To people who think equity chopping is unethical without telling all players: if instead of equity chopping they all got backing deals, should they be required to inform the table of this too? What if one player was backing someone else who shipped them 7 figures should they be forced to disclose this as well since their bankroll/risk tolerance has changed as well?

I personally am about to graduate from college and am seeking fulltime employment. When I play games 10/25 and higher I'm probably not technically rolled and probably play on the nittier side than when I play 5/10. So if when I graduate I get a 6 figure job should I be forced to disclose this? The good regs who have played against under-rolled me will have an unfair advantage because they won't have as much fold equity as before right?

Seriously the whole line of thinking is bull****. No one has a right to know bankroll/affect of variance on a player. If they were splitting action/soft-playing then they were cheating. If ftp was not going to pay guy if he won then he was cheated. Absent of these two though he has no case. Equity chopping/backing deals don't have a negative impact on him unless he is trying to leverage information he has no right to in the first place anyway.

god poker is so ****ing scummy at times when you really look at it.


as much as everyone **** son tournaments. they are far more fair then most cash games, even casino cash games.

+1

There is a large number of individuals in the poker world we so cherish, that will do anything to gain an edge and believe any way you can gain an edge and profit, it's OK. I see it all the time in live games and I am sure everyone else does too. This was happening a lot online, and still does. To some extent, I remember the massive arguments people were making about whether it's ok to play on UB or AP when they were clearly proven to be scam sites, but lots of people kept playing and saying they have an 'edge' and all the good players are gone and only fish left, etc.

Guy has more money than anyone can imagine, but that doesn't make it OK to cheat and collude against him. Besides exposing your underwear in Monte Carlo at the Final Table and wearing your pants at your knee, this is one of the the other reasons that our game will never reach popular acceptability and will alway remain marginal and be compared to OTB as opposed to Golf.

Truly a shame.

Would be interesting to know if the online players were communicating with each other while they sat at the table with LaLiberte.

Having played in a lot of live games with Guy, especially when he first started playing poker, and also in private games (that Guy frequently organized) this is bull****. I probably played with Guy over 100x, never once did anyone in the game have a piece of my action, never did I have a piece of anyone else's action. There were cases of people swapping pieces with each other I'm sure, but never in a way that materially altered the way they played vs Guy or others.

This whole thing is a case of someone with an ego being embarrassed that he lost a fortune playing online poker and now attempting to save face. There is a reason why Guy changed his username frequently, and it wasn't so others didn't know who they were playing against, it was so the tracking sites would have a tougher job keeping track of how much he lost. (more on this).

I like Guy a lot. I have spent a decent amount of time with him both on and off the tables, the thing that I'll never take away was how prideful he was, I remember him showing us a check from the MGM/ Bellagio one day that was for 7 figures, he passed it around the table so we could all look at it.

This struck me as odd because the guy was basically the boss of all bosses - we get it buddy you are worth 1bn or 2, no need to show us a check. We know already, you're already mine and likely everyone else at the tables hero already.

Guy would also do things like sneak chips on the table to replenish his stack (quietly) so that nobody would notice how much he was down. At the end of the night, Guy was pretty much the only loser and yet he would always remark that he was "breaking even"

Thats just the type of guy Guy is, extremely prideful, he can't stand the notion that someone else could be better than him at something, even if he was just starting out and really had no business being a winner in those games, he wanted to win, expected to win and when he lost, he'd probably tell you that he broke even or was a small winner or loser.

I guess when you start out as a clown doing tricks for money on the street, that sense of insecurity never escapes you no matter how much money you have. It also would manifest itself numerous occasions when playing poker when he'd say stuff in a pot like - take your time I know this means a lot to you, its basically your whole life.

He said that to me in one hand when I was facing a 500k all in on the river - My response was, I know this may be a shock to you, but my life is probably a lot more interesting, and worth a lot more than 500k.

I was one of the rare ones that never kissed Guy's ass, I have a smart mouth and I would rib and make fun of Guy just as much as I would others in the game. Almost nobody did this but I felt like he'd respect that I didn't kiss his ass, he may have respected me, but he also resented me and really tried to beat / punish me more than others. I'm pretty sure I made a few jokes that really pissed him off in some way, but thats my nature, I am not changing that no matter who you are.

