Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

News, Views, and Gossip For poker news, views and gossip.

View Poll Results: (Public Poll) I am siding with...
Chris Moneymaker 62 82.67%
Jason Young 13 17.33%
Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-01-2013, 02:08 AM   #926
MarkoPolo
old hand
 
MarkoPolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by monikrazy View Post
summary of key facts

1. Chris told Jason he was going to pay him numerous times, backed up by skype logs Jason has posted.

2. When Chris continued to evade payment Jason took it to 2+2.

3. Facing the real risk that damage to his reputation could damage future income, he tried to justify his non-payment. At one point he made a public statement in this thread saying he would pay the money, acknowledged that despite his reservations, Jason had no history of scamming and a reliable track record with other 2+2 members, only to renege within 48 hours.

4. The evidence posted in this thread suggests Chris had neither the means or the intent to pay Jason for his sports betting losses.



This seems to be a fairly straightforward case of Chris not honoring the agreement between him and Jason. Allegations that Jason would not have honored his end of the agreement are circumstantial. Moreover, Chris continued to tell Jason he would tell him he would pay him back until the dispute was recently made public on 2+2.


Disclaimer: I have no personal relationship with Chris, Jason, or any persons who may have a vested interest in the outcome.
How did you manage to leave out all facts regarding others not being paid by Jason?
MarkoPolo is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:10 AM   #927
JamesD816
adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 994
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUMike1999 View Post
Um, in your mind that was an extremely accurate description of the events... but the next question I have for you is:

How long have you and Jason been best friends????
I have to agree with PSU. After reading monikrazy post the most surprising comment was he is not friends with Jason Young. His take on the events is extremely one sided.
JamesD816 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:11 AM   #928
lostinthesaus
old hand
 
lostinthesaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,520
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

If I'm management at Stars, I'm giving a good hard look at this thread.

Conduct from both parties is completely ridiculous and I would have to strongly consider whether or not I'd want someone involved in these offenses (and there are plenty above and beyond the non-payment of a sports bet) representing my company.
lostinthesaus is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:11 AM   #929
StraddleBet
old hand
 
StraddleBet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 1,564
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Doesn't all of this come down to the sense Chris has that he was/is being freerolled? Based on what I'm reading, I get a feeling that since all of 2+2 has now become aware of/involved in the matter, the only real and favorable outcome seems like if Chris pays the third party whose name remains in question (whom Jason has been saying all along that he floated the bet with) rather than Jason. Jason didn't actually cover Chris' bets and/or credit; he's claiming the money is still owed iirc.

So help me to understand here: isn't Jason the middle man in this whole equation anyways? I'm not questioning anyone's reputation here, I'm simply thinking of a way that the whole thing could be settled so that Chris doesn't continue to feel like he's getting freerolled and Jason's debt to the anonymous third party is satisfied.

If I've got any of this wrong, jump in.

I've read posts saying that there was a third party, then denials that there was a third party, then additional people have come in and vouched for Jason or this or that. What I haven't heard is anyone saying, "Yes, I took Chris' action via Jason and I am owed a lot of money, Chris should just pay me."

Last edited by StraddleBet; 11-01-2013 at 02:21 AM.
StraddleBet is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:22 AM   #930
PSUMike1999
adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,118
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus View Post
If I'm management at Stars, I'm giving a good hard look at this thread.

Conduct from both parties is completely ridiculous and I would have to strongly consider whether or not I'd want someone involved in these offenses (and there are plenty above and beyond the non-payment of a sports bet) representing my company.
The fact of the matter is, the gambling/poker environment has this kind of stuff happening all over the place. It's become so common in fact that most times people rarely give it a 2nd thought.

Chris and everything about his 2003 win(including his name)brought poker to the masses and made PokerStars a household name.

It will take a lot more than this imo for Pokerstars to drop Chris altogether. However, based on his current financial situation that we can deduce from this thread- it doesn't look like Chris has the greatest deal anymore from PokerStars anyways.
PSUMike1999 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:29 AM   #931
heater
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
heater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Happy Easter!
Posts: 11,407
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by StraddleBet View Post
Doesn't all of this come down to the sense Chris has that he was/is being freerolled? Based on what I'm reading, I get a feeling that since all of 2+2 has now become aware of/involved in the matter, the only real and favorable outcome seems like if Chris pays the third party whose name remains in question (whom Jason has been saying all along that he floated the bet with) rather than Jason. Jason didn't actually cover Chris' bets and/or credit; he's claiming the money is still owed iirc.

