PPA should fire Annie Duke

[Emperor]

While we are writing letters. Here is my response to the PPA's email to me concerning Annie Duke's recent testimony.

As a member of the PPA, Two Plus Two Forum, and a poker player for the last 10 years, I am very disappointed that a self admitted poker cheat such as Annie Duke is representing the PPA in any way.

Not only is she a cheat, but she is sorely disliked among the poker population because of her belligerent attitude that is present at every major event she attends. This belligerent attitude leads her to angle shooting those that will let her, which are usually the less experienced and easily intimidated by someone of Annie Duke’s reputation.

I posted on the PPA forum back when Annie admitted to cheating that I did not believe that she should be representing the PPA.

Please reconsider her representation.

Thank You,


xxx

If you have no idea what I am talking about use the search feature before flaming. K, thx.

[dlk9s]

I think I know what you are talking about with the cheating thing, but writing a letter with no explanation as to your allegations isn't going to get you anywhere. Plus, Ms. Duke has done a good job representing the PPA.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I know what you are talking about with the cheating thing, but writing a letter with no explanation as to your allegations isn't going to get you anywhere. Plus, Ms. Duke has done a good job representing the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what the OP is talking about and not sure how big a deal the issue was. I will say on thing for poker, and it does seem to allow people a chance who do not fit into any cookie cutter mold.

There seems to be many more people who had multiple careers or quit college or some other "resume black mark" that end up playing poker and playing it well.

I have been very impressed with Annie and all she has done for poker. She has been well spoken, dedicated, smart, and a great "question answerer". So unless she was involved in a really serious systemic cheating issue I'd be very inclined to give her a pass.

I don't think we should play the holier than thou game. I have yet to meet anyone coming any where near perfect.


Just one man's opinion,


D$D

[ericicecream]

A pretty large percentage of the poker population seem to disagree with the OP.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I know what you are talking about with the cheating thing, but writing a letter with no explanation as to your allegations isn't going to get you anywhere. Plus, Ms. Duke has done a good job representing the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what the OP is talking about and not sure how big a deal the issue was. I will say on thing for poker, and it does seem to allow people a chance who do not fit into any cookie cutter mold.

There seems to be many more people who had multiple careers or quit college or some other "resume black mark" that end up playing poker and playing it well.

I have been very impressed with Annie and all she has done for poker. She has been well spoken, dedicated, smart, and a great "question answerer". So unless she was involved in a really serious systemic cheating issue I'd be very inclined to give her a pass.

I don't think we should play the holier than thou game. I have yet to meet anyone coming any where near perfect.

If you are making a claim that Annie is a cheat because she provided railbird advice to a drunk player at a charity event, you are simply NUTS!


Just one man's opinion,


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

[MiltonFriedman]

OP apparently has "principles":
1. He objects to Annie Duke as a PPA rep. because she is a bad person, obliquely referring to some horrible "cheating" incident he can't be bothered to summarize.
2. He supports Ron Paul.

There is nothing wrong with #2, we all want less government interference in our lives, but look at the political ignorance of his #1 beef ....

Annie is described by the OP as a "sorely disliked", "belligerent", "angle-shooting" cheater.

Booo, F*cking Hooo, OP. You miss the political point of whether or not Annie was an EFFECTIVE spokesperson with her testimony. This is not Church, nor a poker torunament, nor nor even a libertarian revival meeting. It is political theatre and she clearly starred in her role.

I cannot stand her personna and have heard firsthand reports from folks who worked closely with her over the years that she is a real pain in the butt. However, there is no doubt whatsoever that her performance before the Committee was exceptionally well handled. In no way did your gripes, even if true, detract from her effectiveness in her testimony and Q&A performance.

OP's "principled" bellyaching is counterproductive as a political analysis tool. OP, do you give a principled litmus test to the guy who cleans your pool or fixes the alternator on your car ?

[4_2_it]

Seems like she is doing the job she was hired to do. If her reputation is that bad why didn't one our opponents plant a loaded question during the hearings?

[sup_bro]

um...what cheating scandal?? i know she is not exactly a nice person (pretty well known) but to just say she is a cheater and not explain further gives little to no credence to the accusation... not saying u are wrong, but to be vague, is just not fair to all parties involved....