This had its advantages because he never soft played me, I remember one pro who had an especially tight relationship with Guy having the nut flush on the river, making a small bet and Guy only calling with a K high flush because he didn't want to punish him - he said, you are my friend so I am just calling - The Pros face turned white.

-
As for the online stuff, I do think that some guys were swapping pieces of each other, but the notion they were playing with imaginary money is absurd. FTP wasn't backing anyone. In addition, Guy basically was a huge loser the first week he started playing FTP, these guys weren't playing with imaginary limitless money, they were playing for the most part with Guy's money, and his opponents bankrolls kept on going up and up the more he played.

Guy never even really had any upswings when playing live or online, the gap between him and the players he was playing against was that big. Everyone who was railing at the time can verify this, he was drawing dead. End of story.

The only thing I can think of that may or may not have been somewhat unfair was that he has an issue with a particular online FTP Pro - This beef has translated to some live game stuff as well that happened 2 years ago around the time of the One Drop.

This player back when Guy was playing on FTP was the guy who basically funded all of Guy's FTP transactions, whenever Guy needed money, he'd text this Pro and the Pro would send him a transfer.

The Pro thus had the advantage in telling the other players he was friends with / maybe had pieces of to get online bc Guy texted him for online $$ and thus was about to play.

Maybe Guy mistook this for him playing with guys with imaginary "limitless" money, but that wasn't the case. They were playing with money that they by and large won off of Guy.

Tx for posting

Yeah that clears it up perfectly, thanks.

Mystery FTP Pro is:

Maybe Benyamine, but doubtful since he was in debt to Antonius for big $$$ for most of his FTP career.

Could be Ivey, but he's too savvy (selfish) to alert other players about Guy logging on.

Same with Gus. Gus was (and still is) way too much of a loner to text other high stakes players about Guy's activities.

Doubtful it's E-Dog. I don't think he ever played that high.

Don't think it would be durrr. His bankroll was way to volatile to be a reliable source to provide transfers to Guy.

This really on leaves Antonious. And I'm not convinced it's him. Around 2007-2010 I don't think Patrick would be texting durrr, Galfond or the Dangs to alert them of Guy's online presence and to come get some.

Thanks for posting, explains a lot.

I don't know why you think golf is so special that it needs to be both capitalized and immune from allegations of cheating. For example, everyone knows Russ Hamilton was (is?) a huge cheater at golf.

Translation: he's mad.

Inviting a rich whale to play in a poker game under the false pretense that he's playing against separate individuals who are, regardless of any staking/backing deal in place, all playing against one another with real money on the line, is morally reprehensible and without a doubt cheating. If in reality it's 7 against 1 with 7 people all on the same bankroll, creating a bunch of completely fake loose aggressive action to in turn facilitate crazy action by the fish, the sole purpose being funneling the fish's money to any of the other 7 players at the table so it can later be chopped up amongst all the players, it's cheating. Throw in the fact that Full Tilt was giving players unlimited bankrolls to bust Guy's accounts again and again and it's insanely scummy.

Anyone who thinks it's a normal backing, staking or equity chop scenario does not understand what supposedly went on. Given FT's unbelievably shady actions, including the confirmed unbacked loans given to players out of player funds, I wouldn't at all be surprised if they all sat around in a board room and discussed the optimal way to fleece Guy for as much as possible. Disgusting imo.

OK but what if he flies you and the other players out to his place in Hawaii on his Boeing Business Jet and then you fleece him there in the game he invited you to? That make it better? I think it makes it more epic.

pretty sure Bob has the most value per keystroke touched in the history of computers

[x] online pro
[ ] red pro
[x] plenty of money outside of poker
[x] it´s confirmed he backed degenyamine for nosebleed plo
[x] probably backed others as well
[x] very good chance he played vs guy live quite often
[x] close connection to the FTP crew
[x] kind of friends with durrr

I´d bet on Eli Elezra.

The only reason I´d bet against him is he didn´t play vs guy, at least not under the "Eli Elezra" account. But then again, didn´t he once claim he had 17 accounts on FTP?

