Isn't there a player in the league who is welcomed everywhere although he was convicted for selling drugs?

So you're saying that it is OK for Annie and EPL to decide what crime is important and what crime isn't? importing 2 lbs. of cocaine is ok, but 7 lbs. is not? having sex with a prostitute in Canada is OK but not if it's in Syria? Annie and her group are going to decide on all of these legal issues?

BY the way, your continued and almost unstoppable defense of EPL and Annie Duke is eerily strange and borderline bizarre. And the more you defend them against any and all logical and rational arguments that are being made here, the more you sound like a biased and clueless individual.

Step back, take a deep breath and you'll realize that no one is defending Devita, but what EPL is doing is reprehensible, no matter how much you like them or like the new league. The right thing to do was to encourage him not to play the ME, but give him his 20K. There is absolutely no defense for not giving him the 20k and there is NO PLACE in the code of conduct that says AFTER he won the seat, they can take away his prize. NOWHERE.

Except perhaps in the 'EPL chamber', where Annie Duke presides and as per UB history, it's OK to steal people's money.

By the way, this is the link to the pokernews article In the article, they have the exact statement that EPL put out about Chino Rheem and that is exactly where Todd Terry got the statement from, where it says prior conduct is not a determining factor.

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2011/0...tion-10880.htm

It's a ****ty situation of their own creation, though. I fail to see how it's fair to punish the player in this case.

You said it was obvious from the CoC that this guy wouldn't be allowed to play. But what you failed to account for is that any rule or law by itself means nothing - it's how that rule or law is applied. And in this case, they've already applied it in a fairly lenient manner with well known pros who are listed as members on their website.

Can they apply their own ambiguous rule however they want? Of course they can, it's their league. But we certainly can point out the obvious double standard that seems to apply. Whether its because we (and by we I mean the general public) are just unaware of other times they have applied their moral standards stringently or because this is the first time they've done so, the PERCEPTION is that if you are a pro, your past actions are fine, but if you're not, we can and will **** you over.

And if they care about their image in the public eye, that PERCEPTION is a huge issue that will only get worse every time they turn a relatively blind eye to the misdeeds of a pro. And I'm pretty sure that's going to happen. A pro on their official list is going to do something that COULD result in a ban, but won't.

Are the offenses Devita was convicted of worse than anything any pro on their roster has done? Well, without knowing all the facts about every incident everyone has ever done, that's really hard to say. Obviously sexual offenses, particularly those involving a minor, tend to provoke a much stronger reaction. But the APPEARANCE is that their application of their moral code is highly subjective, and basically just a fall back so they can get rid of any "undesirables". Just so long as those undesirables are nobodies in the poker world.

Are you saying that they have run an FBI background check on every player? did they even ask for such permission? and did you guys all grant them such?

I generally dislike making poker analogies to real life, but this small payment is almost like a blocking bet, there is a good chance he takes the money and goes away, but if they did not pay him a dime the chances of him suing go up dramatically (1500 is alot to busto ppl like me). If they were smart they would have offered him something like 2500 and made him sign some sort of legally binding agreement never to disclose the reasons behind him not being in the main event or even how much he was paid.

EPL is going to fail and this is just another reason why it should fail. It's completely irrational to allow someone to enter an event and then tell them they can't play after winning a seat. Then to boot rob the guy out of the minimum 20K that he just won.

If a league wants to have certain restrictions regarding anything they need them etched in stone before the fact not after.

I hope this guy sues them and wins just because it's the right outcome, I could care less about some pedo but right is right.

This pretty much nailed why the league members aren't more up in arms on this. They support the leagues position because it's in their personal financial interest to do so. Annie and her deep pocketed buds are giving us 'pros' a rake-free league with money added to it....therefore, as long as we are getting heaps of overlay, we will happily ignore horrible decisions and dictatorship league rules. Would love to see other league members than Todd Terry stand up against this horse****.

If this league didn't offer their exclusive 250 'members' the +EV that it does, my bet is their take on the matter would be completely different.. As long as you league members are happy you are finally being treated as the 'elite pros' you really are, keep supporting these decisions. What an embaressment.