[Overdrive]

All these arguments about the PPA are pointless and it's not the big picture.

If some of these posters house was buring down and the fire dept. was coming to rescue them and put out the fire, they would yell; "Wait! I see Dave is on the fire dept, and he beats his wife, I don't want him putting out my fire. And I see Ted is on the fire dept. and he is a drunk, I don't want him putting out my fire at my house. And I see Bill is on the fire dept. and he once didn't tip at a restaurant, I don't want him putting out my fire.

The fire is the ban of internet gaming, and internet freedom, by right wing religious Republican neocons, and the MAIN focus shoud be putting the fire out. Once the fire is out then you can all sit back and complain all you want - which is all you all are doing. A bunch of loser computer nerds with no life, no girlfriend, and posting nonsense drivel on a message board all day long. Pathetic.

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
All these arguments about the PPA are pointless and it's not the big picture.

If some of these posters house was buring down and the fire dept. was coming to rescue them and put out the fire, they would yell; "Wait! I see Dave is on the fire dept, and he beats his wife, I don't want him putting out my fire. And I see Ted is on the fire dept. and he is a drunk, I don't want him putting out my fire at my house. And I see Bill is on the fire dept. and he once didn't tip at a restaurant, I don't want him putting out my fire.

The fire is the ban of internet gaming, and internet freedom, by right wing religious Republican neocons, and the MAIN focus shoud be putting the fire out. Once the fire is out then you can all sit back and complain all you want - which is all you all are doing.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a great analogy until you find out Dave, Ted, or Bill are the ones starting the fires.

What if someone at the House Subcommitee had questioned her testimony based on the fact that she is a cheat? She quickly becomes part of the problem istead of part of the solution.

[ QUOTE ]
A bunch of loser computer nerds with no life, no girlfriend, and posting nonsense drivel on a message board all day long. Pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]

While you may fit this description, and maybe many others currently at Two Plus Two also do, the original participants of this forum, of which I am one, don't fit this description, and I would hazard to guess few who post in the legislation subforum do either.

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
um...what cheating scandal?? i know she is not exactly a nice person (pretty well known) but to just say she is a cheater and not explain further gives little to no credence to the accusation... not saying u are wrong, but to be vague, is just not fair to all parties involved....

[/ QUOTE ]

She didn't just provide advice to a drunk player.
She actively consulted two of the three players on how to cheat the third one out of any chance at the prize money.
She admitted to it, apologized fo it, and financially reimbursed the third player.
Also, check the numerous Angle shooting Annie threads.
Also, checkout Daniel Negreanu's anecdote on Annie's cheating.

If it doesn't matter who represents us, then I apologize for stirring up trouble.

[whangarei]

As much of a nuisance that the varied PPA detractors and D$D's "volunteer" efforts are, they are a welcome sign that the PPA is on a path to achieving its goals (since we wouldn't be hearing from them otherwise).

[Legislurker]

Ugly truth: All high stakes players collude, if not openly cheat. All of them. Its just how it works, two or three against another two or three trying to fleece a sucker or two.
It sucks, its dishonest, but thats just the reality of the tables with 7 figures on them.

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
However, there is no doubt whatsoever that her performance before the Committee was exceptionally well handled. In no way did your gripes, even if true, detract from her effectiveness in her testimony and Q&A performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was unable to view her testimony, but reading the accounts, all I could think was, "man, we couldn't find a better face for our cause?" Mrs. Duke is very intelligent and thinks well on her feet. She got across all the points that needed to be said. However, she's just so damn unlikeable. What you say, sadly, is not nearly as important as how you say it. Who, listening to Annie's belligerent bitching and whining would actually want to help our cause? Who looks at her and sees a hard-working mother of 4? I've got nothing against Annie, I'm sure she's a wonderful person. In fact, I even got an autograph from her (to my aunt) which she was happy to sign. But I'm sure she knows as well as I that she's just not that likeable. So yes, in my mind, there is considerable doubt that she was an EFFECTIVE speaker. I'd much have her behind the scenes preparing statements for others to read. We can find a better champion.

All that said, great thanks to Annie for all that she has done for this cause. As to her "cheating", angle shooting isn't cheating. It's just bad manners.

