it looked like he was playing tourneys and then towards the end of his sessions as his tables were closing , he was then opening cash tables and playing some cash / some tourney until the end of his session.

at the start he was buying in for 10 $ and as time went by it went to 20$ and higher.. iposted one where he bought in for 200$ and doubled up when he had about 1400 in the account. some of the early top ups were needed to cover money he lost playing cash games.I have a feeling that pokertableratings had stopped tracking stars cash games at this time so there would be little chance to check up on his cash game play. at the end his account was running below 300$. according to nicole's posts and transaction history , she was topping him up each week when he dropped below 500 so its likely that he was misrepresenting the size of his bakroll to Nicole at this stage.

Stars are the only people who could look up and see who benefitted from his cash game losses and i can't hsee them doing it on a 3rd persons request. money will have been cashed out now anyway.

As far as packages sold, i think he tried to play fairly straight with those , and he made mistakes with the payouts that probably benefitted the stakers at nicoles expense .Jeffs losses on his portion of those packages did come out of the account though so Nicoles stake money went on that as well as the cash game losses , but i accounted for that in the final figures.

As far as staking him in the future ......i wouldn't give him any money to play on as i doubt that i would get it back.

So is SGT in jail now or what? If the thread is still up does that mean online poker is dead?

I thought that this thread had been closed, pending new information......



Lee

Thankfully I'm not in jail. Was close tho.

Sorry for your loss SGT RJ. But this turned into a great thread for entertainments sake.

Wait a minute! I was assured that if this thread did not come down immediately that you and several others would be languishing in a jail cell for falsely calling him a liar on an internet message board. But then if you're not in jail he is a liar, so at worse you were merely early with your accusation?

Okay, so 700 posts in and I might read more tomorrow, but trying to keep this as much in Jeff's favour as possible.

1) It's possible to have a contract without one party to it fully understanding it.



2) The quoted email could well be taken as SGT RJ dropping MTTs.



3) If one does not like the rules which govern a particular system, whether it be a legal system or Pokerstars, peaceful disagreement should probably be okay.



4) There seems to be little in the way of clarity surrounding the whole MU issue unless it's defined in individual cases. It would be useful if there was a consensus reached on the definition (what precisely does the staker have when there's MU? Is it a proprietary interest? If so, in what? It appears fairly clear that any remaining money in the account is held on trust for the staker, but it's uncertain that the same could be said about MU. It also appears not to be a debt - if the stakee is willing to play on under the stake the staker has no personal right against them, apart from one conditional upon some money being won).



The only point of these which seems to have any weight whatsoever is the second. IIRC the wording was something along the lines of 'you should stop playing MTTs for the time being'. If Jeff lost money on MTTs in that period and won the same amount playing STTs, IMO it would be perfectly legitimate for RJ to claim that there was a net profit of that amount.

However, it's tough to take this too seriously considering the absolute torrent of **** which has been posted by Jeff and his repeated changing of his stance on the matter.

Actually the wording was more like "back to those STTs now!".

And I never, ever dropped all MTT action. When he was (telling me) he was getting frustrated then playing suboptimally, and when he (by his own admission) tended to tilt/leak by spewing in a couple of MTTs after a series of beats, then my encouragement/admonition would be for him to keep control of himself and play primarily SNGs/STTs, where he was a much more consistent performer (because the nature of those games allows for less variance).

There was never a time where he was absolutely forbidden to play any MTTs on the stake.

He WAS forbidden to play cash on the stake - it was never intended to be a stake that included cash games - but apparently he was.

I suspect that some of his numbers might be more honest now that what he told me at the time. But the stake money he was provided was based on what he was telling me at that time. If those were all lies, he doesn't get out of paying the debt by saying "yeah but see the numbers were really X even though I told you Y, so I don't actually owe you anything hahahaha." He was given $750 in stake money plus $200 to cover an unauthorized withdrawal/"loan". Whether that money was given him based on lies is irrelevant, other than it demonstrates what a sucker I am. He still owes the money even if he was lying to me the entire time, which I now suspect he was.

