From the article/interview:

"Do you think he acted alone?

Like many players, I was expecting a half-dozen arrests, but it appears he might have been the only player smuggling the chips into play. Several people said he had a buddy with a backpack who was railing him and constantly coming up to the table to check up on him. Maybe he was giving him the chips? I can’t verify this but it seems plausible that this would be how Lusardi would go about his crime. If so I would hope Mr. Backpack would be facing jail time as well."

Would be cool if Mr. Backpack posted at 2+2.

Other than the govt is slow, another cheater is the most likely explanation for the lengthy investigation. It would be interesting to know if he had a roommate or a travel partner from NC that also played.. On the other hand, I think the amount of fake chips being a 1/5 of his highest chip stack could indicate he was working alone....

I subscribe to this main theory, slow govt as alternative theory.

A third theory is they are all pulling a David Williams and just sitting around a suite at Borgata and rubbing the price pool cash all over their you know whatties. prob one of the first two though

nice and yes I believe Karma is real and pninwin is due some for sure.

As far as dreams, there is no scientifically accepted agreement on role, purpose and effect of these. Some think thoughts and ensuing dreams perpetuate reality. But I digress, searching for existentialist/quantum physics/philosophy thread now.

Sorry, y'all, TL;DR alert.

Haha wow, I hadn't noticed/thought about my location in ages. Don't be jelly. I can send you an autographed glossy 8x10 with me holding my bracelet and my law degree for only $49.95.

Ironically, my location could have allowed you to verify that I did in fact graduate from one of the top 15 law schools in the country, one that includes Torts as part of its mandatory curriculum. Just trying to help you out!

It's always amazing, when someone with no knowledge on a subject encounters someone with knowledge, 90% of people try to absorb and understand the extra knowledge and learn, and 10% just dig their heels in and argue from their position of ignorance. My mother did the same thing. She didn't graduate high school, but would constantly argue with her doctors and disregard their advice. Just like she did, you think your random thoughts trump YEARS of education. You are dead wrong.

And I am not 'bragging' about my education (or poker results for that matter). There are dozens of people on this site who can put both to shame. HOWEVER, this is a specific area where I DO know what I am talking about. I have been paid as part of my job to teach Torts and Computation of Damages to judges. They call me and ask how to handle negligence cases. If someone posted here who practices tort litigation in New Jersey, guess what? I would listen to what they have to say, because they have experience and knowledge that I do not.

I will say this, I think a lawyer could ethically ask for 1st place money in one situation here: representing the chip leader. You could make a good faith argument that when the tournament was ended, the prize money should be awarded according to published payout and current standings. 0 chance Borgata settles for it, small but non-zero chance you get it at trial. Of course going to trial means the plaintiff's lawyer gets 40-50% of it, so even as the chip leader, suing probably doesn't make sense as compared to waiting for Borgata to chop it and you keep 100%.

Just like jjj said, the dumb part isn't that you think that 1st place $ may be an appropriate damage measure for any member of the 27. The dumb part is that you dig in in the face of people who DO KNOW BETTER THAN YOU ON THIS ITEM who all tell you no. I will give another example: I contract with Red Pools to dig a pool in my backyard. We agree, I will pay $10k and they estimate work done April 1. They drag and delay and ultimately walk the job in July. I then hire Blue Pools who do it for $9k, they finish it November 1. I have not paid Red Pools their $10k. I want to sue because they said it would be April 1 and I missed the whole summer!! Inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of use!!! What are my damages? They are $0. I would think Joe Public would think I can recover. It's not stupid to not know that. It will be stupid when you tell me that oh yes you can sue and win vs Red Pool.

Seriously, please answer this: I offer a raffle with a first prize of $372k. I sell 27 tickets, and then cancel the raffle. How much should each holder of a ticket be entitled to? Explain how that is different than this? Also bear in mind that a lawyer is PROHIBITED from suing for damages that they don't have a good faith belief in their right to recovery.

If I went up to your job, I wouldn't question your knowledge. I don't know how long the fries are supposed to cook. Could be 45 seconds, could be 3 minutes. I don't know!! How stupid would I be to argue the point?

Checkmate

Down goes Frazier! Down goes Frazier!


Well done, BA.

That was amazing. Well done.

I'm really curious what other subject matters jetlag has no training in, but whose practitioners' opinions carry equal weight to his. Chemistry? Astronomy? Engineering? Aeronautics?

Not just a hypothetical- I'm highly entertained by all this and would welcome the opportunity to read more exchanges he would be willing to have with people in fields which he has no training or expertise.

Epic burn!

though I don't know if this thing ever sees a court room...

I do find the concept of a Timex for example being called as expert witness and questioned down to explain ICM to a random jury as oddly entertaining .

He then gives whole jury his prolonged evil stare and forces them into submission.

easy game.

lol timex would have it easy....

I am currently retained as an expert witness in a staking litigation which is actually going to trial, and I am charged with the task of explaining to a judge how makeup and loans against makeup and basically how all of staking works.....and I have no evil stare to fall back on.

gulp.

holy crap dude, that suuuuucks. damn i would love to watch that.

hahaha you idiots actually read that book? I always get a kick out of these guys who come on forums and brag about their degrees. well It's 2:55pm and I just woke up. I've never actually had a real job. I live off of fools like these who think you know everything, work 40+ hours and piss their hard earned money away to me on a daily basis. I do appreciate it tho. Thank you!

So your saying you live in mommy and daddy's basement?

MickeyD's must stay open late in your town, fryguy.

Dunno why I didn't realize that I didn't need to respond to you. Apparently you already replied to yourself:

hahahah i was thinking that was a rude way to talk about mommy and daddy

Some temp or perma bans to come if the back and forth insults and trolling keep up.

So in your example. 372,000 people each put $1 into a lotto.. you keep picking "losing" tickets,paying out a prize value as you get less and less people. The 28th guy got $5k...
Now with just 27 people are left you find there were counterfeit tickets added into the pot.

So you now don't pay the remaining 26 TRUE ticket holders because the counterfeit tickets somehow affected them from surviving to the last 26?

So you sue the guy with the counterfeit ticket for his winning.. but you should continue the lotto for the final 26, or pay out in some method...

Of course money should be returned. I think a valid legal argument can be maid for the remaining prize pool to be returned in one of 4 ways:

1) Even chop
2) ICM chop
3) Some blend of even chop/ICM chop (like 25% split evenly, then 75% awarded in ICM chop)
4) Pay out published payouts based on current chip standings

I think the most reasonable and likely legally correct is #2, because that most accurately reflects the equity of each player at the time.

My point with the raffle and the WSOPME examples were that you can't sue and win based on a speculative "best case" outcome. Like in the raffle suing for the entire 1st prize instead of your equity back.

Ok, this thread really has come off the rails now.

I hate to use the expression but this really is the dumbest thing I have EVER see posted on 2+2.

Would your 2nd choice be 4? Seems like at first blush 1&3 would give some players an argument they were not made whole.

Do you guys think that its possible if an ICM chop was the best solution that a good player can make a reasonable argument for getting more than ICM?

Not if the option to play it out does not exist.

My second choice would probably be a blend of ICM/even chop. I agree that that seems a bit unfair to the chip leaders, but also accounts for the fact that the shortstacks did have the chance to build back up, etc. #4 would be a close third. I think ICM/chip chop though is BY FAR the best.

Overly speculative IMO. Although the converse would be hilarious, with Borgata introducing evidence that a player sucks ass, and thus should get less than ICM. Calling other players they sucked out on as witnesses, etc. "Your honor he called a shove on the turn getting only 1.5:1 with a NAKED FLUSH DRAW!!!"