Thanks, Oski, for your thoughtful response.

It still all seems a bit bizarre to me, but to each his own.

Also re money going to refugees, exactly zero of the money will go to the refugees no matter what, and if it did, it would get stolen immediately anyway. It will go to "help" the refugees.

Now, "help" is a pretty broad term. The West has been "helping" Africa for about 150 years, and it's still a huge cluster**** over there. Advocacy could very well help more than three days worth of rice. An after-party could very well help more than lining the pockets of a warlord.

So when you really start digging into this stuff, you find a hopeless morass of confusion. You don't know where your money is going, period. Some tiny amount of due diligence based on suggestions by NVG posters isn't gonna change that.

You want to help a refugee, go adopt one and bring him back. Otherwise, personally I'd donate to the Gates Foundation, which is trying to solve these problems with some long-term thinking by very smart people, before donating to any purported "relief" organization.

And I don't much like the idea of playing a tournament dedicated to one cause, then deciding afterwards whether or not that charity is worthy.

But... whatever. Do what you gotta do.

Please elaborate.

And by that, I don't expect you to state: "He set up the failed swap with Cornell Fiji so that he could run to 2p2 with great thread-stater material!"

or, "He made the people at Ante Up hire Annie Duke and caused them to act completely unprofessional, just so that he could leave his winnings at the cage ... so that he could run to 2p2 with great thread-starter material!"

or, are there any other prime examples of your point. From what I know, Admo pretty much did a bunch of photo shops that were top quality, but has otherwise not been involved in any self-serving drama.

So ... just like Johnny Hughes made up stuff about Admo ("he called me a liar" [which is funny, because JH was lying by making that statement]) what will you make up now that the question is posed?

Well, shaundeeb said Admo wasn't gonna donate right away no matter what, and Admo himself said he spoke to Norman Chad about his grand plan before the tournament started, so I'm not sure why there had to be a huge drama-bomb re phone calls, pregnant wives, and the organizers hassling him afterwards. What did he expect to happen if he didn't donate right away?

But, again, whatever. I'm not agreeing with GobboFan, just pointing out that there sure is a bunch of random noise around this issue.

We got it. That alone is a benefit from Admo's actions.

Whether the ultimate donation goes towards advocacy or relief, it should not be understated how much pork is invovled with this stuff.

And yes, a lot of these questions resulted from digging. However, if Ante Up and not had their heads in their asses, they would not have created this situation which resulted in a lot of these questions being raised.

At this point, I don't think the appropriate reaction (and this is not against you Pinapple) is to say, "well, most of these events are FUBAR so, just give em the money."

But what IS the appropriate reaction? Should every player who cashed in the tournament go through all this rigamarole? Then the event would fall apart of its own weight, and even the small amount that got through the FUBAR and helped people would disappear.

And since a player usually isn't gonna cash no matter how soft the field is, and their entry will go towards donations, it's OK to give a small amount of money to a FUBAR, but not a larger amount?

And since your prize is made up of money from other entry fees, and those people presumably wanted that money to go to this particular charity, now you are saying you are smarter and in charge because you outplayed them and luckboxed a few showdowns, and you're gonna decide what to do with it?

1. That may be true, but the fact remains that Ante Up/Hunter created the drama-bomb. This whole affair could have been resolved behind closed doors. Admo gave simple instructions and made a reasonable request not to be bothered until he could talk to Annie Duke.

2. If Admo had a grand plan, well ... I bet it was grand. There is no immunity just because this is a charity; especially since its a charity (or not) that has Annie Duke as a face person. Again, people should be more discerning when it comes to choosing their bedfellows. I think it is completely reasonable to call into question anything (and anyone) that associates itself with Annie Duke. Sorry, but she has made her choices and people have a right to react accordingly.

If you think something is fishy, that doesn't mean the correct course of action is to "stay away" and just let it go. Or, that by playing the tourney, you give tacit approval of the organization from soup-to-nuts. If there is an agenda involved on Admo's behalf, well I guess he subjects himself to the forum of public opinion ... so far, it seems he's read the tea-leaves correctly.

If a player has questions regarding the integrity of the event and its associates, why not? What is the tolerance point? Why assume that it would be a bad thing for the event to fall apart of its own weight. Perhaps, the "event" should get its **** together so that it avoids any questions of impropriety.

Perhaps, it should run events that will automtically take money from the prize pool/fees rather than leaving that decision up to the player's conscience. Really, what happens when a person decides they DO have an issue and their conscience drives them towards a different course of action than what is expected by the "event?"

Well, perhaps they should not leave it to chance, or they should make it so that they are beyond reproach so that the participants don't have these types of issues. Not having Annie Duke as a face person is a good place to start.

I generally agree with your points Oski but I just thought it was important to point something out. I'm quite sure from all the research I have done on the matter that AUFA is actually a "charity" started by Annie Duke and Don Cheadle. Now it doesn't change your point much but I think it's somewhat important to note that the charity did not randomly seek out Ms. Duke to represent them. In the end AUFA probably doesn't exist and certainly doesn't become an official WSOP event without Ms. Duke's help. It's quite a paradox.