Are you implying that poker players prioritize personal finance far above any concern for morality or fairness? Why, I never..! GOOD DAY, SIR!

95% of the suggestions in this thread are either illegal, or involve the EPL paying out 20k more than they have to and losing money on the tournament.

I'm not ignoring logic, but I am ignoring people that fail to acknowledge the above.

they shouldnt have a code of ethics if 20k is a bigger deal to them

Wait, so you are actually posting on 2+2 that Men the Master should not be allowed in the EPL for cheating but that you are fine to play?

It's actually pretty sick what's going on here on lots of levels. You have Annie Duke, the face of UB (no need to say more about that) being defended by Justin who we know obviously cheated in the past, who's calling out Men and defending an absolutely horrible decision by Annie. Yea clean up the league and start off by getting rid of Annie Duke.

What a ****en circle jerk this is............

Oh and you better mind your P's and Q's too Justin, they may just decide to get rid of you next.

LOL, I think they should give urine tests prior to each event; based on Justin's responses he would surely be a gonner.

Edit
thinkin this thread might be a great topic for an upcoming podcast

But that's their problem. Either they let everyone play who qualifies, or they don't run any qualifiers at all, or they compensate qualifiers they don't want to have in their league.

Or at least they need to state clearly what kind of players are welcomed to play. DUI without harming someone? Injuring someone while DUI? Killing someone while DUI?

You're free to think molesting a child is worse than stealing, tax fraud or selling drugs and most other people (including me) feel the same way, but the law isn't that clear. Would you let Bernie Madoff in the league? Basically he just stole money from people and was sentenced to 150 years.

Zee,

People aren't arguing with you about excluding Devita, they are arguing that EPL screwed up because they let him into the satellite, he won it, THEN they decided to exclude him.

EPL made the mistake, if they were going to ban him they should have followed the same exclusionary protocol for BOTH the satellite and the main event.

This failure is an error on their part, which is why everyone feels EPL should cough up the 20k.

Poker players have a very long memory, as you can see from some of the responses in this thread to you. EPL has already committed huge sums into this venture, is it really worth all of this negative stigma for 20k?

If I was EPL I would have paid the 20k and move on, lesson learned, do a better job of consistency for both satellites and main events.

Mike, i'd love for you to come and call me "an embaressment (sic) " to my face because I'm not "up in arms" over this, whatever that means. Please get on the Pokercast tonight and repeat this sack of **** statement

and make sure to clarify that you are referring to every single member who has a card, including me personally.

I mean you have all this insight into every pro of the EPL to make this sweeping generalized statement, I guess you were the fly on my shoulder when I talked with all my card-holding friends about it.

If everyone is so "stoked" to play in this league as you claim why did only 36% of those who qualify show up to play? This doesn't sound like they have been waiting for the Epic Poker League for years to me. This turnout is pretty much fail.

Justin Bonomo never regretted cheating, he only regretted getting caught, just like every other cheat.

ZeeJustin has only ever had his own interests at heart, including by posting in this thread. He is trying to suck up to people in power, in the hope that his own transgressions will be overlooked. He has been doing this ever since he got caught as it is in his own personal financial interest to do so.

how can something be eerily strange and borderline bizarre? your post is oddly phrased and nearly stupid

whats player is worse for a poker league

allowing a man who showed another adult male his glistening buttock in a public bathroom

allowing a man who used 6 screen names to play in the same poker tournies on party in 2006

He actually said he was worried about his own eligibility earlier in the thread.

Although it raises (again) the obvious point that a league that has already issues ethical waivers, as it were, to known pros with felony convictions, cheating, thievery, and general other general scumminess on their records - along with being run by a former UB pro - doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to excluding anyone for poor ethical and/or criminal behavior.

But the word "hypocritical" is annoying and doesn't apply here.

Just to be perfectly clear, I'm referencing this post, where a douchebag gets on a high horse and calls people out for basically....

not posting in this thread

Maybe I'm just stupid but... that sounds pretty clear to me.