Understand I consider this basically an academic exercise at this point - I'm never getting the money and I know that.

Eh, the phrase I'm talking about is this:

'Technically this is the last week of the stake as well, right? We should probably talk about that too.

GL today and the rest of the week. STTs and SGNs, man. MTTs are just too high variance for a small roll.'

(quoted from an email exchange posted by Jeff on p8 - I haven't seen a confirmation of the integrity of these emails)

I think it's certainly debatable at best (though the offer and acceptance required for this to amount to a variation is disputable - certainly the acceptance would need to be implicit).

Tbh I haven't a clue what's been going on for most of this thread due to the lack of facts so the relevance of this doesn't amount to that much probably.

Read four pages at fifty posts per page pro setting, then had to jump ahead. Now eagerly awaiting going back to spend hours of crazy rambling non specific demanding inaccurate posts by unrealzeal.

I mean nobody in the history of staking who has ever approached a thread the way he did was ever correct. Ever.

I don't remember there being an "end" to the stake until BF, although that email suggests that there was an initial period that was then extended, making it (in my view) one continuous stake.

And yeah, I can see how that could be interpreted one way (no more MTTs), but I do not recall a time where all MTTs were off limits. I read that as my encouraging him to play more STTs/SNGs (and much fewer MTTs) than he had been previously (again, because he was telling me that he had a tendency to get frustrated then spew in MTTs), but to the best of my recollection, there was never a hard and fast "thou shalt not play MTTs this week" rule put in place, let alone a "no more MTTs on this stake, period" change.

Without the AIM logs from the same time period it's literally impossible to know. Or his imaginary phone conversations. But the vast, vast majority of our correspondence about everything, including the stake, was over IM.

For the record, I don't dispute any of the emails he posted, even ones I don't have any record of myself. They all read/sound like my tone. I'm pretty sure I'd be able to tell if he tried to forge one of my emails.

I also don't dispute (and never had) that I kept incredibly poor records (basically none) and basically made my ability to "prove" any of my side of this almost nonexistent. Except, you know, the emails where he admits to owing me something close to what I claim he has owed all along.

Back to



Lee

Damn, I chose the wrong career. I should have been a professional poker player as well. To think I could have been in my forties and earning between $40 and $100 dollars a week!

On the upside, I think SGT RJ is amazing. How many other poker players do you know spend their time befriending the homeless and people with mentally illness, shipping them monies and providing them with much needed therapy and social reintegration by being kind to them and reading their insane, rambling emails.

Never mind moderator, she qualifies for sainthood in my book.

^^This as well.

anyone want to bet that Jeff Bennett is a methamphetamine user?

21times20,

I'm embarrassed that I haven't actually typed that. yes. yes he is.

at the very least he knows what 30mg of adderal feels like going up your nose and down your throat.

the paranoia, the scatter-brained theories..**** me. opportunity missed.

First time i`ve seen a pokerplayer lost his mind completly after BF I do hope he get help he`s a trainwreck.

Props to Sgt RJ for doing the right thing even though it perhaps was for a lose of 950.

it seems as "gerardox of Peru is a compulsive liar", LOL, make the law having the last word, good luck

I agree,

As a matter of fact, everything a man do is going to return in any moment, oh jeff, take care of that, poker is science+art+honor, dont break the rules, it seems your a degen, but keep playing poker LOL

The guy had a pretty small brain, sorry you got mixed up with this turd.

its funny how when they steal from you, they try and dictate the terms on how/when they pay you back...and they always mention it is a 'measly' amount of money...I had this happen on part time poker by someone over $50 , another degen

You better be careful or else the ghost of Jeff will come back and threaten to send you to jail.

You too.

Those who call an amount of money measly needs to realize that measly to them might not be measly to someone else. I'd have the same reaction as RJ if someone owed me $1,000.

This thread gets better and better the more you read. His brain deserves pity.

mmmh, tough one that.