Let her play, donate some of those lost Epic $'s into the poker economy. The reception she'll get from a lot of players is punishment enough, if she keeps turning up with money then you should be delighted to have her.

LOL. Benny Binion "never killed anyone who didn't deserve it", and people are trying to make the tournament he started "squeaky clean".

Let her come and play. Being inclusive is a good thing for a tournament.

There is nothing that should stop you from telling her what you think though. Free speech is ok in the US isn't it?

Did someone really compare poker to cooking? :/ I'm sure they put something in the 2plus2 water on BF that is turning people crazy.

It's an utterly bizarre situation when people are defending AD's right to be involved in anything poker related imo. Her recent track record is atrocious. The atmosphere at WSOP would benefit greatly from not having these people. Allowing her to play(and HL and co) is a bit of an insult actually.

No one should be arrested in Kentucky for crimes they committed in West Virginia.

it depends on what you mean by a known card cheat i guess. if different casinos share information with each other about people that they have actually caught cheating in their casinos, i have no problem with that and don't really consider it off property. i do have a problem with random casino employees being assigned the task of passing judgement on customers based on news articles, word of mouth etc. for pretty obvious reasons.

that's a pretty terrible analogy even by internet standards. more llke people shouldn't be arrested by random casino employees that may or may not know ****.

i'm also curious whether or not people that think annie duke (or russ hamilton, or anyone) should be banned from live poker tournaments think she should be able to play slots, blackjack, etc. how closely related does a casino game need to be to a scandal that happens outside of casinos for people to get to play police?

Banning a select few of the worst cases is far from making anything squeaky clean, and Binion's past really has nothing to do with this.

I'm not entirely convinced either way whether a ban of Duke or others is good or bad idea, but there sure are some terrible arguments against the idea ITT.

I don't recall anyone suggesting such a thing.

Why would the employees be anymore "random" than say, Floorpeople, who are assigned to make rulings when called by a dealer?

Setting up a committee to decide who to ban would be a complete cluster****. Unless someone directly violated WSOP rules no one should be banned. For non-WSOP infractions, the community can police itself. If you ever see a Lederer, Ferguson, Hamilton, etc. at your poker table, let them know how you feel. The fact that none of them will probably ever show up at a WSOP event again shows how effective self-policing can be.

I'll agree with that.

What if they have violated casino rules outside of the poker room?

I'll take "The Ladder" for $400, Alex Trebek.

Looking forward to reading the PokerNews update to when someone snaps at her a table she's playing at, this year.

I dont think outside issues should stop someone from playing. If you pay you play. I do hate Annie and I also think Chris's banner should be taken down. I think having a banner up of a main owner of the site that is responsible for stealing from almost everyone in the poker community is in bad taste. Let him play and be harrassed but the banner got to go imo

In this new era of a "Diffusion of Responsiblity", the WSOP just doesn't give a flying crap about what someone outside of the WSOP has done.

If they are paying the rake, the corporation just sees it as a profit gain. Nothing more.