I said I think it's 1K but I was wrong because I had the dates wrong. It really is that simple, and she's been trying to strong arm the money from me ever since.

I'm done again with the thread because no one will be able to make a judgment because the data will get buried.

She can accept 235 as the total and delete the thread or there can be a new one where I will post all the dates and can show and verify every single penny of the money. If I did make a mistake it could possibly be lower than the 235. I don't think if it's higher it's much higher.

That is all I'm ever going to say about it. If she wants the money, delete the thread. If she wants to dispute, I will open a new thread with all the data, or I can print it all out and show it to her in person.

Is that reasonable? If not I am done with the issue and that's that.

I think everyone agrees that you should post your data once you get it together, since this is now in the court of public opinion.

Right, you've made that very clear, and it's been made very clear to you that won't be happening.

I thought you wanted to have this arbitrated.

What are you talking about? Nothing gets "buried" - it's not like if you make a post with figures, we won't be able to find it later because too many things were posted after it. If there's a lot of random noise being posted in the thread, we can deal with it at that time, but it wouldn't matter if we did or didn't, your post(s) would still be here and easy to find.

I'm pretty sure you're the one who suggested this, or at the very least have been on board with it. Are you changing your tune on that?

Here's where I'm confused on the difference between your figures. There is an amount that she staked you with - the money she provides so that you can play the games. Every staking arrangement I've ever heard of involves the player receiving a stake, playing with that money and splitting any profits in some fashion, and then returning the stake when the staking period comes to an end. Were you only staked with $235 or less? Or were you way down on the stake when it came to an end? There's been a lot of talk of profit, so it didn't sound to me like makeup would have been an issue.

This is the kind of thing that really hurts your credibility. How much money she did or didn't make is irrelevant.

Oh FFS stop with this "data will get buried" nonsense. A new thread won't have any magical properties that stop the data from getting "buried".

You know, I don't really care about a new thread. If this silly obsession of yours is going to derail everything, then go ahead and start a new thread with the data.

So if we don't agree that your proposals are reasonable, you're done? So you're not really asking if it's reasonable, you're just telling us the only way you'll do things. That certainly isn't reasonable.

But it doesn't really matter either way. Post your data here, or post it in a new thread. I don't care; just post your data.

Thought you'd agreed to arbitration, and it seems like you're trying to make a case here. Now (once again) you're making a take it or leave it demand. She can't delete anything here, she isn't a moderator on this forum. Your demand of payoff amount isn't supported by any facts you've shared. You're basically demanding that you get to steal 3/4 of your stake and that Bobo clean up all evidence that you did. Why would any reasonable person think that's fair? I don't know either one of you, and I'm fairly certain that you stole your stake three years ago and are trying to get your reputation back for 25 cents on the dollar today. Based on what you're saying and what she's posted of you conversation, how could anyone think otherwise? Post your side if you want anyone to change their minds.

Put together your financial case. Show us email or IM logs that show she agreed to those figures. Show evidence to back up your side of the dispute. You keep threatening to show your evidence and never do. It makes you sound untrustworthy. Dude, you're way past showing data in person. Post it all at once and show your side of things. Don't dribble it out. "I owe exactly X and here's why."

this happens with periodic cashouts, it's a complication in any staking agreement. Ideally, when you chop, the stake ends, but I wanted weekly cashouts of 50-100 per week where the stake wouldn't end, so it's in a sense a salary of sorts that gets added to makeup as the stake goes along

so yes she was in profit and yes I was still in makeup

this is per our agreement to start the stake, which we adjusted downward as the stake moved along. I started taking out less and less, but as per our agreement, I could have taken more but we altered the deal to make it better for both of us.

here is how the deal was structured:

open ended stake with weekly cashout of 50-100 depending on how well the stake goes

total of the stake is chopped when it's mutually agreed to end

no leaving in makeup

so say I win 200 one week. we chop 100 apiece. Then the next week I lose 400. No chop. Then the next week I win 300. In this case, there is still a chop for the 300 even though the total of the stake is still 100, we still chop 50 apiece (the low chop). This will eventually become makeup.

