Players were defrauded by their deposits plus their net winnings (losses).

The funds are now commingled and there's really no case for DoJ undoing the fact that players chose to spend their money at the tables.

Joe got some of his money from FTP, sat down at a table, and lost $600 of his money. He has $400 remaining.

If I gave someone $100K, borrowed back $20K, lost/spent it, and then found out the underlying investment was fraudulent, my remission wouldn't be based on $100K. It would be based on $80K.

DTM wote an eloquent piece, but unless DoJ is reading the forums, they won't see it. AFAIK, everyone speaking to DoJ is arguing in favor of a balances-based remission, and that's exactly what we expect to happen.

LOL about reading the forums like that would matter.

It is the effing lawyers that will do this. Guaranteed.

And at a minimum that will mean huge delays as a judge will have to mediate this. And lo and behold, a DTM smart guy may sway a judge to rule that the whole damn thing was a fraud.

Yes, of course they won't see it. That was the point.

Yep. That's why PPA has lawyers out there.

There's no "other side" before DoJ, at least AFAIK. DoJ has the money and is determining the process for repayment. Once done, I believe this will all be handled administratively such that no judges are involved.

WE its a big word not all of us expect to happen. Please dont speak for me and others. bigsid

He's speaking for himself and the PPA. Trust me, no one cares what you think let alone would speak for you.

Since there's no evidence the games weren't on the square, the PPA is doing the right and fair thing for poker players by arguing for balances to be repaid.

Is there precedent for DoJ doing a deal like this of magnitude and scope with no public comment/involvement from any outside entity for approval? Don't they at minimum have to open it up to comment before remissions are put into action?

The SEC case I am involved with requires a federal judge to rubber stamp every single dollar of disbursement. And it is constantly held up because of lawyers contesting everything.

They weren't on the square. You had players playing with play money (that is a lot of use of play!) vs. real money players. Their tolerance for risk wasn't equitable since they had no downside risk.

As much as I love DTM I do not think his post qualifies as Post of the Year. I believe in a prior post he stated that the DOJ could do pretty much whatever they wanted in the remissions process, including for example, basing payments on the spelling of the person's name. So whether a person's name starts with a vowel or a consonant could be used to determine who qualifies for remission. I think they should use consonant as both my first and last name begin with one. IMO you vowels do not have a leg to stand on.

The DOJ also committed fraud in that they seized 100s of millions of dollars from online poker sites by stating that online poker was illegal. 8 months after BF they said my bad the wire act only makes sports betting illegal, not online poker.

Yes I know it is not that simple but to think that the reason someone lost 100k playing poker was because FT was not capable of paying people back when the DOJ's action on BF caused a run on the "bank" is inspiring me to stop entertaining myself here on my break and hit the tables again.

I dont find that argument nearly compelling enough for a player organization to be arguing for anything other than repayment of balances. They are taking the correct stance, and membership would support them by overwhelming numbers if put to a vote.

Maybe that explains why I preferred FT to PS. People were giving money away. I feel so used.

i think all people got there own agenda here.IM sorry you left your money on a corupt site where it was known alot of the members and owners were stealing loaning money to e-dog 2million that was are money ! playing against red pros that were just given money to just play.

C'mon, man. Insiders and sponsored pros NEVER had to put up real money to play. God only knows how many accounts these guys had. When you can just request 400K and then start playing, and not have to pay it back EVER if you lose, then it is a FRAUDULENT endeavor.

The above example is what Barry G, did, and he wasn't even a sponsored Pro at Full Tilt (he was sponsored by Poker Stars). Now, imagine what types of FREE SHOTS the insiders and other pros at Full Tilt got. They would just request advances and then take their shot. If they lost, it is not like they EVER had to actually go to the bank and wire money to Full Tilt.

The whole thing was a scam. It is easy to see. Insiders took out over 450 million that we know of. That number could be more. Stories like Barry G getting a 400K loan from player funds and then never paying it back, while not even being affiliated with Full Tilt poker is the type of activity that sends all involved away to prison for many years when it happens in the real world.

Stories like Erick Lindren getting a 2 million dollar advance, only to accidentally be advanced 4 million, and being able to keep it without the authorities being brought in is another STUNNING and obvious example that the whole thing was a fraud by mainly degenerate high stakes poker players, and a few non-degenerates who still went along with it because they were taking out tens of millions of dollars each.

The joke was on the public. They knew exactly what they were doing when they aggressively went after the United States market when most all others withdrew due to legal reasons. They figured they would all get rich, and when the **** hit the fan they could argue it was a grey legal area.

They pulled it off, for the most part. You only have to get rich once. Notice how goofs like Phil Gordon basically disappeared from the poker scene. No more cancer charities, no more trying to win that bracelet he so desperately wanted.

The joke was on the players. You won't be getting back anywhere near what you think you are. Nor should you.

$4 Million of players funds (and $2MM being an accident) being wired to a poker degenerate and people believe the game was square...

That would take a person 115 years to earn that money at $35k a year if they saved every dime. And it was clicked over to him with no recourse.

How these people are not in jail is the thing people should be asking.

Who gives a **** about who should and shouldn't go to jail? Start another thread if you must, or dig up the last thread on that topic.

Meanwhile, I have a balance due, and will get some portion of that at some point, when the government gets around to it. Nothing any of you idiots say or do is going to change how much I get, so just STFU until there's some real news.

You have been suggesting that the DOJ does not have discretion over the remission process for months based on your experience in another case, regardless of everything that has been posted that contradicts this, and you've been asked before what that prior case is because there is literally no precedent of a court ruling against the DOJ's discretionary latitude granted under the Federal Civil Forfeiture statutes.

Is yours a State SEC case? No, you said Federal judge. Is it not a forfeiture case but rather a forced liquidation? No, you've posted that it is not a bankruptcy case. Why are you unwilling to give the name of the case so we can put your 'the DOJ doesn't decide remission, courts do' assertion to rest?

Uh, this is NVG, not government reports.

Stop reading this thread if it bothers you so much.

There is some great stuff in here, some stuff that doesn't mean that much, and a bunch of crap, just like your post.

Knock, knock...welcome to the Internet.

I wasn't speaking for you. TBH, I was unaware of your existence until you replied.

By that logic, anyone bankrolled sufficiently would be able to run you over.

Anyone who maintains that the fact that many of the people on FT were playing with imaginary money didn't effect the integrity of the games are liars or fools.

yes whatever he said >>>>>>>>>>>>>> DREDDY

LOL so everyone would get like 1 penny on the dollar? Maybe

Nice

no disrespect ,sometimes you sound like your speaking for every poker player.

It was the equivalent of having a backer. Anyone with backers and/or very large rolls has the same effect on the game.

I'm not defending FTP's actions in any way, but I am saying that, as far as any of us know, the games were played honestly, so the results on the felt ought to be considered binding.

What I am suggesting will result in more total remission (perhaps three times as much) being paid out to US players than if remission is paid based on balances alone. It would also, however, mean that winning players would get a substantially smaller share of the total remission paid. For players to only get a penny on the dollar would seem to require that net deposits since 2008 exceed $50 billion. That seems to be a tad high to me. I think somewhere between a nickel on the dollar and a dime on the dollar is more likely.

Of course, what I am suggesting would be unpopular here, where every poster is a winning player.