Come on. You expect all of us to issue public statements and rush to our computers to defend a pedophile. You cant be serious. He was likely wronged, not really arguing that, but flipping out because the players in the EPL haven't vehemently and publicly come out against the EPLs decision is insane.

Hang on - so basically the only reason why this was looked into, and the guy was robbed of his winnings, was because an EPL board members wife got insulted and they went on a revenge mission against the guy who insulted her?

And this is supposed to make the EPLs actions look better?

I didn't expect a single person to defend a pedophile. I would have thought that as professional gamblers some would have defended poker/gambling integrity and ethics though. And no, not every single player had to speak out, but had a decent sized group of players gone to the EPL ethics committee or those running the EPL or come out publicly and said, 'we all believe this is wrong, if this dude doesn't play the ME, you have to give him the 20K he won in an event you allowed him to enter' it almost certainly would have been done.

It is very possible to defend the rights of poker players without 'defending a pedo'.

There's nothing specifically wrong with your logic, it's just that the actions by the league are pretty hypocritical. From a business sense they probably make sense and reduce both risk of embarrassment and money lost (since they convinced him to go away from just his $1.5K back), but from an ethical standpoint this is pretty ridiculous.

Either they told this guy he wasn't welcome because of a 20 year old felony conviction (pretty lol considering the convictions of some of their members - I'm not going to debate the relative "badness" of sexual assault involving a minor vs. armed robbery and drug distribution, but they are all pretty serious, yes?), or someone's wife got them to look into him after being harassed by this guy at the table and they used the "he's a sex offender" thing as a convenient excuse. If the latter, is that going to be the standard going forward, that people who say sexist/homophobic/douchebag stuff at the tables are going to be excluded? If so, holy ****, the league will have nobody left.

There's no way around the fact that the league has plenty of people who violate and have violated their vaunted Code of Conduct, but when a random with a bad background shows up, they suddenly decide to apply it. That looks really, really bad - it suggests that if you are a pro you can get away with stuff, but if you are an unknown in the poker world, we can **** with you as much as we want. If they want to keep the riff-raff out, why bother with the Pro/Am at all? All you pros can just sit around and stroke each other's ego about how great you are and how exclusive your league is and just ignore the fact that your Code of Conduct is just a giant sham.

I'm not saying that is your opinion/attitude specifically, I'm just saying that this is how the situation appears to me, as an outsider/unknown in the poker world.

Edit: I generally agree with Casey below, though. I thought Bakes overreacted but I don't know that I expected any of the league members to be outspoken about this issue - it wasn't their decision. I wonder if any of them are questioning their involvement with this league based on how things have gone so far, though.

I agree with Christian on this. If a member wants to make a statement (or a public display as Justin did) that's there prerogative,
I don't think they have an obligation to do so.

Bakes reaction was just way over the top but at the end of the day he has no obligation either. (I bring bakes name into this simply because I was a bit harsh regarding his reaction but it was regarding his reaction not that I felt he should be compelled to make a statement)

If an EPL member wants to give their take on it I'm sure we would all welcome it but it shouldn't be expected.

Yup, but that would also be the case if they decided to keep a final table bubble boy in the tournament and force another player to withdraw, because the busted guy is a more famous player or just makes for better TV.

Justin,

Is the EPL compensating you in any way for promoting the league?

To me the best post itt was the guy who pointed out that the EPL valued a measly 20k more than their reputation and for a league trying to claim the moral high ground that is really freaking pathetic.

If EPL is compensating Justin for defending them then I believe they should get their money back. His arguments in this thread have been some of the most illogical and poorly crafted I have seen in quite some time. If anything he has made them look worse.

Oh I agree with that but the only logical alternatives are is he is a complete fool and nothing in his history suggests that or he made some prop bet about how long he could defend the indefensible.

It has nothing to do with defending a pedophile. As has been stated many times, what people are standing up for is the principle, not the individual. You don't see a dangerous precedent being set by what happened here?

This is the most ridiculously thing I've ever heard. Like the poster in the first page said, so they're going to do background checks on everyone now? How's about Howard illegally allowing US players on his site and stealing millions of dollars, does he get barred?

Yeah, but obviously something like that would raise more of a ruckus. As you know, their image is everything to them.

I think they assumed that either nobody would hear about this, or, if they did, they would automatically go, ewww, convicted sex offender, good job at getting rid of him, EPL.