Does this make sense.

This is the way I structured the deal and she agreed to in the beginning. Over the course of the stake, I lowered the chop amount because the stake wasn't doing well.

So yes, she was in profit and I still had make up accrued. This is always a complication on period chops.

Basically the deal was this, I was to be allowed to take chops based on the expected value of the contract, and in return, I don't leave in MU. That's how I verbally structured it to her, and I thought it was mutually beneficial.

Got it?

You lost me here a bit. I get chopping the 200 and the 300, but isn't that 400 loss entirely on you?

Say for example the stake was 2000. After week 1, you chop the 200 win and the stake roll is still at 2000. After week 2, the stake roll is down to 1600 due to the loss. After week 3, you chop the 300 win, but the stake is still sitting at 1600. Don't you have to makeup 400 at some point to make it whole again at 2000?

there has been allegations of thievery and deception in this thread and I can post a 2 day old email where nicole says she knows I'm not trying to steal from her, and I'm sorry but if I'm going to be branded a thief, I don't have much to discuss because nothing I say will matter

Remind me again why you were going to get a new staker to pay her $950 if it's not a valid debt? I'm sure your new business partner would have loved to hear all about this $700 "mistake" that you somehow only just realized was a "mistake" once it became obvious you weren't going to be able to wiggle out of it.

yea, obviously it's complicated but not really

on weeks the stake does well I get to chop regardless of whether the stake since the last chop is ahead. this was a verbal stipulation that she agreed to and the only way I would take the stake. This was not a problem at all until I went on a ridiculous downswing. She then dropped the MTT portion of the stake, so I went to sell the action in the MP. That's where the confusion was because the account had 1200 total in it and I didn't realize at the time that only 235 was hers until I sat down and calculated it.

By then it was too late coz I already told her 950, and she wouldnt budge. I tried everything I could think of to make it good for both of us. But seeing as how she'd already insinuated I was scamming her, I think I should have made the post myself, but the bias of the community scared me too much. Plus I got banned by a non mod.

and by the way, I can post a two day old email from her saying that she knows I'm not trying to scam her, and yet, here she is saying I am

In fact, I just offered her interest on the total amount in cash on the spot if she'd pass me to another backer that I'd found, and she still refused, so obviously her motivation needs to be put in question

I can totally understand that.

It really will help your case once you get the actual figures to post.

I said I didn't think your original intent was to scam me.

I already posted the email in question.

I never agreed to a stipend.

I never staked you for anything other than low stakes MTTs and maybe SNGs. You selling action for higher stakes in no way invalidates our stake for lower MTT action

We've reentered the pleading phase of the negotiations. New emails incoming.

I called it makeup from the beginning and at every point until now, including after I found out about my error. She basically has me over a barrell with this site because nothing a black sn says matters to you or this "community"

Believe me when I tell you I would prefer for her to have every cent of the money due her, and it's not because of any reason. She staked me and I appreciate it and wanted her to profit.

In fairness to her she probably wants absolutely nothing to do with it if you get involved in another staking deal with someone, so that would mean no transfer, no vouching, etc... nothing that could in any way come back to her if for some reason that deal went south too. And I can understand that as well.

I don't care nicole, you can show me every single email it doesn't matter. I know what I owe you based on the stipulation in the agreement. You wanted to change that agreement from the get-go and I kept taking out less and less because of it.

but she knows I'm not out to scam anyone and that 900 was too much for me to pay without poker, she made money on the stake, and called me a friend. I knew that she wasn't a friend but I tried to be hers. I just wish I had had it out with her after BF because it was heading here all along, but I wasn't in the mood for poker anymore. If she had given me a ref 2 days ago she'd have 1K in cash in her pocket because I offered to pay out all the makeup plus interest on the spot, and she still refused.

I don't get it. I think she wanted a circus from day 1 and I was her mark. I almost think that's why she offered me the stake in the first place. Remember, I didn't ask her, she asked me.

So to summarize, he's admitted to lying and stealing from me, but wants not to be called a liar and a thief.

I said it once and I'll say it again - the truth is a bitch Jeff.

