Conversely why do you care so much in defending how much a stranger on the internet earns? it just seems weird to care so much about this.

except i'm not defending it, i'm questioning you and your angry statements, read back over the posts. other than the fact it has been corroborated on here i don't have any first hand knowledge. but if she and others say she was earning this amount, then hey, she probably was, who cares? But you (and others) for some reason automatically assume this can't be true and aggressively react to it on the internet without any reasoning or evidence. is that salary so high to you that you genuinely didn't think anybody earned that much or something?

Yes you are, that's why your arguing with someone who bashed her you muppet.

Why am I skeptical? I think you need to be the elite to earn that much, and I don't believe she is elite, more like a show pony. Secondly, I don't believe she would throw that kind of money away at 35 to play poker. It just smells fishy, and in poker that usually means bs.

I am skeptical that you are knowledgeable about salary structures at elite law firms. Are you a lawyer or do you have a relationship with a lawyer that would allow you to know how much elite lawyers make? If she didn't make close to 500K, what do you think she was making?

I probably can't convince you that someone would quit such a high-paying job, so let's stick to analyzing your thought process about number where we can get some evidence. That's assuming that you would accept any evidence and won't just scream "fake news" at anything that contradicts the narrative you have adopted.

cate should have had way more than 130k.

if you're overrolled for a game and you still are willing to sell half of your action for 5/10 nl you should just quit poker. you aren't cut out for it.giving up half your profit because you're mentally weak is inept.

i could understand staking some 23 year old kid who is good at poker for 5/10 nl and has just been grinding 1/2 nl.



i would never trust someone who made good money professionally, hit some big tournament scores and still asks to be staked for 5/10 nl.
i could understand wanting to stake her in some big private soft nl game.but for 5/10 nl warning bells should have been going off.

Alrighty, you haven’t added anything here other than more salty uninformed speculation and I’m not getting further into a back and forth with someone like you. The prior posts speak for themselves.

Keep an eye on that blood pressure won’t you

I'm not pretending to be an expert, I only have a general knowledge which is why I'm just skeptical. 500k is big money even for a lawyer, i assume you would need a lot of experience for starters and she was what, 33 at the time? Have we even seen any evidence she was anything more than a law clerk?

I suspect you don't even have general knowledge.

The internet can tell you that she had the title of associate at what was then known as Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel (notable for Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch formerly working there). It is an elite law firm and suggests she had a very strong record to be hired at what should be a sought-after job. If you have problems looking for her information, you should know that Cate is short for Caitlin.

Then, you can look at this article dated 2015, which says that the first year base salary is $225K with a starting bonus of $175K, year-end bonuses range from $100-300K, and Howard Treesong said that the compensation statement that he looked at included 401K contribution and benefits on top of salary plus bonus. It wasn't her first year when she quit, so it seems likely that her base salary plus year end bonus was at least $400K, with other forms of compensation on top of that. So, it should be plausible that her overall compensation was close enough to be rounded up to $500K.

This is all something that you could figure out yourself instead of making assumptions when you admit to not having the knowledge base to even make a decent assumptions.

It's a stressful job with the article saying that average hours were greater than 2500/year, so it is easy to see how it might not be the long-term choice of someone who doesn't love the job and doesn't have a strong love of money. I have no idea why she dropped out of legal practice. Maybe she had aspirations of entering politics or becoming a judge and it became clear to her that she was not going to be on a track to accomplish that, so poker became a temporary job while she tried to figure out what she wanted to do next. I can come up with a dozen plausible motivations. Just because you wouldn't walk away from the money doesn't mean that someone else feels the same way.

Wrong kind of thinking esp with having Chad as a backer...The long term opportunity is nosebleeds and high buyin tournaments with some backers. Something that wouldn't be easy or smart on one's own money.

except she needed to be staked for 5/10 which is pathetic all things considered

Exactly this. And i also call BS on the explenation presented wich goes something like this: "I am infact comfortably rolled to play 5/10, i just want less risk for myself so thats why i need a stake and thus giving away 50 percent of my winrate".

Yeah sure, i have been on a huge tournament heater and claim to have left a 500K position to play poker- i have so so much money to my name that i barely knows what to do with it, but i still need to be staked in order to play 5/10. Its just laughable that anyone is buying this nonsens.

The reality is that 95 percent+ of people needing a stakingdeal is broke, and cant keep themself in action if they dont get staked. There is nothing in this case that indicates that CH is an exception to this rule. Chad himself also confirms this in posts during this thread: that most people that approach him for staking is busto.