So help me to understand here: isn't Jason the middle man in this whole equation anyways? I'm not questioning anyone's reputation here, I'm simply thinking of a way that the whole thing could be settled so that Chris doesn't continue to feel like he's getting freerolled and Jason's debt to the anonymous third party is satisfied.

If I've got any of this wrong, jump in.

I've read posts saying that there was a third party, then denials that there was a third party, then additional people have come in and vouched for Jason or this or that. What I haven't heard is anyone saying, "Yes, I took Chris' action via Jason and I am owed a lot of money, Chris should just pay me."
paying jason's debt isn't going to make chris feel like he isn't getting freerolled
heater is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:29 AM   #932
monikrazy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
monikrazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 26,895
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesD816 View Post
I have to agree with PSU. After reading monikrazy post the most surprising comment was he is not friends with Jason Young. His take on the events is extremely one sided.
I'm more interesting in Chris Moneymaker's actions because he is a much more important figure in the poker community (due to his title of World Champion).

I don't have any problem with someone contesting a payment that is fraudulent. For example, someone who has an unauthorized transaction on his credit card should report it, have the company withhold payment while it conducts an investigation, and have his card replaced. If the company finds its client made an error or an effort to defraud the original beneficiary, it will honor the payment.

The evidence in the thread shows Chris purported that he wanted to pay Jason back and was going to when he had the means available. He stated this directly to Jason, and in documents that Jason has posted publically. The manner in which he is now saying he will not pay Jason appears extremely self-serving. The evidence does not suggest he had good reason to doubt Jason's ability to honor his winnings, even if Jason were honoring the winnings indirectly (transacting business for a bookie).

Is it possible that Jason acted in an unethical manner in regards to this particular transaction? It is possible, but the the evidence doesn't seem to prove anything beyond that. So while it remains possible, the burden of proof rests on Chris to establish it beyond a reasonable doubt, and he hasn't done that in the thread so far.

Furthermore, his actions also strongly suggest that Chris was acting in bad faith, meaning the evidence needs to be strong (beyond a reasonable doubt) and evaluated by an impartial party to justify witholding payment that he took responsibility for in his conversations with Jason.

Last edited by monikrazy; 11-01-2013 at 02:39 AM.
monikrazy is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:38 AM   #933
StraddleBet
old hand
 
StraddleBet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 1,564
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by heater View Post
paying jason's debt isn't going to make chris feel like he isn't getting freerolled
I realized after composing my post that no actual money ever changed hands between Jason and Chris -- there was a 5K win that rolled over into a loss of 20K. However, Jason merely acted as the middleman in the transaction & therefore Jason has tried repeatedly to collect.

It seems that if Chris felt he was being freerolled, he would never have agreed to pay the debt in the first place; however, now that Jason's other debts have come to light, it feels like a freerolling attempt making Chris disinclined to pay.

I think the impunity to Chris' character levied in this thread (people saying he's busto etc.) only creates a larger problem in settling the debt if, in fact, we can agree one exists.

If Chris pays the debt, people will think they can freeroll him and get away with it. If he doesn't pay the debt, people will call him busto/degen etc. He can't win & neither can Jason.

Ok, I'll go back to lurking now.
StraddleBet is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:39 AM   #934
MikkeD
old hand
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,477
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by monikrazy View Post
I'm more interesting in Chris Moneymaker's actions because he is a much more important figure in the poker community (due to his title of World Champion).

I don't have any problem with someone contesting a payment that is fraudulent. For example, someone who has an unauthorized transaction on his credit card should report it, have the company withhold payment while it conducts an investigation, and have his card replaced. If the company finds its client made an error or an effort to defraud the original beneficiary, it will honor the payment.

The evidence in the thread shows Chris purported that he wanted to pay Jason back, including in direct conversations shown to be between Chris and Jason. The manner in which he is now saying he will not pay Jason appears extremely self-serving. The evidence does not suggest he had good reason to doubt Jason's ability to honor his winnings, even if Jason were honoring the winnings indirectly (transacting business for a bookie).

Is it possible that Jason acted in an unethical manner in regards to this particular transaction? It is possible, but the the evidence doesn't seem to prove anything beyond that. So while it remains possible, the burden of proof rests on Chris to establish it beyond a reasonable doubt, and he hasn't done that in the thread so far.

Furthermore, his actions also strongly suggest that Chris was acting in bad faith, meaning the evidence needs to be strong (beyond a reasonable doubt) and evaluated by an impartial party to justify witholding payment that he took responsibility for in his conversations with Jason.
Has it been shown yet that Chris would have been paid if he had won?

Were there funds available to pay if Chris had won?