The real irony here is that I probably would have forgotten all about this if you hadn't contacted me and tried to get me to compromise my integrity for ~$1k.

Oh, the "she asked me" thing.

Yeah, I offered Jeff the stake. We chatted via IM all the time, and he was constantly talking about how broke he was, how much money he had made for other backers, how he couldn't find another backer (holy **** I wonder why not)...

IMO, he was basically soft asking without asking, so eventually I offered.

Once again to be perfectly clear:

The only thing about the stake that was ever adjusted was the amount of the base stake (from $500 to $750 + the $200 "loan") and reiterating things like "don't play cash on the stake" and "don't exceed the buy in limits of the stake" when he would admit to playing cash and playing like a $50 or $100 buy in tourney on a $500 stake.

I never requested additional money other than no MU and a 50/50 profit split.

I never agreed to a weekly "stipend" and if he was taking one it was without my knowledge or permission.

Also, let's marvel at this new theory: that over three years ago, I basically decided the following:

You know what? In three years, I'll bet I'm a mod. And I'd really like to create some drama and really **** someone over. Who is a likely mark? Oh yeah, this guy, whom I consider a friend! I know what I'll do. I'll ask him if he'd like a stake and then, when that stake is abruptly shut down by an event like Black Friday (I knew about this, just like I knew I'd be a mod), I can claim he stole some of my money. And to make it even more epic, I won't keep any real records.

What fun!

You are the seer!

OK I will post graphs and you guys can decide and I'll try and find emails outlining our initial deal, but I remember that the initial deal was discussed over the phone. I told her explicitly that I needed periodic cashouts that would add to makeup.

If we stick to the original deal, then she will be owed less than zero but we changed it to 20-50 I think and I believe that was over the phone as well.

Finally, Jeff never spoke to me before last years WSOP. About anything at all, let alone about a 5/10 cash stake.

Prior to the first email I posted last night, the last time I had talked directly to him was in the ATF thread in August (?) of last year. Before that, it was sometime (probably late May or June) in 2012 before that years WSOP, when he told me some sob story about breaking his leg (I'm such a sucker for sob stories, obviously) and he agreed to meet up with me and pay me at least a couple hundred or so and set up a payment plan. I provided him my cell phone number and dates that I'd be in Vegas. No meeting took place, and I was meeting with tons of people while I was there to collect money to play the ME.

After that I contemplated outing him but then noticed his unreal account was banned and basically forgot about it. I did periodically IP check the unreal account to see if he was back but saw nothing and eventually just forgot about it.

If there's any other conversations within the last 1.5 years or so I don't recall them.

nicole this is going to become my word vs your word because I told you from day 1 that I was broke and needed to cash out the stake weekly or I couldn't play

If I do an analysis of the original deal, I'd owe you less than zero, because you didn't like the cashouts so I lowered the amount. If we go by the cashouts from the beginning I don't owe you anything. Toward the end of the stake you were freaking out if I cashed out anything.

This is how I set up the deal and I tried to explain it to you clearly when we started and I knew then that you didn't understand. You trusted me, and that's fine because you can trust me, and everytime you tried to change the deal, I would appease you and agree, and I haven't done a thing wrong except avoid you for 3 years. For pete's sake, I think you at least doubled your money on the deal even without the 900

Oh I know you were broke.

But I never agreed to a stipend.

That's why the $200 transfer shows up, that's me covering the "loan" you took without my permission that I added to the stake because you told me yet another sob story about being like 3 hours from eviction.

Further, you were playing poker all the time, broke or not. God alone knows how you got that money.

I was willing to give you money to play poker to (hopefully) make myself some money as well. I was not willing to be an endless revolving line of credit for your broke ass.

I spoke to you over the phone during WSOP 2012 to see if you wanted to transfer makeup and you still refused. I miraculously had a backer for WSOP lined up and for some reason I still can't get a reference from the 3 people I've won money for in the past and paid every red cent owed to them.

I accidentally slipped and told you the wrong number, and you glommed on to it and wouldn't let go. That's all there is to this story.