I too agree with this. No one is ever obligated to make a stand for what is right. It's just disappointing that almost no one seems to have.

This isn't the first time an event run by Duke has engaged in what many would classify as the bullying of a player. Most everyone will remember the AUFA incident where Adam Richardson claimed he was harrassed by event staff regarding the timing and size of his donation to the charity while his was busy dealing with a family matter(pregnancy complication I believe).

For those who don't recall

Eight year-olds, Dude.

AND?!?!!?

I for one wouldn't enter a charitable event and not leave a donation after winning 100K. I don't know all the details but this in itself seems to be more of a valid indictment against against Adam then anyone else.

Surely there's more to this story that I'm not aware of.

/derail

I think the league chose the lesser of two evils. Either have a child molester win the main event which still shows in peoples minds that loser, scumbags, and degenerates play poker or take the seat from him, deal with some bad p.r. (which not everyone disagrees with) and that's it. I think epic is trying to remove itself from that stigma.

So it's either let this person with a horrible past enter and have people questioning the integrity of the league or have this guy sue. I would much rather deal with the guy suing than have him enter the league.

Not saying how they handled this situation was right but I can see their position in this matter

Correct

This is the thread discussing that issue from 2009:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...-truth-524504/

They could have chosen the second option without robbing the guy of $18k. If they had just given him the $20k and said he couldn't play then I'd have said "Meh, OK" and I'm sure so would a lot of people.

Again, I think it would show more integrity to say that whatever he did, he served his time so who are we to judge, but that's subjective and others may disagree.

Hello Poker people...
I can't believe the number of e-mails and messages that I have received from all over the world regarding this "Epic" mess that I now find myself in.
I thank all (well most) of you for your support. The number of calls that I’ve received from people like yourselves, along with several professional Poker players and Celebrities that I’ve play with in various Charity Poker events is pretty overwhelming. Several of them have advised me on the legal issues and my right to take legal action, but I’m not going to take any immediate action against EPIC Poker or against Federated. I have discussed these matters with an attorney for EPIC (Stephen Martin of Los Angeles), and I’m sure that they will 'eventually' (with continued pressure from all of you) do the right thing.

For right now, I’d like all of the Poker players, and all of the Poker fans out there, to continue to support Federated and the EPIC Poker League. Although I do not agree with their recent decision regarding my situation, anger and bitterness towards them will only bring things to a level of immaturity that is best left behind, as it would serve no useful purpose to anyone.

Most of you have been very kind and supportive, while a very few chosen to vent a little anger towards me and my past. No problem. This is America, and we all have a right to our opinions.

I want to thank most of you for your kind words. Still, many of you have questions regarding the circumstances surrounding my 1991 conviction, and frankly, I have no problem answering those questions, or any other questions that you may have about me, my conviction, my rehabilitation, my Poker career, the charities that I support, or anything else that you have on your mind.

Again, I'd like to thank the Poker world for their support, and I am looking forward to communicating with each of you personally.

Finally, to the remaining players of the current EPIC Poker League Main Event, I wish you all the best of luck, and with a little luck of my own, I'll see you at the next Final Table.

God bless, all…


Michael J. DiVita

SRG RT- Winning (AINEC)

How are we 700+ posts into this?
Pedo's IMO are THE lowest form of life but that's not the point here. The point is if they can do it to a pedo who's to say they can't do it to some guy with a DUI/credit card fraud/grand theft auto, etc. Where's the line?
"We can do what we want, it's our league. If you're one of us, your past is okay. If you're not one of us, you can play but we reserve the right to your seat AFTER you've won it." (ZJ's apparent stance) is pretty much the definition of hypocritical. As someone stated above, if you want to have an exclusive league where only the cool kids are accepted (past criminal history notwithstanding) why even have a Pro-Am?

PS- I'm NOT directing this at Bakes.

Edit- In right after the lowest form of life.

Um, no, we ALL vent anger toward you and your past. You are a convicted sex offender. We think what EPL did to you was wrong, but generally we have no use for you otherwise.

And if you are willing to address your convictions, why not do it here? Why do I have to personally call you? That just makes me feel creepy.

Don't forget about http://terrencechan.livejournal.com/163598.html

Kind words ITT: "Give the scummy pedophile his money."


Um yeah. We can't wait to talk to you either.

Not it calling first, Obv.