You got to be pretty naive and easy to fool if you truly believe that the story/image Cate Hall have presented of herself is the truth. Mirage is using strong words in his posts also btw,but even so he is rightfully doing so to an exctent in my opinion. It certainly smells fishy on alot of levels of this case.

exactly.

i've had non poker friends yell me "hey let me give you x dollars, you put up x dollars in a poker game and we split it 50/50" which of course never makes sense for me, as i have to explain because i'm literally just giving them money, unless of course i am going 50/50 with them in some massive game i normally wouldn't play that's super soft.

i probably won't ever stake anyone or be staked. but if someone wanted me to stake them for something like 5/10 nl they better have a damb good reason (basically they/their kids had some serious health issues that cost them a ton of money, not that I wish that on anybody) for me to do so.and "i want to cut my risk so I'm giving up half of my profit" doesn't come close to cutting it.

i would say barring occasional really big soft games, it's more like 99 pct of people being staked are broke and/or total frauds.

Man, it's amazing how often in these disputes posted on here that both parties look terrible.

The live poker scene just seems like a cesspool.

Was it her year end pay statement or a Total Rewards Statement? When people talk about how much money they make, they normally don't include all of the benefits... it is usually just salary, commission, and bonuses. Total compensation statements can include every possible benefit and every potential bonus and is much higher than their income.

Her tweets are skewed differently after parsing the info in this thread, imo. I leaned towards guilt of predatory staking originally. After reading Chad's side, scrolling her twitter and it's revolting the way she controlled the narrative via inferior communication technology.

it is.

just grunched the last few days of thread. Im pretty sure it was noted in varying degrees of politeness in several posts above, but just to be clear, you sir are a raging idiot.

please post link where CH said that. else please post and say that you just are making stuff up.


Why do so many posters ITT have so much and anger and hostility toward CH ? Is it as simple as her being female and having some moments of fame in the poker world . For example, I am assuming that the source of MJK12's anger are his serious mommy issues, but whats the source of others' hostility and anger

Also the number of people ITT making stuff up and claiming CH said it , thought it, believes it, must believe it, must have said it, must have thought it .. etc is mind boggling.

It would be helpful going forward if posters could post links to back up their claims of what CH did, said, thought, etc etc

Else please just start your post with. "Full Disclosure I am pulling this info out of my arse"

For example , since its been stated many times ITT and repeated by several posters someone coming to thread might believe CH was out there bragging about her mad poker skills. Unless there is some secret twitter feed or members only youtube channel, or some poker TV show that only a select few can view, I have not ever seen this, and I follow alot of stuff in poker.

I've asked several posters to post some evidence after making the above claim in a post..... no takers as of yet. they state their opinions as if they were facts, and when asked to simply post link to back up their claim... crickets

I find it weird she would show some financial statements to a friend. Other than that, this whole mess seem to attract way more attention than is warranted.
Naive staker. Reckless stakee. We have seen it plenty of times before.

[x] 500k Lawyer
[x] 40 horses in his stable
[x] doesn't understand the value of a written contract

If anything is accurate in this thread, surely it's this.

Unless it's this.

Whoa settle down there. Some people would rather enjoy their lives than grind it out doing something they hate

The fact of a written contract is not particularly relevant. See Texas v. Penzoil or Cable & Computer Tech v. Lockheed for examples of eight or nine figure jury verdicts based on oral contracts.

Also: she posted her comp statement because dentale bet her she didn’t make 500k. I independently know the comp structure at DC law firms.

Pretty sure the whole point of this mess was to out the other as a scumbag infront of the relevant community. If a written contract is legally binding is not as interesting as proving who is in the wrong.

At the risk of encouraging further derailment, as another lawyer with biglaw experience and knowledge of DC law firm pay scales, I saw Cate's compensation memo and it was totally legit. She made just short of 500k her last year at her firm. I held similar jobs and made the same during years where I was able to stomach billing thousands of hours and had a good Adderall prescription.

One comment I wanted to add to this derailment: I am always amused when non-lawyers act incredulous that anyone would ever walk away from mid-six figure salary at a law firm. If the law firm could pay people less than that to do the job, they would do so. They pay such intense salaries because it is quite necessary to keep people doing the work. In other words, such jobs are incredibly miserable for most people and only a very specific and unique personality type can make it work long term. It is the least interesting and shocking thing in this thread that Cate quit a job at a white-shoe firm and took a couple years to play poker and figure out what to do with her life.

The ones that make it on here look bad. I'm going to assume most end up fine. Basing it on the twoplustwo sample is like watching baseball game highlights on sportscenter and thinking it's home runs hit by most batters