Al Ethier at the 1983 WSOP Main Event [youtube.com]

Al Ethier Hendon Mob page (with more current pic) [hendonmob.com]

Submitted a thread asking for fellow 2+2er's opinion on seating scripts, since pokersites neither do something against them, nor communicating its permission. Sadly, the thread was almost instantly deleted.
I wonder which rule was violated.
Or maybe the content was too low, so I figured to ask here :P

I didn't see or delete said post but it is off topic for this forum.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...51&postcount=2

It was instantly moved to "Internet Poker". After some minutes it got removed.
I completely forgot there were other boards than NVG on 2+2.

I moved it.

And it was off topic for NVG, as PP said.

IP seemed like the best place for it but apparently the IP mods disagreed.

Hard Rock poker player falls shy in bid to finance boyfriend's new kidney

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/fl-holly...,2561539.story

Guy get booted from poker table. Lots of NSFW audio, but funny.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=953_1378393852

You're being completely disingenuous. This has nothing to do with being against my values, it has to do with that service clearly having a very negative impact on the lives of the people who use it.

So you're either saying that:

- It doesn't. I'm not sure how you argue that...

- As long as something is deemed legal, it's perfectly fine to exploit it and you have no moral responsibility toward other human beings in society. Hopefully without taking the example of some truly horrible political system, you can see why that's a problem?

- It's the victims' responsibility not to have the chemical weaknesses that make them prone to being addicted to gambling, so it's perfectly fine to destroy their lives if they can't show that self-control.

- ...some other explanation I'm really curious to hear.




I guess yes, this has something to do with one of my values, which is that we should strive to remove from society things that have a significant negative impact.

Maybe that's a bad thing? After all, the US was built around the idea of free market, so hey...who cares as long as you're making money, right?

How you can argue that either something being legal excuses the impact it has on people, or that gambling doesn't have a negative impact on the vast majority of people who partake in it, is beyond me.

Maybe (but hopefully not...) you're saying that just because something is available doesn't mean people have to do it, but that's extremely naive; the average human being is borderline ******ed and has zero willpower and a whole array of huge weaknesses, which gambling taps into more than almost any other activity.

To say that those (most) people just "have to be responsible" and need no supervision/protection is wishful thinking at best and...well, I'm going to stay polite about the worst, I'm sure you get the idea.

BS - offering a safe legal environment to gamble is not a negative impact on anybody. TBH I struggle to work out how you can play poker which is peer to peer gambling when you think gambling is evil/negative.

Me I keep away from the pit but if someone goes there and they have a problem the blame is on them not the casino. Casinos should keep out kids and self excluders but they offer far more of a service to losing players than poker sharks, they employ staff and provider a place to have fun, the online shark offers no service in comparison.

If you hate gambling so much, quit poker.

Gambling is pure entertainment for the very large majority. People drop a couple grand in Vegas and have a good time.
Sure there are problem gamblers and we, being gamblers, probably know a couple personally.
Everything gets abused by someone. Must everything then be prohibited?

One of the stupidest comments I've ever read, congratulations.

Oh, well what do you know...here's the actual stupidest ever, thanks for the experience.

Let me ask you this. Beyond the ******ed assumption that people are responsible for their actions, which I won't address here, are the children and spouse (to name only a few) of that person to blame too? Are they responsible as well?

Think about this: The logical implication of what you're saying is that opportunity counts for nothing and that there's no difference between the ways the same person would act in two different environments.

Now...you're going to disagree with what I just said because you're unable to understand the logical connection between the two (or because you now kind of see it, but are too proud to ever back down from your absurd stance); but trust me, that's exactly what you implied (whether it was your intention or not).

Also, I never said casinos are "responsible", I said they're unhealthy elements that have a very negative impact on a lot of people and should be removed from society, with the people (among many others) who create such unhealthy opportunities for others.

It's funny, because I have a bias such that I always expect old posters to have decent reasoning skills and be a lot smarter than recent ones, and in your case it's shocking how much it's not true.

/derail.

(this will be my last post on the subject (hurray!). I don't have time to argue with people whose reasoning skills are abysmal and values non-existent)

I certainly am not backing down from saying that individuals have a little thing called personal responsibility. If you are faced with an opportunity whether it is to gamble, to cheat, to steal, to kill...pretty much anything it is 100% down to you.

As for opportunity and problem gambling. Well by accident you seem to have stumbled on a truth you find so strange you think it is absurd. When it comes to problem gambling access and availability seems to make little or no difference. Since the whole Internet gambling thing problem gambling has not risen.

