I think perky should be dragged threw the street by the valls, I dont think alec should be saying how moral he is when he knew what was going on, and if he didnt then he should have no probalem paying the guy back. Since Alec takes it so serious when he is owed or stolen from i think he should also pay when he steas or recieves money he shouldnt. Anyone with half a briain can see what happened here.

he probably doesn't want him to tap the tank? I don't know wasn't viffer accused to reneging on pool bet (and he was painted in a poor light, I don't know the result, I'm sure he wanted all the details out in an unbiased way and Alec wants the same). So I'm thinking he should treat Alec like he wanted to be treated when he was accused.

Alec, if you unwittingly got paid a debt from stealing the money of an innocent third party, shouldn't you return it? Is that how you perceive things to have happened that night?

i have never claimed to be mr wonderfull. alec is and he also judges others

http://www.epicpoker.com/events/stan...d-conduct.aspx

Alec owes Haley $150k

Perky owes Alec $150k + $85k

Only reasonable solution.

Viffer,

I'm honestly very hurt that you would go out posting this about me on a forum when you know me personally and couldn't simply bring this to my attention. As for my dealings with Perky, I've tried to bring my personal issues to his attention many times, to which he hasn't responded.

Personally, I feel like you've always had it out for me, when I've never been anything but cordial to you. If you are going to make claims, that is fine, I just feel like we should be able to discuss this privately before you slander my name to the community. I would grant anyone that same respect and I feel I'm owed an apology. If you would like to bring this up to the EPL, it's totally within your right and I would be happy to defend myself.

I texted Dan today and he agreed to escrow. Naturally, I can't magically post the money, as he is not in my house, but I would be confident he would vouch, otherwise I can do so in Vegas. It's obvious that if this comes to fruition, it will be done.

Perkys involvement with his personal dealings are his problem. I won the money fair in square off Perky and had I lost, would have auto transfered him the 150. So you want me to pay 150 which essentially means I was getting freerolled the entire time?

Whether Perky decided to freeroll, scam or steal someone else is not my concern nor problem. I do not intend to get into the personal affairs of others and feel very bad that it seems someone was falsely informed of the situation. However, the liability is not mine and Perky, should he adhere to this claim you're making, should consider working this out with his backer, provided that him playing me heads up was not allowed in the backing deal.

What I hope is obvious is that this testimony against me stems from Perky who has no honest dealings in the poker world and has many reasons to attack me personally. I trust that the truth will transpire and that the community can see what is going on.

Viffer, if you want to take this further, I urge you to present your case to the EPL board. I would genuinely be happy to defend myself (I've always wanted to be a lawyer), reach a verdict and put your rumors to rest. In the mean time, I would appreciate it if you kept my reputation in tact.

Thanks for your understanding.
Alec Torelli

perky's staker seems like a smart guy

Viffer,

One more thing. As for the TYPERKY license plate, it was something that we joked about regularly. When he hit a 2 outer in a 120k pot, he would call me on the phone and needle me: "How do you feel about a J on the river for 120k." Before, I could respond, he hung up. It was all in good fun and we enjoyed the playful banter.

When I bought the car, it was in this mindset that I sent him the picture and bought the license plate. In fact, I actually picked him up in it several times, much to his amusement. We had a good relationship for quite some time and would hang out socially outside of poker.

A small side note, but it's important that my decision didn't seem arrogant or somehow spiteful toward Perky because I can assure you, it was not the case nor intention.

There are 2 different cases possible here with the backer/chipdump situation.

1. Perky loses 150k in 3 50k freezeouts while not under a backing agreement and convinces backer to stake him and then chip dumps off his personal debt. In this case traheho is owed 150k + 85k by perky and owes Haley 150k imo.

2. Perky loses 150k in 3 50k freezeouts while under a backing agreement and chooses to play HS and chipdump as a method of payment. In this case everything is square imo.

Given that Perky could've transferred the 150k if it was scenario #2, and that they could've used a phone call or skype to orchestrate the chip dump, it seems that #1 is the more likely case.

This is not even remotely true. If someone embezzled money from their employer, deposited the money onto an online poker site and chip dumped it to me to pay a debt, and I had no knowledge of the situation/embezzlement and then 5 years later the company came and tried to collect the money from me; I wouldn't owe that money, the person who stole it would.

Obviously in this case Perky owes his former backer the money not Alec. Alec, would only be guilty in this situation and owe money if 2 things are true:

1. Perky Wasn't backed for the FREEZEOUT matches he played
2. Perky told him he was stealing from his backer.

In this case Alec would owe the backer money back and Perky would still owe Alec whatever amount of money. Being friends with Alec I seriously doubt both of these things (or either one happened).