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
Ugly truth: All high stakes players collude, if not openly cheat. All of them. Its just how it works, two or three against another two or three trying to fleece a sucker or two.
It sucks, its dishonest, but thats just the reality of the tables with 7 figures on them.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude... what?

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, there is no doubt whatsoever that her performance before the Committee was exceptionally well handled. In no way did your gripes, even if true, detract from her effectiveness in her testimony and Q&A performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was unable to view her testimony, but reading the accounts, all I could think was, "man, we couldn't find a better face for our cause?" Mrs. Duke is very intelligent and thinks well on her feet. She got across all the points that needed to be said. However, she's just so damn unlikeable.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should watch her testimony on YouTube. Some people are very unlikeable up close, but come across as very friendly when "on stage." Annie may fall into this category. Barry Greenstein said she and Vanessa Rousso were the most effective talkers during the PPA fly-in. Chairman Conyers agreed as he requested Annie testify at the hearing.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ugly truth: All high stakes players collude, if not openly cheat. All of them. Its just how it works, two or three against another two or three trying to fleece a sucker or two.
It sucks, its dishonest, but thats just the reality of the tables with 7 figures on them.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude... what?

[/ QUOTE ]

High stakes players, named pros, whatever you call them, actively collude 95% of the time. I meant what I said. Its not a fair game to an outsider.

[TruePoker CEO]

I saw a video of her performance, she did well. I liked her response about ancedotal evidence.

I don't know or care whether she is a wonderful person because, "She got across all the points that needed to be said. "

That is what counted.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
I saw a video of her performance, she did well. I liked her response about ancedotal evidence.

I don't know or care whether she is a wonderful person because, "She got across all the points that needed to be said. "

That is what counted.

[/ QUOTE ]


Amen!

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
You should watch her testimony on YouTube.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right! Duke comes across great. Yay Annie!

[CardSharpCook]

ok, just watched the QA with goodlatte. THIS is what I was afraid of. She argues in in a way that makes it difficult to agree with her. At one point, she derisively chuckles when Goodlatte (amusingly, to be sure) says that he is not aware that fantasy sports involve betting. Her initial statement was well delivered, but her debating skills need work. Do you think Goodlatte left that meeting thinking about what Duke said? I doubt it. I'll bet he left it more entrenched in his own ideas.

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
ok, just watched the QA with goodlatte. THIS is what I was afraid of. She argues in in a way that makes it difficult to agree with her. At one point, she derisively chuckles when Goodlatte (amusingly, to be sure) says that he is not aware that fantasy sports involve betting. Her initial statement was well delivered, but her debating skills need work. Do you think Goodlatte left that meeting thinking about what Duke said? I doubt it. I'll bet he left it more entrenched in his own ideas.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought she handled herself very well in the Q&A esp vs Goodlatte...Nobody on the face of this earth either living , dead or yet to be born will sway Goodlatte's opinion..In fact I thought she made Goodlatte look like a fool..He continuously interrupted her getting louder and louder yet she pretty much kept her cool(I certainly would not have)..Also Goodlatte's question about State's right's should've not been directed at her(here I do wish she would've have deferred)..I could see Goodlatte's blood boil with every word the panel spoke esp when talking to Annie "the anti pastor's son"..

You may like this thread..Discussion goes on live with the hearing..

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&vc=1 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=12901623&page=2&fpart=1& vc=1)

[PPAdc]

I feel the need to clarify and defend Annie from this unwarranted attack. First, let’s be clear, Annie Duke is not a paid employee of the PPA, nor did she receive any compensation for testifying before the House Judiciary Committee. She did it because she loves the game, she is well versed on the issues facing poker today (UIGEA, WTO, personal freedom, etc.) and most importantly she so impressed Chairman Conyers during her visit with him during the October PPA Fly-In that he personally requested her testimony at the hearing! The PPA was proud to have her represent our organization and the poker playing community at-large.

Needless to say she did an outstanding job. Several members of Congress (who currently serve on the Committee), former members of Congress (who are part of the PPA lobbying team), Congressional staff and representatives from the banking industry to the gaming industry personally sought me out to say how excellent Annie performed.

Emperor, I value and would not censor the opinions of PPA members, but on this issue I must vehemently disagree.

John A. Pappas
Executive Director
Poker Players Alliance

[Uglyowl]

Bravo Annie Duke especially if she did this unpaid. She performed great on one of the biggest stages out there.