Not good enough for you try this US research on casinos


http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/...70/0036514.pdf

If the words were a bit too hard for you try this link to the pretty picture (chart) instead.

http://www.americangaming.org/sites/...ence_final.pdf

The reason I disagree with you is that the facts do not match your claim.

well no - you said this.
When you changed it from a statement about casino gambling being a negative impact upon everyone and instead changed the claim to some you went from barkingly wrong to a partial truth. Some people do have a negative experience re gambling, they are called problem gamblers. You playing poker with one is no different to a casino providing a craps table. It is the same moral equivalence, you want to take his money by engaging in a +ev game for you and -ev for him.

Given your stance the logic is to oppose poker full stop. Do you? You want to ban casinos, do you want to ban online poker and my homegame too?

the spouse is to blame since she chose to marry him. the children are probably not to blame unless they gave their consent to let him gamble. if everything that was potentially harmful to ppl was banned by our government then would life really even be worth living? not everyone needs to be saved. your forum name confuses me.

How so? It has everything to do with being against your values. Just because you've decided that the "vast majority" of people who gamble are negatively affected doesn't make it so, nor does something become immoral just because you've deemed it so.

Has it occurred to you that we might not all agree on the extent of that impact?

It does have a negative impact on some, yes.

It's completely possible to offer something like this and have some moral responsibility to others. Also, not everyone agrees that is immoral.

Perfectly fine to destroy lives? Well, I think it's incumbent on them to make reasonable efforts to avoid doing so, of course. But yes, there will be people that have chemical and/or psychological weaknesses that allow them to cause harm and/or destroy themselves with gambling, alcohol, cigarettes, junk food, and numerous other bad habits. Obviously we draw a line somewhere, as many harmful drugs are outlawed, but it would seem that many people feel gambling is on the other side of that line.

But you weren't talking about things, you were talking about people.

This is the sort of attitude that compelled me to reply to your post. This very high and mighty stand you take, where everything is black and white.

Gambling has a negative impact on the vast majority of people who partake in it? And you're so convinced of this that it's beyond you how anyone could believe otherwise? Wow, you must have seen some compelling evidence to feel so strongly - anything you can share?

Wow.

There really is no in between for you, is there?

Your morals aren't everyone's morals, and people aren't criminals because they don't live by your moral code.


Edit to add: I've moved the last 7 posts here from the "Phil Ivey wins 7.3m GBP in London, casino refuses to pay - Ivey sues. Cliffs in OP" thread, so as not to derail it further.

Fair enough but surely #687 is full of published research data, it might be a shock for a 1/3 less content thread. Properly sourced academic research and all.

Quite right though, arguing with anti gamblers in a thread about Phil Ivey, especially when the anti gambler is an Ivey worshipper is just too surreal.

Just wanted to add that I didn't move these posts here in an effort to drag you back into a debate - if you're done, that's fine. Just didn't want other replies (including my own) to derail things further.

Allen Kessler @AllenKessler
"Out in 63rd place @BorgataPoker @wpt main event. $9662 Folded to me in sb. Shipped 13bb with 96ss. Bb woke up with ak, but I was still live."
8:12 PM - 18 Sep

don't much care who the 3 players were... but am waiting for the secret formula to min-cashing, in one sentence or less... or more.

Phil Galfond and his multimillion dollar penthouse condo complete with interconnecting slide.....
Durrrr with his legendary bar bills.....

By contrast, since I've played poker for a living, with my profits I have;
Had my extension roof re-felted.
Renovated my kitchen and bathroom.
Purchased a Fiat Panda (It's even an automatic - my wife's decision).
Bought a child (well, paid for IVF treatment).

Anyone else spent their winnings on anything less Rock'n'Roll that this?

You, sir, are indeed not a balla

I spent $3.25 for a gallon of gas yesterday.

I see someone already posted his Hendon mob page. IIRC he was known as a VERY tight player, tight by anyone's standards. On a side note he developed a variation of hold em, I can not remember the exact name of it. He had a table in the tropicana in Las Vegas spreading it as well as a few other places in town. This was only a few years back, after the trop renovation for sure. I used to play it once in a while when I saw him at the trop an he would tell me some stories about poker at Binions in the old days. The few hundred I would donate was worth hearing his stories, he is a likeable guy for sure.

pretty funny, pretty standard for the commerce

mopeds are so cool!

It is my birthday today!