Lol

Has there been discussion on 2+2 about PokerShares allegedly adding terms to its line on this after bets were placed? Saw the Terrence Chan posts on Twitter but wasn't sure if there's a thread on it:

https://twitter.com/tchanpoker/statu...43663934124035

i thought it was pretty scummy of chan

he knew about the 9bb/100 aspect of the challenge and then basically tried to break the bet button on PS website

the line seemed obvious to be settled on the winner of the challenge

Considering he was DEEP in makeup before hitting a 200k score(that he probably didn't keep more than a few shekels), I'll take my side

Its definitely a questionable situation for the guy. Rob isn't even that trash. Certainly better than Bill. Giving him 15bb/100 is a losing proposition.

Mike looks brutal based on that message exchange. Talk about ego. Pokershares always seemed like a massive waste of time due to the limits and now it just looks like amateur hour. They put the wrong terms on the page (no mention of the handicap) and they cry foul that someone bet it? Lol c'mon man.

i think it was more that the two are friends or at least friendly.

chan was told that the challenge involved a handicap and then filled up three times on max bets because he felt that the handicap was not made explicit.

imo if you are betting on the winner of a challenge - and the bet was labled as the tice v perkins challenge - then you are betting on the winner of that challenge as defined by the rules of the challenge.

he knew this and then tried to grim a mate?

yuk

hey that's me.

+240 seems like a good deal. But don't want my money locked up 5 months or w/e.

Telling though that Pokershares sent the clarification follow-up email. Indicating they understood how ambiguous it was. I don't really care and agree that TC probably did know something was amiss. Mikes responses are childish at best and I'm not surprised this is all over a few hundred bucks of EV.

Timex is a ****ing clown. If it wasn't obvious from the 10 million other spots where he was an entitled clown, then it should be completely obvious here.

Last week twice bookmaker, one of the biggest most honest sportsbooks in the world, had a prop listed wrong for Philadelphia 76ers games, they listed players points as what would be there points+rebounds+assists, then the next week they listed all players assists as their points+rebounds+assists. I bet 5k the first week on different players points, won all of them of course because lines were way off what was even really possible, then the last time i bet 30k on the under assists lines they posted which were more egregiously off, one that i remember was joel embiid under 43.5 assists i think it was, they accepted the bets, but then rejected them later when the game started, so this is a totally common thing and Mike isnt wrong at all imo

Yes, Mike even quoted the specific Pokershares TOC in terms of materiality and human error in his response. And I too have been victim of this (2014 Uconn somehow listed as +1200 in march madness final). They gave my my bets back by the way and pretty lol calling your book 'honest' if they just continue to free roll you (or don't send an email before the event begins quoting the corrected line).

My response was specific to their exchange and how brutal Mike looks here by insta-responding with "are you dumb?" and continuing to act like a child when representing his own business. Not to mention Pokershares reached out to clarify the bet when they re-read it and realized how poor their wording was. Again, amateur hour and sad seeing him die on that hill over a few hundred bucks of EV.

My view is that there are arguments on both sides of whether the book should honor its customer's arguably reasonable interpretation of a line, but Timex is acting like a prick calling him a liar/scammer, needling him with another Tweet today, and calling him dumb from the get-go.

Lemme get this straight.. This Chan guy thinks 9bb/100 should've been mentioned explicitly on the betting page for it to count.. But then tries to fire 3x $1k into the bet when it explicitly states 1k max bet on the betting page

Sick angleshoot. Absolute ****ing hypocrite.

I know they’ve known each other for 20 years or so, but I can’t imagine they were anything more than acquaintances based on how catty they both were in their Twitter spat.

Ultimately, I think Terrance bears most of the blame. He shouldn’t have publicly attacked Pokershares and Mike, and they had every right to cancel his action.

That said, clearly the terms of the bet weren’t that clear if Pokershares felt the need to send an email verifying Chan’s bet. I bet a lot and I’ve never had a book contact me after I place one and say ‘Are you sure? You can cancel within 24 hours.’

Once it was all said and done, Timex’s reaction was over-the-top, similar to how he went after Schulman with the free throw prop bet. I’m a fan of Timex, but he comes across as a bully which is a tad surprising and probably not the best look from a customer service standpoint.

Wrong

On a lot of gambling sites there are max bets. If they allow you to rebet you just rebet as much as you want and if they do not move the line then it is on them

Typically though if they want you capped at 1k they wont allow the other bets to process.

They allowed all 3 bets to process. They should honor all bets with no handicap. Eat the loss. Change TOS. Update software if need be to stop more than one bet from going thru if thats all they want.

Their TOS already allows them to cancel the action, so why would they need to change it?

The bet Terrance made was on the Tice v Perkins challenge which clearly included a 9bb/100 handicap. The language was ambiguous enough to warrant a change, but I think Chan would’ve lost arbitration if it had gone that far.

Chan is one of the most straight-up people around. He's dead right o this one.

Chan offered to arbitrate it and Timex told him to eff off.

Is there any professional poker player that Perkins would be even money against in a HUNL match?

wat...

Someone that plays poker for a living.

Would Perkins be even money against any of them?

Timex deciding not to arbitrate isn’t evidence that he thought he’d lose. He prob didn’t want to waste his time.

Ya lol. If Terrance wants to arbitrate I'll lay 3:1 on his net worth that it resolves in my favor. Just a ridiculous precedent to set where I'd rather just pay him 1k than deal with wasting my time

Based on dealing with different businesses in day to day life, if that's how you talk to any client, ever, it's likely they won't be around in 5 years if that's how someone in charge handles a very minor problem, maybe this will just be a one off though. Maybe because it's a scummy business that this is expected...

It might be a good idea to hire people for customer relations if outbursts can't be controlled. Sounds like the business is getting to the point where maybe the owner could afford to step back and work on what they were good at. The customer is not always right, but you can let them know that without insults. With how easily people can turn against you in todays age, gotta be careful. Seems98