BTW, this is an awesome lesson for all you ballers out there. I'm sure even if her time is donated to AUFA, its billed at something absurd, and then written off of her taxes. Forget donating to charity for tax purposes, running the charity is the way to go. All the big boys have their own.

When you make your own at least pass 100% of the cash through, like I hope annie is doing, only screw uncle sam for the good karma.

Anything associated with Duke is open to question. Whether its an issue of the chicken or egg doesn't matter.

I am sure Cheadle has enough pull to get another poker celebrity to carry out the plan.

Norman Epstein (charity co-founder) confirmed that Ante Up For Africa is a "501(c)3 non-profit organization."

Maybe you forensic accounting wizards overlooked something, is that possible? It seems unlikely someone would lie about their 501(c)3 status if it is easily verifiable via public record.

Mr. Epstein didn't answer any of my other questions; he explained that he is in the midst of a personal matter of his own. He will be unable to communicate with me for several weeks so this is probably the last update for a while. In closing, I asked if he could have one of his staffers provide me with financial reports and told him that I look forward to speaking with again him whenever he is able.

http://www.irs.gov/app/pub-78/ seems a good place to start.

http://www.irs.gov/charities/article...=96291,00.html as well.

It is just as legitimate as Annie Duke's other business ventures.

Seems kind of funny:

"Ah - you're considering donating 60-100K to us? That's great...that's just great! By the way - here is the answer to 1 of the many questions you've asked: Yes we are a "501(c)3 non-profit organization."

Can I get back to you in several weeks? "

As Kevmath so astutely pointed out with his links to the irs.gov site, if Ante Up For Africa is a 501(c)3 they are not using the name "Ante Up for Africa."

Also, if they are a 501(c)3 they must file a form 990. There are no exceptions to this (None that would apply to AUFA anyway, there are plenty of exceptions but almost all relate to religious groups). If I were you Admo I would withhold my donation until the receipt of a form 990 for AUFA. Even if Mr. Epstein is busy anyone from the AUFA office (assuming there is one) should be able to pull, copy and send you the latest 990. It's a public document containing public information and even the person answering the phones should be aware of its existence and location.

Again I will caveat with the fact that I have worked with charities who were years behind in filing their 990's (they agree to settlement fees with the IRS for the delinquency). So there is a possibility that AUFA is simply behind on their filings as I believe they are only a few years old.

LOL. Yeah, his personal matter is his charity is being scrutinized by someone that wants to donate.

So it's perfectly OK to:

- Ask zero questions ahead of time
- Assume that because Annie Duke is involved, it is likely to be shady
- Pummel the soft field to a second-place finish
- Create a drama-bomb to focus attention on the issue
- NOW start asking questions

And anyone playing the event can, nay SHOULD, use the same strategy, because of Annie Duke's involvement.

Well, fine. I guess that's all there is to say. It's all Annie Duke's fault for starting up a charity, and it's all the organizers fault for actually expecting a top finisher to donate to the actual charity that put on the actual event, and Admo is a genius and a god.

OK, got it. Carry on.

This! Its just ridiculous that AUFA has not responded to anything at all in this matter. If everything is on the up and up wouldnt you want to set things straight asap???

I get the feeling that Mr Epstein just wants Admo to go away at this point-with or without his donation.

Charities are supposed to raise money for worthy causes, and charitable donations are down across the board in this economy. Why would the Co-Founder basically give a potential 60K donator the backhand when he is trying to pay them. Why wouldn't he politely hand him off to another person? Why wouldn't he address the issue of "Hunter" publicly? Maybe he was promised to be made whole by "Hunter" for her hasty actions.

On a completely unrelated note, I wanted to say nice job Annie Duke for your 2d place finish on The Celeb Apprentice. Your ability to raise funds was admirable. Although you sometimes said things you might wish you hadn't, If I represented a Charity you worked for, I would never cross you. That is all.

Pineapple: feel free to get dramatic. lol

Anyhow, your "summary" of my argument is way off. Re-read, and maybe we'll chat about it later.

Hunter created the drama bomb imo

i taught annie duke waz white?!?!

Also read - personally i'd donate it to someone involved with the bilderburg group. A foundation that is helping the NWO sort out the worlds overpopulation problem with some long-term thinking by some very smart people who are also extremely powerful.

If this statement provokes interest, please research it. You will be shocked.

Admo has donated 60k and he just wants to know how the money is being used.(who cares whether he asked before the event started or after)Infact everyone who are part of the donation wants to know how the money is being used.
why are the event organisers sceptical/scared in revieling the info?


its much harder to be known as a genius in 2plus2 than winning at poker.
But its rather easier to be branded as baised and based on your arguments
its seems you are.Got it OK