he or she was exxagerating they'd probably just be quoting their best ever year rounded up to the nearest whole number....which is a bit misleading but doesn't materially change the claim.

(this next part is not directed at SageDonkey) and to pre-empt any arguments that "But she left which suggests......" I worked for a dentist who I know for a fact made at least $350k a year (likely more) for the 3 years I worked there and he did quit practice and went to live on a boat and then later went on to teach for very modest wages. people get burned out....and the more money you've had a chance to squirrel away the more feasible leaving becomes.

I do totally get that someone whose had enough of the rat race and has been disciplined and saved a lot of their earnings thinks you know what you only live once so go and do something else that makes you happier and that you enjoy.

However, I think Cate Hall has chosen quite a low-rent thing by choosing poker. And it will always be low-rent regardless of how successful she is in it.

Nope, I really don't. Poker is a game of information. It makes no logical sense that a professional poker player wouldn't use all the information that is readily available to him/her. For instance, if I'm in a close spot but live tells boost my confidence level that the player is bluffing above 90%, then of course i'm going to use that information to make my decision. Live tells are one of many reasons that attainable winrates are so astronomically high in live poker (your average noob rec player is an even bigger tellbox than Doug).

you are clearly illiterate. Here is what I meant

lmk if those words are simple enough for you dallas folk

You should write a book.

Isn't CH going on Doug Polk podcast soon, maybe Doug Polk can mention that Perkins offered $5,000 to Cate Hall (according to someone itt) that she can not provide enough evidence that she had a potential salary earn of~ 500k/yr.


Gregorio: Any thoughts on trying to get in on this action? if this was as cut and dry as its being made out to be. just takes a few messages and folllow up and everyone will shut up about it. except, would you admit, there is a percent chance, however small, lets call it x%, that she never really was in a position to achieve the 500k/yr. is it ever possible you could have egg on your face and be wrong? or maybe you know something others do not.

Just watched a lot of the match...I'm a 2/5 player and I'd love to play against Mike D. Jesus, he's bad. And he is obviously a pathetic human being. My god, what an ungracious loser.

You know how I can tell you are not a golfer. Lol.

Gambling is not a vice.

Definition of vice - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/vice

Which words are you referring to?

Most of the losing recreational players I know would destroy him, along with random players in my 1/2 home game who have never played online. It was amazing watching him humiliate himself with his terrible play and -105 was an absolute steal in a deepstacked bo3 even if Cate is a lower mid tier reg or whatever as some people have claimed she has to be at least -150 in a bo3 vs Denatle with that structure given how bad he is

He would probably have a better chance open shoving every single hand.