Also as far as making an allegation like (Alec working Perky to steal form Perky's backer to pay a debt) this you'd need a whole lot more than Perky saying this happened. I get along with Perky just fine; but he is not exactly known for telling the truth, and obviously hates Alec.

As far as either of these things being talked about here, both Perky's debts to everyone and the whole backer situation I don't think it's the best way to handle either matter.

again, nice vouch

fyi people would perceive you better if you dropped the holy than thou attitude and stopped trying to sound intelligent (if you don't know what words mean, don't use them).

uhh yeah if alec didn't know about the stake etc then there's obviously no way he owes the backer any money...

Who the hell would back Perky?

I am not sure what to make of these mixed opinions but let me paint a hypothetical that is not THAT much of a stretch and hear what you think should happen.

Person A owes person B $1,000. He asks B to meet him on a quiet street and then walks into an alley and says "let me know if you see anyone come". You don't have any further info than this but say "sure" and he walks into an alley, mugs someone for 1k, and then returns and gives you the money. You are unaware of what he has done.

When you find out later, including the name of the victim, what do you do and what is your ethical responsibility here? You are holding the 1k from the innocent and mugged victim that you had thought was just Perky paying you his debt.


The situation is comparable because Alec, even if unwittingly, was PART Of the crime in the way the backer was scammed. The fact that he blindly agreed to do a chip dump and then agreed to terms that led to the theft make him a part of it even if he was 100% just innocently going about his business. I think good2cu is missing this point in his analogy. Alec was PART of the theft where as in your example someone just got paid with stolen money totally innocently. Alec engaged in something against the sites ToS in a relatively fishy way since they had no reason to do this. He then agreed to the terms that directly led to the theft so he was a part of it whether he knew or not.

The only way I can see Alec being clear of this completely is if there is any chance >5% that the backer and Perky were actually in cahoots this whole time and the backer was in fact backing perky in the freezeouts. That seems really far fetched because the way things have played out just don't logically follow such a scenario. If some guy randomly came to Alec a few days after the dump screaming "I want my stolen money" that would be more shady than 5+ years later.

So perky owes alec money,

Perky cant pay

Perky gets money in fulltilt account, but instead of transfering he tells alec hes going to dump the chips.

But instead of talking on the phone while they do it they come up with a way to give signals because perky has someone watching him and cant let them know what hes doing.


You say how shady and scummy perky is and you have known this for a long time why would you vouch for him for 85k?

Amazing.

OP, you chose to assume a risk of non-payment when you allowed him to play the 3 50k freezeouts matches, therefore you are responsible for collecting the 150k debt. The person he stole from in order to pay you is not responsible, yet by your inaction you are forcing him to chase up your debt.

You were paid with stolen money, therefore, you were never paid.

makes a difference that it was on fulltilt imo - no reason not to just transfer normally unless something shady is going on

Everyone in the poker community is a huge scumbag.

you were friends, i think theres good chance alec knew about what was going on.

this combined with the facts that you can transfer money on ftp, why would he chip dump if its not to screw someone up?

but maybe not tho

~0% chance he knew what was going on at the time.

The point is that now he does, and can/should rectify the situation.

The problem is that if someone were walking down a dark alley carrying a decent chunk of change, it should be assumed that they are partaking in some fairly risky behavior. You are implying that the person who got mugged is absolutely not at fault when I don't think that's exactly true.

Based on what has been said about Perky and his reputation, it is pretty clear that anyone willing to stake him was also engaging in some very risky behavior and therefore should accept a good bit of the responsibility for putting themselves in this spot. I'm not saying that this person is completely responsible, but traheho is not completely responsible either.

Whattttttttt oh man. A friend of mine that posts a lot in politics told me you're really smart (!!) so I'm assuming you could be right! I just can't fathom this though. If someone owes me $ and walks up to me and pays and then I find out LATER that it was stolen from someone else I just can't imagine that it would be my responsibility to pay back the person who was stolen from.

I'm gonna have to think this over, I thought it was so obvious haha.

what if you knew the money was stolen and help steel it?

yeh i don't think many are suggesting he knew about the scam, but what non-shady reason could there be to not just transfer given how easy it was on ftp?

i think the fact he should have deduced he was potentially gaining dodgy funds is the reason he should rectify it, not just because he happened to receive money that wasn't perky's to give.