As for the guys you mentioned - 0 % chance of this being Benyamine (remember how he said the exact same line coltranedog mentioned - "this is your life blabla" - to Benyamine on High Stakes Poker?) or E-Dog. Antonius or Gus might be a better bet (and this might also explain why Gus can piss away 100k every day it seems), but both of them were part of Team Full Tilt, not some online pro.


EDIT: Never mind. I guess the chances of this being Durrr are even bigger, given how *randomly* Guy would join tables a lot and just so randomly face a table that featured Durrr, Galfond and the Dang brothers, who all happen to be friends. I also seem to remember seeing Guy ask Durrr for a transfer in Chat while playing on FTP.

Confirmed

Exactly, that's who i'd put my money. I got the impression that Durrr and Guy had somewhat of a friendship.

More like: Coltranedog has taken Guy for all he could and now he´s confident Guy will never play again.

Passive fish cold 3Bs a flop...seems bluffy.

Everything you say is true. You are one of the few that played at those stakes. But he is talking about FTP and the fact that players were playing w play money vs his real money. I think this has a great effect to someone's playing style. And to go one step further, what if the players were more willing to flip and force action bc they not only were playing w play money but they were also chopping?

I remember seeing those rail heaven games and thinking that the play was ultra aggressive and lots of all ins, especially multiway. There may be some truth or perception of truth to what he is claiming.

As for live, whatever. This isn't his issue. He doesn't even say poker stars. He states the glory days of FTP.

Yeah but in the interview Guy says something to the tune of: "oh my live results are good and I only lost online as they cheated."

This of course ties in prefectly with what Coltranedog says i.e. He exhibits the classic symptoms of a perennial losing gambler i.e. "yeah man, I'm break even overall except for when I get cheated."

Yawn-fest, bro. And telling lies just further makes his moaning less valid as it's not even an honest moan. Fair enough to come out and say "they had pieces I didn't know about and I think they should of told me. And it now seems shady stuff @ FT means who knows how real the money even was. Overall it was a blast to play and even though I would of lost anyway, I don't feel too good about those games now and feel the playing field wasn't 100% level." That would be reasonable and would gain him a lot of respect, but instead he goes into mumbo jumbo loser ego talk that is resulting in a lot of people who might otherwise of had more time for his story, now having zero sympathy for his being at least somewhat played.

I just can't help thinking that even though he was at least somewhat played, he needs to man up and deal with it better and a more truthful and accurate assessment of what actually happened (and still happens in his poker life i.e. he loses all the time,) would be a good starting point.

You don't think Player X playing with funds being replenished carte blanche by Full Tilt against Guy who is putting up his own hard earned money that Player X is at a distinct advantage over Guy?

It is like I use play money against an opponent who is using real money. I will be at an advantage.

As long as the money is real and FTP would have paid out had Guy won there is nothing wrong with this at all. Is it wrong for people to get no-loss backing deals? Like seriously do people who make these arguments even play poker? Play the play money tables sometime (if it's not your regular game) and see how they play. I promise you the quality of play goes WAY DOWN when people are playing for play money. If I have a chance to win money from someone who doesn't care if they lose that's a huge advantage for ME as it will lead to them playing badly. If he's accusing FTP of freerolling him such that if he won it would have also been play money then yes that is a serious allegation and if true is 100% wrong, I'm just pretty sure it's not true.

not arguing either way(dont really care), but i think your play money analogy is a little off because the quality drops when people know if they win play money they cant do anything with it anyways(playing for fun and not necessarily to win). however if they don't have to worry about there losses but if they win, its real money that will effect their livelihood(thus playing hard to win). totally different mindset it think.

i doubt ftp was giving pros an endless bankroll, but you never know with the level of corruptness that was discovered. i.e. we have an endless raping oops sorry, i mean raking machine that will never dry up so we can use players deposits to cover in the short term. it might not make a difference in the edge the pro has over the fish but if the pro had a more limited bankroll and the fish went on a heater, he could be knocked out of the game and not be able to come back in for a while.

if the pro was backed with endless legitimate money i dont see anything wrong with that. but if ftp pros were using player funds provided by that ftp ceo, knowingly or not i think there is a problem.

Spot on. Thanks for the information.