Using this terrible logic, people who hack and account and dump all the money to their friend's account would get away with it, because IT WAS TECHNICALLY A POKER GAME.

dude, viffer told us all what happened, and alec ran away

lol i love how i clarify for you and then even after i make it totally clear what i'm talking about you make another post showing how freaking stupid you are.

thats not even CLOSE TO WHAT IM SAYING and i'm obv not going to explain it again, cuz it could not be any more clear, and now you're either too dim-witted to follow along with the grown-ups or you're just trolling for the fun of it.

They're not exactly the same, because the Toby Maguire case was a legitimate poker game, while perky and Alec allegedly just used FTP as a means to launder money.

Wikipedia: "Money laundering is the process of disguising illegal sources of money so that it looks like it came from legal sources."

You're not a grown up. please sit down

river they arent the same, one guy had a chance to win, perky had no chance to win, it was an axtension of the crime, the get away. Like the guy who robs the bank and kills someone, the get away driver is also charged with murder.

Wasn't familiar with the Tobey Maguire case, now I see why they are similar.

I also note that it's going to trial in early 2012. Strange that you would bring that up when it proves Alec could be, at the least, sued. Regardless of whether he knew it was stolen or not (I assume Tobey wasn't aware he was gambling with a crook).

haha love this

It's exactly what you're saying. You're now backtracking because i've pointed out how stupid it is.

Wut? It's very easy to lose without a chance to win. In fact it's even easier to lose in these spots than in spots when you have a chance to win.

The point is that this was a transfer which was made to look like a game of poker for various reasons, not a game of poker.

I just want to point out I've basically only said 3 things in this thread.

1) I want some proof on these allegations before I assume Alec is guilty.

2) Chip dumping is not as bad as stealing.


I don't understand how anyone could possibly have a problem with any of these statements.

Not sure how you can draw that conclusion from Viffer's post, especially when the only thing that has been made clear in this thread is how Shady perky is. Alec clearly took a huge risk in this spot on multiple levels. There were quite a number of different ways he could have lost including having a losing poker session against the guy he thought was trying to lose.

The problem is chip dumping has a high potential for laundering stolen/fraudulent funds.

The idea that any single person can decide for themselves its okay to chip dump because everything seems legit doesn't sit well with me.

They aren't exposing themselves to risk. They are exposing everyone else to risk for their own benefit.

When they are wrong they get the funds and everyone else is hurt.

Justin:

Clearly, you see that I pose a threat to your position in this discussion. Name-calling won't make your arguments more valid to anyone, unless they're already choking on your sack of ****.

? gr8 stated that Perky & Alec had an arrangement whereby Perky would use a specific bet size to indicate he was bluffing. Alec didn't deny that. We know Alec 'won' the $150k in the 'game'. Alec has admitted it was a chip dump. There's no ambiguity here.

No one in this thread has even implied chip dumping is ok.

I'm friends with Alec. AFAIK, he's a great guy. If he helped organize a way to steal 150k from an innocent backer, I would certainly not be friends with him or ever trust him again.

If he allowed someone to chip dump him money to pay a debt, that certainly won't ruin my trust in him, especially given how long ago this was.

Do you understand how one issue is more important to me than the other?

really? says the guy who keeps sending me absurdly immature PMs?

holy **** you're ******ed. i'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CHIP DUMP I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FREEZEOUTS (GAMES OF POKER) THAT HE WON THE MONEY IN.
just like in the maguire case the MONEY WAS LOST IN A LEGIT GAME OF POKER, how the person actually delivered the stolen money that was used to pay for the LOST GAMES OF POKER is not relevant to my argument.

not sure how you're saying that, pretty sure perky won quite a few of the HU freeze outs that he played.

no i've said the same thing over and over you're just too ****ing dense to realize/admit that.

again see my points above, its so unreal tilting that you can't understand this simple point and keep making a totally non-sequitor argument over and over.

I haven't called you any names.

the only thing you pose a threat to is the collective sanity of the species.

Alec has already stated that he could have lost, and even if he hadn't said that, it's pretty easy to see how the tables could have turned on him in this spot, unless of course you are assuming Perky is 100% trustworthy...

Accrue debt -> steal money to pay debt =/= Steal money -> lose money.

simple stuff rbk.

I don't think the argument that Alec theoretically could have lost the chip dump hands or that he theoretically could have been freerolled matter much because neither was the case and there is basically no chance in hell either could have occurred here. Perky and his backer were not conspiring to freeroll Alec or the way this played out would be different every time, and Perky clearly dumped the money to Alec in a deceptive way that Alec was a part of.

I would put the chances of Alec having been freerolled here at around the same as the chances of getting struck by lightning while sitting in the Bellagio poker room.

And I get that RBK and ZJ don't want to shut out their friend without definitive proof, but can you guys honestly not say that, given Viffer's account of the events and Alec's posts in this thread, Alec is at least more likely than not to have done something highly unethical here that should lead to the repayment of the 150k? Again, I am not asking if you are convinced or that it has been proven, but simply by the way this story has played out, does it not make more sense than that Alec was just some naive victim in all of this?

The situations where a possible freeroll makes a difference is in cases like the deldar/JM staking deal where Deldar likely freerolled jungleman in the sense that many reasonable people believe that had jungleman won and payed Deldar, he would have taken the money. We don't know for sure, but logically, it would not be THAT surprising, so its easy to say JM got freerolled. Alec DID NOT get freerolled here because it simply did not happen. Blah, that was horribly written but I have to go.

are you really trying to argue that there is ANY difference whatsoever with the maguire et al case and this one?

LOL @ YOU.

just keep changing what you think is relevant i'm done arguing with trolls.
forgot how awful all of these threads become because its just impossible to have any rational discussion.
everything just devolves into trolling and poo-flinging.

sayonara.

Justin i usually respect what you have to say and at least say hey he has a good arguement. If in fact you bet on a spots game and it is later found out that the out come was predetermined the people involved in fixing the game goto jail, look at the world series that was fixed.

you are just trying to fid points to argue and you lose this one.