Will take 4-1 @ minimum of 400 (to my 100)

You came in this thread, apparently without reading all of it and basically tried to chase away OPs action.

OP is still looking for more action if he can get better odds. You were making comments to chase away action or sway the line without having read the thread or doing any research. Not only is this uncouth, it's plain ignorant.

I don't think anything else needs to be said publicly about this and I'll be dropping the matter.

you type the same things in like 10 different ways


still its only IMO that you are very biased towards one side, Im not betting on it so it doesnt really matter.

but I am

chicagojoey, you're out of line

My $2 to ur $0.5

Quote to book. Also, sense we're friends, can we just agree that escrow not necessary for this?

dont think chicagojoey is out of line at all.

online poker is filled with gullible young adults with plenty of money that they came to way too easily and are not grown up enough to realize people will go to great extents to take away their money. i don't think he's said anything but reasonable statements and presenting facts as they are.

if he is slandering OP and said blatantly lying such as saying he's a huge winner on another account blah blah then that's out of line, but saying a prop is easy when/if it is is not out of line at all.

here's how betting works, someone offers a bet at set odds. if you think the odds are +EV, you take them. If you don't, then don't take the bet or offer different odds. CJ isn't even betting on this but is worried about his future prop bets being affected so he's making a big deal about how this bet is -EV for the bettors against OP.

not cool imo

+1

that's how YOU want it to work. if you're looking for action on a message board, you should be expecting to get replies of all natures.

how many times has there been OP's that have made a ridiculous bet that everyone has laughed off ? plenty of times. but if people had simply ignored it, eventually a couple people would bet on it and they'd pay with their lack of knowledge.

CJ is presenting further information to the bettors ; it is not unethical nor is he luring away other people to his own prop bet i.e. offering same odds but offering to play 32k hands instead or something.

Ill post detail later if necessary but anyone who thinks Chicago joeys posts were in line hasn't read the thread in entirety (much like he didn't before making them). Also, I don't sense the least bit of bias in blackize's posts.

In b4 "lol knows op irl"

.

+1 mill

I like OP too, i dont have any dislike for the kid at all.

All his friends coming in here to post is totally reasonable but this is a ****ing message board to voice both sides, i can say what I want in regards to the bet, it is my opinion, whether anyone listens to it is up to them. Since there are 10 of you that are saying no I am wrong then you should be able to expect people to want to agree with you and go crazy betting.

lol laughable just like the bet.... you're saying that this guy can't do this at least 33% of the time he tries to do it??

no offence, but 3-1 is crazy odds for this, I expect he'd be able to do this at least 50% of the time which is why i feel 2-1 is far more appropriate.

oh and edit, nothing against op, seems a nice guy from what i've read.

there is something wrong with this?? Trying to potentially prevent something from cutting into my bottom line is wrong of me?


You are an idiot


When Ive done all my prop bets in the past, there were plenty of people who posted saying exactly the same things I am saying, it happens and is to be expected. Your side as the OP's side is to state your case for why I'm wrong and drive up more action for OP. I know you guys really have no idea how this all works but maybe you will learn one day

hes starting this in less then 20 hours, has action. I made my case for whatever case I am making it for. I stop carrying it on if every1 else does but if people want to still keep arguing then lets keep it on

This. Why an unbiased judge would try to squash any dissenting comments towards one side that are made in a public forum is perplexing?

i'm still waiting for CJ's 30 b*tch's in 30 hours prop bet.

no need to. i think you're wrong but no real need to argue about it.


glad you felt the need to revert to this. good job.

Of course you don't.

Where are the replies from anyone connected to this bet commenting on anyone who claims the line is good and the bet is not-doable. What I do see are people connected with the bet jumping on someone who is voicing his opinion, in a public forum, as to how easy he thinks this will be for OP.

People connected with the bet are almost overzealous in their desire to fulfill the action target of OP. Is that unbiased?

I don't know CJ IRL and he could be a soothsayer when it comes to prop betting but if anyone takes their betting lead from him or anyone else who posts on a message board, they deserve to lose.

Again, I wish OP luck but those of you connected to the bet need to do your chores and stay out of this back-and-forth.

we need a third judge, bettors can choose who.

edit: well, not "need" but i assume they want one

not sure i understand what ur getting at but CJ is also "connected to the bet" if you are claiming otherwise...

My only issue has been that the line discussion has come from people misinformed about the bet. CJ in particular I think should hold himself to a higher standard when speculating on these bets because he is an authority on them.

Edit: My opinion on the odds is pretty clear too if you read the whole thread.

Stream's up

I am informed about the bet, nl200 SNE grinder, looks like nano, down money on ptr over 1 mill hands, needs to play 30k hands and show a profit