This is all that matters with regards to whether Chris has to pay.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Last edited by MikkeD; 11-01-2013 at 02:42 AM. Reason: Beyond a reasonable doubt - show a bank account with the monies available for instance..
MikkeD is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:44 AM   #935
DrChesspain
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Young View Post
Did it ever for one second cross your mind that I'm ignoring you? YOU in particular?? Who the F*CK ARE YOU? i dont owe you anything, i dont know you, and you dont know me, and your ludicrous accusations about me, personally, financially, my business, my dealings with chris your just guessing at everything. Why im choosing to respond to you now is because your overly pompous, tooling out on me has gone way to far. Your lop-sided one sided one track mind makes you look ridiculous to the people that actually do have a clue what is going on.
And the lying degenerate is back up against the ropes, flailing wildly.

Last edited by DrChesspain; 11-01-2013 at 02:58 AM.
 
Old 11-01-2013, 02:44 AM   #936
monikrazy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
monikrazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 26,895
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikkeD View Post
Has it been shown yet that Chris would have been paid if he had won?

Were there funds available to pay if Chris had won?

This is all that matters with regards to whether Chris has to pay.

Why is this so hard to understand?
Jason and/or his bookie said that the funds were available.

How are Jason and/or his bookie supposed to prove their financial status from 2 years ago? At the bequest of someone who kept saying he would pay them back until the matter was made public.

This is one reason why the legal system has statutes of limitations for many types of cases. The passage of time from the event in question can creates undue burdens.



Let's take this one step further. Let say's Jason and/or his bookie have irrevocable proof they could honor any winnings of XXX dollars to Chris. Is it reasonable for them to make their business records public and take on the risks such exposure might entail.

What if they are willing to expose these records, and after they did Chris still refused to honor his payment? That would seem to be the definition of the phrase 'throwing good money after bad'.

After all, Jason and/or his bookie have Chris on record promising to pay them. How much more should they be obligated to prove?



Edit: Maybe one solution would be for Chris to offer additional compensation, held in escrow, should Jason offer financial proof of his and/or his bookie to pay at the time. That could partially mitigate the risks involved.

Last edited by monikrazy; 11-01-2013 at 02:57 AM.
monikrazy is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:46 AM   #937
Drewphish2
banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 750
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

If im not mistaken Moneymaker had 50 percent of himself for his 2003 wsop main event win right? Even after that, he would have won 1.25 million dollars after taxes he would have made 750k roughly? Then he had the stars sponsonship which is worth more money.


From looking at those text messages, that is pretty shocking. So Chris Moneymaker is close to broke now? How in the world does a former WSOP main event winner have this happen to him. Why in the world would he need a backer? Shouldn't he have enough money made from back then?


The fact that he needs someone to send him a dime aka 1k... i would assume moneymaker would have a decent amount of money. Did he just degen most of his money away? Or was it from bad investing or poker doing bad for him? I cant believe a guy like chris moneymaker would have financial problems where even for the amt he supposedly owes, he would have a problem.
Drewphish2 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:48 AM   #938
MikkeD
old hand
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,477
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

.

Last edited by MikkeD; 11-01-2013 at 02:54 AM.
MikkeD is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:49 AM   #939
lostinthesaus
old hand
 
lostinthesaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,520
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
The fact of the matter is, the gambling/poker environment has this kind of stuff happening all over the place. It's become so common in fact that most times people rarely give it a 2nd thought.
So sad but so true.

Quote:
Chris and everything about his 2003 win
I'd call it a solid 10 years for everyone. Flashfoward to the present, he is openly admitting to searching for what he calls stakes (clearly loans with promises of poker winnings to pay back the loans) in order to pay off his sports betting debts. These situations don't usually get better, they get worse.
lostinthesaus is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:50 AM   #940
DrChesspain
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dixie60 View Post
Awesome
 
Old 11-01-2013, 02:51 AM   #941
MikkeD
old hand
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,477
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by monikrazy View Post
Jason and/or his bookie said that the funds were available.

How are Jason and/or his bookie supposed to prove their financial status from 2 years ago? At the bequest of someone who kept saying he would pay them back until the matter was made public.

This is one reason why the legal system has statutes of limitations for many types of cases. The passage of time from the event in question can creates undue burdens.
Well that's OK then if they said that.

Chris should just pay obv!

Last edited by MikkeD; 11-01-2013 at 02:55 AM. Reason: Messed up first post.
MikkeD is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 03:06 AM   #942
Dixie60
centurion
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 164
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewphish2 View Post
If im not mistaken Moneymaker had 50 percent of himself for his 2003 wsop main event win right? Even after that, he would have won 1.25 million dollars after taxes he would have made 750k roughly? Then he had the stars sponsonship which is worth more money.


