yep. both sides come across as pretty scummy. i dont have sympathy for either.

i didnt see it that way. every legitimate argument jmo had remko would be like o well i didn't do that. or that was pokernews not me im freelance he was lawyering him dont even know why he showed up for the pod. remko was also brick walling jmo and making the convo go full circle. i dont know why remko seems to assume that phil is a good guy anyone who lones a degen money in a high stakes game there playing has alternative motive and is an enabler. Granted i grind lower stakes and am not apart of that world no one is giving 250k away unless they think there getting something back whether it be EV or the intial cash back. remko is more selfish then jmo. jmo literally has nothing to gain from complaining about this but remko and pokernews r UTG. poker news doesnt care about poker they care about pokernews they thought it would be a popular article and they where right.

Jmo was actually pretty reasonable and convincing. He came across as a dick, sure, but he actually stayed on topic. Not sure why people think Remko "won," though Joey seemed to side completely with Remko.

I think Joey felt bad for Remko. Jmo took some shots at Remko, and Joey felt the need to deflate the situation. Jmo was making Remko look like a pawn in a chess match. Good debate though.

yeah honestly didn't really see it go down that way. remko sort of agreed with all the points i was making about pokernews being biased and not an actual news site but an affiliate site that represents the interests of their sponsors. a lot of the issues i bought up he sort of just deflected by saying he didn't know about it or nothing was presented to him because he didn't represent poker news. hard to really go in depth into specific examples when the other party doesn't know anything about them it makes for sort of a mundane discussion. Stuff like "i don't know what evidence was presented" or "im not sure why that article got rejected i would have ran it" either stifles the discussion on my end completely or forces me to go into detail about individual people/cases which wasn't what I wanted to do.

felt like i was getting angry cause i had to repeat the same basic points on the major issues with the galfond article, but this is one of the things i do feel strongly as to something that should not be allowed to happen. at the end of the day, regardless of my opinion or whats actually right or wrong, they are probably just going to do whatever the **** they want so its sort of pointless for me to even get angry about it.

In the end it may have been pointless but you absolutely crushed remko on the pod and it was nice to see !!!!

jmo had good points

Yeah, I agree. Joey is a nice guy and usually try to help the guys in bad situation

I felt bad for Remko too. Not sure how you can say good debate or even call that a debate. Props to him tho I think he handled that angry kid pretty well.

i still want to know who makes up the rest of remko's top 3

Lol likely something like Dnegs (remko is a fanboi )and Ivey .

I'd rather hear Jmo's top 3, with the stipulation that they must be outside the EE. And if Galfond isn't in that top 3, where does he fit in?

no clue how you guys feel bad for remko. If anything it felt like he was the one taking shots, while he was also clearly presenting an underwhelming side of the argument. He actually was the one who came across as childish and kind of dumb to me

Agree that his anger made him come off childish in a lot of spots,

Remko seems like a good guy with good intentions overall but he was really aggressive in a lot of spots like when JMO was trying to make a point asking him if he has ever been loaned 250k and a few other spots while it seemed JMO was pretty civil trying to present his sides.

Also LOL @ Remko trying to tell him to bring things to him or the media. I say screw that. If the media doesn't cover something then that's why twitter was invented so individuals can have a voice. You can choose to go whatever route you want.

I think JMO booked a solid win here based on the points he presented. I can see why people would think Remko got the better of him. It's like the same people who think Manny beat Floyd all over again.

Remko kept on bringing up reputation and how Galfond has a great reputation. JMO perpetually reminded Remko that journalism should have nothing to do with reputation; it should be based purely on facts. Remko immediately dismissed this and says some bull**** about how reputation is all a person has in life.

Remko is obviously a ****ing idiot who doesn't understand what actual journalism is.

get private world on

both came across stupid/can't defend their positions.

But Galfond has a top 3 reputation in the world

Jmo set the tone with the rolled up sleeves and all, remko is just a simple reporter dont be too harsh on him. He is not some whizzkid like Jmo but I think Jmo is taking this alfa man **** too far.... but whatever srsly dude like wtf. ..

JMO is typical poker poker player only tough on twitter and social media, if you have a problem with someone be a man and talk to them in person like Remko said

Why talk in person when you can crush remko on a pod ???? Chicagojoeys pod !!!!

also gotta agree with the absurdity of "say it to my face" as a pov...

This isn't the schoolyard where some kid is calling you names behind your back. It's a legitimate concern with the only substantial source of poker journalism on the internet...

One of the points being made is how poor of a job pokernews does in putting out legitimate poker news. Seems like trying to get pokernews to do a piece on how **** they are is pretty absurd.

Also have to just shrug at how many times he'd fall back on "well i dont know im not poker news or this wasnt brought to my attention".

Just seemed unprepared for any sort of debate wrt the matter at hand imo

when you post something publicly, whether on pokernews or twitter, particularly when it's regarding a private matter between to individuals, you don't get to go the "say it to my face" route when there's criticism

Would love to get a live nosebleeds endboss on for the stories-
-moseley
-alaei
-shulman
-oppie
-hat

Really loving the podcasts joey, thanks again for putting all the time/effort into them

lol @ Jmo wanting to bet with Remko that Remko said outing increases the odds of getting paid back.

What happened was Remko said - possibly incorrectly - that Galfond is sacrificing getting paid back by outing him, and Jmo was the one saying outing increases odds of getting paid back.

Stick to the poker bets Jmo. Past conversation bets gonna be -EV for you brah