gossip ldo

Maybe because he can't beat 1/2 online?

Yeah he's such a fish, clearly a losing player.

I bet you think you are a better player than Negranu as well.

Del Mar opening day Race 3

#1 Horse Anita Marie paid 25.20 on a $2 bet....nice longshot.

[ ] Phil Ivey

[X] Phil Lvey

Read in a poker magazine that Daniel said something to the effect of- high stakes players lick their chops at the hope of getting HU w/ Dwan. Has Dwan's game deteriorated so much over years/ others moved that much ahead of Dwan?

Sent from my GT-I9305 using 2+2 Forums

jokes...anyways u may want to clarify which daniel, assuming its cates tho

I don't think Dwan was ever really known as a heads up specialist even in his heydey. And even that heydey was mostly built off Guy Laliberte. Not that there's anything wrong with that, business is all about timing and capitalizing on opportunities that come up. I would hustle 5 year olds in Candyland if I could make 8 figures doing it.

wtf was about to take the family to candy land not sure now if there going hustle 5 years olds.

The top ~20, probably more HU players in the world would be very eager to play Dwan HU, yes

yep + every 50nl reg.

Wow. I had no idea.I always thought ivey, dwan and PA were the top 3- maybe not HU.

the comment was from kid poker. Poker player july 2013 edition

Sent from my GT-I9305 using 2+2 Forums

I tend to avoid reading about poker scandals because unless you follow them from the start they're hard to follow, but now I feel like reading some. Obviously most people know about Black Friday and UB/ Absolute, so don't include them.

Preferably ones with cliffs, because most of them have like 100 pages of messy info.

CardRunners was founded in 2005 largely as a response to growth of interest in internet poker due to the Moneymaker Effect. Caby and Wiggins, two college friends and big winners on the Ultimate Bet poker site, would film their screen while playing online and narrate their thought process. They then sold access to those videos to subscribers.

So basically you want people to do all the work for you (tell you the scandals but only if they have cliffs) and for some reason you thought a random question was worthy of its own thread, even though it's not News, Views, or Gossip.

Wow wait to be a complete dick, have you had a bad day and need a little ego boost?

A thread sharing the biggest poker scandals ever isn't gossip or views? Right ok then. How is that thread any different from "What's your favourite WSOP moment" or the hundreds of other compilation threads?


How you somehow think there's something wrong with me starting a thread for everyone to compile the biggest scandals of poker... In a poker forum. Do the work for me? Wtf are you on? The reason I say about the cliffs is to make it easier for people to read, the point was to compile a list of all the biggest poker scandals in an easy-to-view thread.

Applying the logic (lol) you've just applied, about 30% of NVG needs deleting, no more questions in NVG!

SGT RJ have you considered making training videos for cardrunners about original posting strategy in the news views and gossip subforum. perhaps balancing your range with 1/3 news 1/3 views 1/3 gossip?

if that's too advanced, maybe start with a video series about how to use the search function, and boolean AND/OR formatting

So are you going to put my thread back, or is there a new rule about Mods determining whether users will like a thread enough for it to be threadworthy?

If it's not being put back, might as well get all the other opinion related threads deleted. Otherwise it's just grossly inconsistent modding.

I really wish more people would use the search function, but I've given up hope that this will ever happen.

LOL.

You didn't start a thread asking what people's opinion was of the most influential scandals (other than BF and UB). You said you wanted to read some scandal threads, but only ones with cliffs.

So yes, I didn't consider that worthy of a stand alone thread. And you getting angry at me now isn't going to change that.

Your OP:

Yep, there's some great opinions in there.

Do you realise how many irrelevant, drawn-out, practically incomprehensible threads show up if you search 'scandal' on here? That was the entire point of making that thread.


What was my original title? "What are the biggest poker scandals ever?"

That was the title, that was the point of the post. The bit about me wanting to read some was just personalising the post with why I was interested.

My post wasn't meant to be the point of the thread, the point of the thread was going to be other peoples opinions (after all - I don't know much about scandals) but you decided to delete it before anyone got to put their opinion.

Sorry I wasn't able to figure that out. Silly me. Here I thought original posts by the thread author were the point of the thread.

You couldn't figure out that the title of the thread was the point, and seeing that the post didn't differentiate from the title, the title was still the point?

Do you not see how pedantic it is to say that if I removed my personal opinion for wanting scandals in one place, it would've been ok?

The post was very different from what you now claim your intent was. I'm sorry if you can't see why someone reading your original post might think that.

BF has linked you to a place where you can read scandal threads to your hearts content, although I have no idea how many of them have awesome cliffs.