From looking at those text messages, that is pretty shocking. So Chris Moneymaker is close to broke now? How in the world does a former WSOP main event winner have this happen to him. Why in the world would he need a backer? Shouldn't he have enough money made from back then?


The fact that he needs someone to send him a dime aka 1k... i would assume moneymaker would have a decent amount of money. Did he just degen most of his money away? Or was it from bad investing or poker doing bad for him? I cant believe a guy like chris moneymaker would have financial problems where even for the amt he supposedly owes, he would have a problem.

750k 10 years ago works out a little over $200 per day..
Dixie60 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 03:47 AM   #943
Sam341
centurion
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by dunlap View Post
not that its anyones right to know my financials but to be clear.

I have separate gambling account that is "my money" and it went busto from sports, loans and being scammed.
I feel like this is an attempt to save face and act like "hey! I'm still rich, but busto in my gambling account"
Sam341 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 03:51 AM   #944
Nobel1
grinder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 660
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam341 View Post
I feel like this is an attempt to save face and act like "hey! I'm still rich, but busto in my gambling account"
It could also be saying I separated my gambling money from the money I saved for my family, which sounds very reasonable.
Nobel1 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 04:06 AM   #945
zachvac
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
zachvac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,757
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobo Fett View Post
I think if two people are freerolling each other, they have an obligation to still pay - a charity. Not having to pay anyone means it's...a freeroll! There should be a consequence to their actions.

Of course, this isn't a court of law, and it's hard to imagine two people admitting they freerolled each other and agreeing that the winner should donate the money. That's just what should happen in my imaginary world where everyone does the right thing. But of course in that world, no one would freeroll each other in the first place.
If they had the money to pay to charity they'd have the money to pay each other and it wouldn't be a freeroll in the first place...
zachvac is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 04:32 AM   #946
PraguePoker
journeyman
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 319
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

How is it possible for a bookie that is taking five figure bets (minimum, perhaps even larger) with multiple people (10's? 100's?), works through agents, and is affiliated with an on-line site (so not just any new random) to disappear - stiffing many, many people out of major money - without causing at least a minor scandal in Vegas? And his name becoming very well known in sports betting circles almost overnight? It's not really a big town, after all.

"Bookie X skipped town, did you hear? He welched on at least 300k USD in bets, I was told! I heard such-and-such is out 40k! Perhaps some HS poker players were involved, too! Blah, blah, blah, gossip, gossip, gossip..."

I would imagine everyone knows everyone in sports betting in Vegas, especially a bookie taking relatively large bets. This isn't a regular occurrence, after all, and so many people were impacted. How is it possible for this major scandal to happen and nobody seems to know about it?

Also, I really hope no more correspondences are posted in this thread without redacting sensitive issues that do not relate directly to the issue at hand (free rolling on the initial bets). People can have major issues with wives, divorce lawyers, IRS, employers, etc. because of somebody's petty recklessness and vindictiveness. I know we're talking about a lot of money here, but please black out personal info that is not related to the core issue, out of common decency.

--PP
PraguePoker is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 05:41 AM   #947
paulgees822
adept
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: lots of places
Posts: 712
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus View Post
If I'm management at Stars, I'm giving a good hard look at this thread.

Conduct from both parties is completely ridiculous and I would have to strongly consider whether or not I'd want someone involved in these offenses (and there are plenty above and beyond the non-payment of a sports bet) representing my company.
lol. stars will never fire chris. he is a huge reason stars is what it is today. MONEYMAKERBOOOOOM!!! carry on.
paulgees822 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 05:51 AM   #948
Odysseus
grinder
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sup
Posts: 439
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewga View Post
It doesn't really count since everyone cornering him is either a random drooler or a nobody who doesn't sports bet so therefore isn't eligible to have an opinion.
Says the dude with 40 posts who registered last month

(jason sockpuppet)

Last edited by Odysseus; 11-01-2013 at 05:58 AM.
Odysseus is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 06:18 AM   #949
bundy5
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
bundy5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,856
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by flopp_deuces View Post
I mean that changes things alot if moneymaker won 5k and jason tried to pay him which gets rid of the idea Jason was trying to freeroll.
What does it change? It's in the ****ing OP by Chris...FFS
bundy5 is offline  
Old 11-01-2013, 06:30 AM   #950
bundy5
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
bundy5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,856
Re: moneymaker vs jason young (resolved - see post 497 & 503...and then not - see post 656)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edgelooker1 View Post
So CM never owed JY 25k or 20k, seems to be 14700? Wonder why JY lied and told the people that he owed that CM owed him 25k?
At 1.31

bundy5 is offline  

Closed Thread
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive