What's the escrow situation? I'd need to do Stars/FTP but you can do an extra $50K w/ DW and that's fine w/ me.

lol, none of this is true. Guess ill go back to treating you like a miscreant until you pay me then.

lol , viffer u da man , f these internet nerds

You have, by far, a higher post count and post-per-day than anyone else in this thread

Terms, if anyone backs out its 5K.

Im ok with you sending on stars to dw.

these terms suggest you are not debating the fact that you owe money from the crossbook prior to black friday

Something that I realized going through the math of challenges, is that once someone gets down 20-30ish bi, it really becomes pretty much impossible for the other person to win. The losing player is way more likely to have a -ev winrate, and so each additional bi decreases the likelyhood being +ev per hand, and increases the gap for them to get back to even.

I think durrr has to be <60:1 to win the challenge, could be 100:1, could be more.

Since i know you are a gambling man, and wouldnt throw things out there and not bet on them, ill just take 50-1 and bet 10k.

counterparty risk dictates that there's a significant difference between thinking theres a 1 percent chance of durrrr coming back and wanting/willing to lay 50-1 against durrr coming back

however i wouldn't expect viffer to understand concepts like that. i hear he's unedumacated

.

but thats a freeroll for both of you

I guess then you should buyout at 95% then viffer? Unlike what i was going to offer you had you actually listened...

had u guys discussed a settlement before u paid him that 165K?
did u ever ask for any sort of vouch/escrow when u made the original bet or when u were up 160K in the xbook?

did u think making a wager of hundreds of thousands of dollars with no vouch or any sort of written contract was a good idea?
did u consider the possibility that if u won a few hundred thousand in the xbook u would have any trouble collecting?

the 160k was discrete from the xbook

I made the xbook years ago when i knew no one and was unexperienced.

I tried to settle partly because me might have issues later if the debt is larger, and I dont think it's likely to get smaller. Viffers posts in this topic are virtually all lies regarding that subject

lol this is mad :|

OK, once he confirms he has received 50k cash from you, I will send on stars and bet is on.

Same exact terms as ZJ's bet with you. I don't know his "back out" amount but scale it 1/3rd and we have a deal.

Daniel cates :| pleasure sir.

You take the bet to the arbitrator that you agreed to use (before the bet was made) if conflicts were to arise. You don't decide to choose a new arbitrator lol.

Talk about a free roll for you if this were allowed.
If you were to think arbitrator 1 is <50% to rule in your favor for X reasons, with a large enough bet you would be smart to find a new arbitrator.

Ex. You bet on the Yankees to win the World Series. Yankees are down 0-3 through 3 games. Before game 4 they postpone the series for 3 years.

You and opposing bettor take your case to the pre-agreed arbitrator. You find out the arbitrator is a Cubs fan. You think if you can find an arbitrator that was a Yankees fan he'd be more likely to side with you. And you think this should be allowed? When picking out your arbitrator, didn't you pick someone you thought would be Smart/Fair/Unbiased or did you just pick some random person?

ya wasnt trying to attack u or make it seem u are in anyway to blame, was just curious as to ur guys relationship prior to this as it seems pretty hostile and making a bet for hundreds of thousands where u know you'll never welch but have nothing but the other guys word seems pretty insane.

What arbitrator did i agree too? Do you think i would ever agree to letting someone who has money against me decide my fate?

I didnt make the rules, they have always been there. Its not like im just making this up. Or its some weird theory. Its plain and simple and clear. The only question is, is 20K hands enough to call this a completed match. If it is I lose, if it isnt i win.

wait, what?

The challenge was arbitrated by the chosen arbitrators and you bet on the challenge. That means you agreed to the arbitrators imo. Since we love the sports analogies ITT saying otherwise would be like trying to not pay out on a sports bet because you don't like a refereeing decision or personally decide the referee was not fit for his job. In a football match you have 2 teams and a referee and if you bet on that match you accept the possibility of any errors from that referee. In this challenge Jungle plays Durrrr and any disputes are settled by the arbitrators they agreed to and if you bet on the challenge you accept any decision on it from them as final imo. Just my 2c

Kanu im not argueing with you, your right.

I find this whole issue very interesting. I am an an attorney (and casual poker player) and I have taken part in several mediations and arbitrations in my litigation practice (none having to do with poker/gambling).

I have never met any of the parties involved and I do not have any wagers pending on the outcome.

I have been considering Viffer's and other's arguments in this case but I had a question that I don't think has been addressed...
What rule of law is the arbitrator going to use to make a ruling?
-Is he going to rule based on contract law?
- Is he going to rule based on sports betting rules and customs (as Viffer has put forth)?
-Is he going to rule based on a "gentleman's agreement" between 2 gamblers?
- Is he going to make ruling based on "fairness" and not on rules or laws?

A person might win under one rule of law but lose under a different one.
In the business world, there is usually a written provision as to what rule of law will be used.
Obviously not the case here.

I think this will make for a fascinating arbitration. Would love to see it.

Humbly posting in HSNL...... I would like to see it too.... Any chance of video taping and uploading?