sorry this seems like a cop out....

You guys are rightly really harsh on multi acounters and scammers, Nick is self confessed as a multi accounter and a known scammer.

If I did not have a friend that had been personally scammed by Nick then listening to your show I would have thought he was a likeable but controversial character.

surly you guys have a duty to condemn him and talk about the recent scam in your show.

fwiw i love the show and that you show no mercy to these type of guys normally i.e. people like Annie duke (generally morally ambiguous, girah, Howard lederer, Russ Hamilton etc

I just think that the same standard was not applied in this case

PS sorry for the bad grammar, I am hammered and jet lagged

This has to be a first. Condemned for not talking about something on a show that hasn't even happened yet.

FWIW, we have discussed Nick's antics on the program before when Stars decided against patching him during his 2010 ME run.

Typed out a long, sarcastic response to this post but it was more caustic than funny so lets just say I hope this post doesn't reflect your actual intelligence, shall we?

there is a witty intro there somehwere

That is the way it is now. But $20,000 buy-in with no rake and money added is a step in the right direction from a previous norm of $500 or whatever in rake from that $20k with no money added.

The end goal would be having to put up no money, like golf is currently. You are blinded by the current norm and not looking long term enough.

If it succeeds or not is not the question, but what their goal is.

I would still be interested in hearing exactly what he/she was insinuating with their post.

I was drinking when I first read it and replied but was he actually suggesting that you or Bunner are somehow accomplices in the matter because you had a beer with him 2 months after the incident and he choose to use Bunner's nickname as one of his many 2+2 screen names.

Mike,Adam,Bunner
I loved the show this week as always.

Thanks and welcome to the forums!

This is the part I was curious about. Didn't know the history of his banned SNs either.

As to who you (AS) associate with in private, then no, it's none of our business.

And I didn't bother cross-referencing when the shows tape and when the story broke, standard internet laziness.

Technicality, but Bunner didn't ask him to change it. He asked Mat to put "not the real Bunner" or words to that effect as an undertitle.

In Rome when a general came home in triumph and was riding a carriage through the streets, there was a person who was riding with him and supposed to say "memento mori" so that... well, what happened in the end to the republic wouldn't happen

there is a great streets song called momento mori

Adam, you did it!

http://www.egrmagazine.com/news/1695...tionship.thtml

did you guys record last night? when am i going to get my fix?

mmmm he was outed as a scammer shortly after the main event occurred....

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...011-a-1067529/

looks like mid july to me

I'm not going to call poker a sport. But, in terms of trying to setup a professional league modeled somewhat after the PGA, that has been a goal of a lot of professional poker players for the past 8 years. I think the ultimate goal is to have around 200 pro players, who earn a card, and then do not have to put up money to play in the league. Whether that money comes from the league itself, or from sponsors of the players themselves. It may be a big if, but if they can create some legitimacy, they can really grow this thing. Hence, the creation of the ethics committee. It will probably need to be tweaked over time, but it's a start.

And, please stop with the indignation about Dwan and Galfond and others not being good enough to play in the league. The league set up standards to make it in, and if you don't reach them, you have to play your way in. The league is for the best live tournament players. If someone wants to set up a cash game professional league, good luck to them. If someone wants to set up a professional online tournament professional league, good luck verifying who everybody is.

The indignation is not whether they are good enough to play or not. Anybody with 20K is good enough to play in the EPL. The indignation is the EPL referring to everyone who doesn't have a playing card an an 'amateur'. It's a complete insult and is basically attempting to tell the world that we, the EPL, get to declare who is a pro and who isn't. Who the hell are they to designate players as amateurs or pros? It's not that hard for them to come up with a different term like 'non-card holder' or 'non-EPL member' that doesn't make them look pompous and arrogant.

<Just> Since you don't have your card, I'll say that it's an 'amateur' comment. </Kidding>

Grunching a little, but the answer is a resounding "yes".

For those who were giving MJ a hard time for discussing gender differences in poker, listen to Act 2 of the following This American Life episode called "Testosterone" (skip to the 17:00 mark). It's an AMAZING interview with a woman who underwent a sex change operation, a procedure that involves extensive testosterone treatments. She has absolutely jaw-dropping accounts of increased aggression & libido, a sudden interest in cars and science (I swear to God this is not a level) and more.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radi...0/testosterone

its actually 6 years minus a few weeks, he had no grass losses post wimbledon in 2002 and no grass losses until a wimbledon warm up event in '08.

Good point.

Thanks for this. Definitely interesting. It probably won't change my opinion much (after all, it could be placebo and whatnot), but I do admit that my stance might not be correct
I might just be biased a bit also

I was raised with a strong mother figure and a sister who kicked my ass at everything.

Society is slowly slipping back to misogyny, it's very disappointing.

I wouldn't put so much faith in your technological terror.

^ lol sample size.

j/k. but seriously, I don't think anyone's saying every man is one way and every woman is another. As with anything it's about tendencies and bell curves and generalizations etc etc

I don't think society is slipping into misogyny at all. We're just finally getting out of the "everyone is identical and we should treat everyone the exact same way" phase. I've got a boy and a girl and despite our attempts to give them access to toys "aimed" at both genders, my boy plays almost exclusively with trucks and dinosaurs and robots, and my girl has about seven dolls that she absolutely must take to bed with her every night or she screams bloody murder. Boys and girls are different like it or not, both physically, emotionally, socially, etc. No one's suggesting that either gender is "better" or "superior", just that they're different and we should make adjustments as such.

There's at least one study that would back up the placebo effect theory

http://www.nature.com/news/2009/0912...2009.1131.html