In what world is he risking at most 50k of his own money and making half a mill plus if he wins? If he beat him for 20bb/100 they'd net $880k profit after paying the 9bb/100. Even the backers aren't likely going to have an ev of much more than a half mill at best. He also probably is not putting up 50k of his own money unless he's putting up most of his net worth which seems unlikely that he would do. He prob is getting a very small freeroll %. This is not going to be some super lucrative get rich quick situation even if he crushes Perkins. He seems like a nice kid and Perkins doesn't need the money so hopefully it goes well for him. Doubt it will be super significant for him personally either way though other than it's a cool experience and maybe the advertising will be good for his brand he seems to be trying to build. I actually wouldn't be surprised if his hourly would be higher just spending the time spent on the challenge grinding the regular mid/high stakes games he is staked for.

feel like its just advertising for Solve for Why and they are behind it.

they will surely make endless content about it, berkey has contacts that can help the financial side of it. maybe do some type of vlog during the lead up etc.

content is king

Am I the only one who actually thinks that the original wording of the bet was correct and wrong now? Because the bet was who will win the challenge, not who will win the actual match. To me it seems to imply now that Bill can lose a grand total of 1.44m for the bet to count.

Closest analogy I can think of is the basketball cup here, where when a lower league team faces a premier league club, they are given a handicap before the game starts and I've never seen a bookie state that explicitly. It's just implied you know that the winner is the team that has the bigger number on the board in the end, not how much they actually scored in-game.

Unless the legal precedent has shown that Consumers complaint is more important that the companies TOS-Do you have any legal precedence in mind for this?

damn think you nailed that one.

What I find amusing is how saturated poker coaching has become. Much like drop shipping, you have to wonder if the money is in the activity or the teaching of it.

It is a basic feature of contract law that the actual text of the agreement is much more important than any other fact, so whoever posted that the "spirit" of the agreement is the most important thing is just MSU.

Here, though, the question is precisely what the terms of the contract are. There is likely a reasonable argument that the TOS on the side are part of a contract, in addition to the text of the bet that Pokershares put up.

This definitely isn't Terrence's best look ever, but Timex's is vastly worse. Texting "I'll wager 3x his net worth" is about as immature as it gets.

sure they're gonna make content out of it, but if you can bet against bill perkins, you bet against bill perkins. really isn't that complicated.

I'm a bit surprised how few people have commented on this. Phrasing this challenge is somewhat challenging in that we want wording that helps those uninformed on terms while not misrepresenting the situation to those who are informed on terms.

For instance if they play 3000 hands, Landon makes 800k but sees his allin EV is -200k and is terrified of paying 9bb/100 for 17000 hands so he quits. Did Landon win? He won 9BB, he won over 720k. But most ways we can use one sentence to clarify terms may appear like he still wins despite forfeit. Whereas just calling this the "headsup challenge" I think everyone in poker would know the guy who forfeit did not win.

I don't have all the answers but I do think most potential ways this could be worded can result in over-explanation causing ambiguity.

The challenge currently has a term of 20k hands. If someone bets on the challenge they're doing so on the basis that 20k hands will be completed.

If someone forfeits at 10k hands then challenge isn't complete (on the initial understanding of what the bet consisted of) and all bets should be written off and money returned.

Are you dumb?

You think if Bill says he can't be ****ed to play any more and is ahead that people who bet on him should lose their money?

Welcome to the poker world where everything is a mirage and everyone's a crusher... until you look at their finances.

Let me call my friends and ask for $$$. Nothing impressive here buddy.

Are you dumb?

You seem to be discounting all of the work that he did to make it to this point

It's the bookmakers responsibility to make the rules of any given market clear. If the -9bb stipulation isn't mentioned by the bookmaker then it's not part of the bet. It's unfair to expect everyone to know how a market will be settled without stating it. Terrence's interpretation of how this specific market was going to settle when he placed the bet is a fair one.

It's also unfair (and hypocritical for pretty much every poker player) to criticise Terrence for attempting to take an edge off his friend by betting on a poorly worded line. If you operate a bookmaker and set lines you are saying "come at me". Every poker player has played tournaments or cash games where their friends are playing who they thought they might have an edge over. I am also sure Timex has no problem accepting thousands of wagers from his friends where he thinks he has the edge. The market was public and Terrence was using his own account, get over it.

Ultimately if Timex/PokerShares want to just void the bet because they dont like it after its been placed then OK I guess they can do that. It's a scummy rule because where does it stop? Every time someone makes a smart bet they can cry mistake and void it after? That's not being a bookmaker, that's only taking advantage of idiots that bet poor lines. This is what the vast majority of books do though.

Terrence made a fair bet and it should stand as he interpreted it imo. However it's poor form of him to post private communication in public, as hilarious as it is.

Honestly I feel kind of scammed just finding out now that Landon isn't taking all his own action. Are you allowed to void your own bets on Pokershares within 24 hours or is it just Mike who can cancel them?

The negativity comes from it being the internet.

Pads is totally talking out his ass about inspiration and selflessness though. Its just a group of friends/business partners leveraging their assets to hopefully make some money.

Like, the path to success is getting staked and having a poker "influencer" take a liking to you? That's inspirational? Yeesh.

Keep folding JJ for 35bbs Pads , your a inspiration to us all.

Rooting for the kid. That's a tough read though.

TIL chilling w/Landon is great humanitarian work.

I bet a bunch of -175 ish stuff ( different lines in different places) and then found +175

Its the Super Bowl. Its the time of the Philly special. - This sounds like every tout I heard on podcasts last week.

That's all this place ever does, all the time, and without exception. This entire community is crazy that way. Everyone flocks to the poles, digs in, then takes up arms in a way that is beyond hyperbolic.

Or at least, it seems that way. I'm not totally sure. I find that most generalities, especially when softened by conditional and comparative terminology, can be deemed untrue by certain parties.