Hi jason

this is just going to drag on and on just set up for boxing matches and get this over with

Lol. What's with that anyway?

Gender reveal nights can be very stressful, especially if the gender is not the one you really, really wanted.

Pretty sure we saw the last of the Merciers in this thread. The post by J Moscow made Natasha look horrible and they are gonna duck and run for cover. No way you can really claim the high ground after something like that.

On another note, seems like there is a market for SAFE SECURE OFC, will a legit site like stars/Party/888 ever step up and host games?

Tonybet currently spread OFC. I agree that you would think that other operators will do soon too, unless they are prohibited by laws or regulations, or possibly it's a game that wipes out bank rolls too quickly so they are not offering it because they love to feel that rake churn around and around between a large amount of players.

Poker players don't want to pay rake if they can avoid it, because in general they are greedy so would prefer to play some games like they are still in the good ol' fashioned Wild West, Yee-Haw.

Greed creates extra risk and playing in any sort of unregulated, unsanctioned gambling game is asking for some kind of trouble sooner or later.

What a mess this turned into for the Merciers. Obviously Fernando and Dr. Jaclyn look bad too but their names were already sullied, so this thread is a big win for them IMO. I thought the Big Time move by Mercier was so tacky, "oh, you're a cheater, I'll play you a thou$and a point live to prove it," just like Doyle telling people to come play him at $1000/$2000 when it was clear the game had passed him by. And then the slow paying and negotiating by Mrs. M prior to the cheating allegations, sheesh! with that revelation Fernando has accomplished his goals, which were to derail the accusation, (unlikely, may be using a hud, probably not cheating) and take down the Merciers a notch (mission accomplished. Gender reveal week be damned.)


As an aside I want to refute that playing poorly live means someone can't be a big winner online, especially if they are playing a game live for the first time. I know that when I play live I sometimes make basic mistakes or have problems executing moves that are automatic online. There have been plenty of times that I have done things live that would make you think this was my first rodeo and not that I have played about 2000 MTT's in the last ten years. Just sayin'.

How is this gender reveal even possible? What if the ultrasound says boy but mini-Merc identifies girl? It is patently unfair to reveal someone's gender without their explicit permission, preferably in writing.

The court must step in here to appoint a guardian ad litem for these poor unfortunate souls before their biological progenitors ruin their lives before they even develop a voice to protest.

I've been thinking more about this thread, and I think the rapid improvement (if there was any) of Jaclyn is not really evidence of anything. Pineapple OFC is not that hard a game. It's not like hold em where you need practice reading people, seeing patters, there are a lot of decisions, etc. Most of your decisions in Pineapple OFC are made when you set up your first 5 cards, and the rest of the game you could often basically autopilot. It would not surprise me at all if someone could get much, much better at this game with a month or so of study and heavy play.

I think it really can't be underestimated how hilarious playing the 'gender reveal night' card was.

Needs more love imo

"A tranny suprise is nothing more than a gender reveal angle shoot."--MadTiger 69:69

Finkle...is EINHORN.
EINHORN IS FINKLE!

This is pretty reasonable in general but doesn't account for rare situations where I think a request for partial rebate or further live play as evidence against cheating is going to be more fair overall.

If a team of experts determine you have 100% hard evidence of cheating and you owe a balance, you shouldn't have to pay. If they determine it's 95% and the opponent isn't willing to give live action, forced partial rebate is most fair. If it's similar to this situation with something imo like 30%, partial rebate or further live play should at least be on the table and seems reasonable to request but not demand.

I don't think her, Jason, Deeb, etc. are just pretending to think he's cheating to help her get out of a debt, so don't think slowpays on past debts are as relevant, this is a different situation where potential cheating is involved.

So you think all debts should be weighted by the potential cheating equity? Who decides the cheating equity? SMH.

No one ever said anything about "pretending to think he's cheating." Jesus Christ.

It's a caveat. Past slow-pays would be way more relevant if we couldn't rule that out. Some people like zima will false accuse of cheating to get out of a debt, so it's worth noting if we can rule that out.

I didn't say all debts, I specifically said rare situations where experts determine there's reasonable suspicion of cheating. You care about the cheating equity because it's relevant to a fair outcome. It isn't always the most fair to either pay the full amount or pay nothing.

Playing OFC on the Pineapple app is totally unregulated so any number of people could be cheating in one form or another at any time, nobody knows.

Therefore either don't play because it's clearly an unsafe game, or play and then pay the amount you lose without any complaint or question.

And for those that are then accused of cheating or of some kind of advantage playing, well tough, because you are playing an unregulated game in the first place so who you gonna call, the police, the gaming commission? "Hello, I'd like to lodge a complaint against a player in respect of this unregulated (and quite possibly illegal) card game that I have been playing against them".

It's a bit like if you play the "find the lady" card game, or the "ball under one of three cups" game in the street that you see gangs of con men offering. The game doesn't have a big sign over it saying regulated by the gaming commission of XYZ, so obviously caveat emptor (buyer beware).

Playing an unlicensed, unregulated, unaudited poker home game is also not a lot different either as you can easily be colluded against or be cheated against in a number of other ways.

I never have done and never would play any of the unregulated games above because they are all either crooked or can be potentially crooked in some way. On line regulated poker is not 100% safe but compared to OFC played over an app, it feels very safe.

So this whole dispute/situation is a crock of $*** really because you have people gambling with each other, not knowing if the other player is cheating in some way and not knowing if the other player will definitely pay if they lose.

I am applying this to everyone playing unregulated OFC, not just those mentioned ITT, because you are bringing all of these problems upon yourselves in the name of greed, or because of an addictive need to gamble.

It's essentially addictive gamblers/card players (yes, some of them successful) not knowing where to draw the line when it comes to playing cards for money or gambling for money.

What next? If they heard of a good "find the lady" game in a street near them that they heard was beatable would they go and play that, would they bet on Russian roulette ("Oh the guy died, but it was a good result for me"), or on cock fighting or dog fighting, if they thought they had an edge?

In the cold light of day unregulated OFC on an app is not so different to the above, save there being no blood involved, or no upside down bread crate in the street to run the "find the lady game" on.

The whole thing is yet another example of the kind of BS that pervades much of the poker world and that tarnishes it.

Playing OFC on an app is a gateway to Russian roulette? Yikes.

This is already underway at Pokerstars. They are working with the idea of going to a spinning wheel for prizes when you reach fantasyland.
Although currently in beta, you can have a sneak peak of what's in store... I have managed to obtain a screenshot of the prize wheel:



To participate in the beta version, use the Star Code: slooF lirpA

Please Note: 'Suspected Cheating > (you lose)' has now been changed to 'Suspected Cheating > Please Advance to Nosebleed Games'
Important Note: I am not taking any sides, everyone involved on both sides is fine and wonderful. This post was entirely inspired by the phrase 'Gender Reveal Night'.

By your logic, we might as well have people serve a 15 year instead of 20 year prison sentence if they figure there is a 75% chance of you having murdered somebody.

The responsibility lies with Natasha/Jason to prove they were cheated. Pay the money, have someone reasonable post an apology and move on.

Yeah I found it:

No I didn't say the % you pay is the same as the % chance you got cheated, and you also have the option of further live play to get more evidence before making a decision.

By your logic, if there's a 99% chance you got cheated that should be treated the same as if there's a 1% chance. Sure that's more convenient but not the best way of getting a fair result.

But there's not a 99% chance. The two of them said they had no proof whatsoever. I have no idea about whether she was cheated or not but having suspicions doesn't absolve you from your responsibilities.