Professional speaking or politics is not her occupation and she handled herself fantastically IMO.

[kslghost]

[ QUOTE ]
She admitted to it, apologized fo it, and financially reimbursed the third player.


[/ QUOTE ]
How horrible. O.o

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel the need to clarify and defend Annie from this unwarranted attack. First, let’s be clear, Annie Duke is not a paid employee of the PPA, nor did she receive any compensation for testifying before the House Judiciary Committee. She did it because she loves the game, she is well versed on the issues facing poker today (UIGEA, WTO, personal freedom, etc.) and most importantly she so impressed Chairman Conyers during her visit with him during the October PPA Fly-In that he personally requested her testimony at the hearing! The PPA was proud to have her represent our organization and the poker playing community at-large.

Needless to say she did an outstanding job. Several members of Congress (who currently serve on the Committee), former members of Congress (who are part of the PPA lobbying team), Congressional staff and representatives from the banking industry to the gaming industry personally sought me out to say how excellent Annie performed.

Emperor, I value and would not censor the opinions of PPA members, but on this issue I must vehemently disagree.

John A. Pappas
Executive Director
Poker Players Alliance

[/ QUOTE ]

Unwarranted? Did you read the posts? Or are you making assumptions? Have you talked with Daniel Negreanu?

The PPA was quick to separate themselves from the last scam they were involved in (the CEO tournament), but you're going to defend Annie?

Which of these others would you want representing your sport or game? Or does it completely depend on their ability to express themselves?

Pete Rose
Barry Bonds
Michael Vick
Mike Tyson
The 1919 White Sox
Ben Johnson
Tonya Harding
Boris Onischenko
Donald Crowhurst
Sylvester Carmouche
Fred Lorz
David Robertson
Joe Niekro
Annie Duke

EDIT:

I'd like to add, I have nothing to gain from this. I am concerned about my right to play this game, as I am sure most who visit this subforum are. I believe Annie Duke to be a threat to that.

[Uglyowl]

Everything I have read on the subject, you are blowing this way out of proportion.

Interesting list of cheats by the way, my favorite which I'll add is Rosie Ruiz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosie_Ruiz)

[Keyser.]

I would be fine with the PPA hiring Amarillo Slim or Grimstarr or whoever as long as they get the job done, and it appears Annie is a good candidate for getting the job done.

[88keyz]

I think she killed it in the testimony, but the democrats asking the questions were even better.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel the need to clarify and defend Annie from this unwarranted attack. First, let’s be clear, Annie Duke is not a paid employee of the PPA, nor did she receive any compensation for testifying before the House Judiciary Committee. She did it because she loves the game, she is well versed on the issues facing poker today (UIGEA, WTO, personal freedom, etc.) and most importantly she so impressed Chairman Conyers during her visit with him during the October PPA Fly-In that he personally requested her testimony at the hearing! The PPA was proud to have her represent our organization and the poker playing community at-large.

Needless to say she did an outstanding job. Several members of Congress (who currently serve on the Committee), former members of Congress (who are part of the PPA lobbying team), Congressional staff and representatives from the banking industry to the gaming industry personally sought me out to say how excellent Annie performed.

[/ QUOTE ]

The key point: "Chairman Conyers... ...personally requested her testimony at the hearing"

Her testimony stands on its own merits.

To call her "breach of etiquette" cheating is way too harsh.

Given all of the other problems and other recent scandals, her advice on tourney strategy was correct and pretty basic, she wasn't playing any hands for anyone. This doesn't come any where near cheating IMO.


D$D

[4_2_it]

Emperor,

Since Annie does not work for the PPA and her testimony was at the request of Chairman Conyers, what exactly is the PPA supposed to do? Attack an ally? I'd rather see them spend their time strategizing against our real foes as opposed to attacking someone over a breach of etiquette.

[oldbookguy]

Agreed 4_2_it and I agree, bots are cheating.

As I understand this, she allied with 2 other players to beat another out.

So, how many players, us included, when at the money in a tourney will call a SS all in, then, if called by another as well simply ‘check down’ to the river (unless one hits the flop, turn or river really big with what is the nuts), hoping one of the 2 beat the all in SS player, increasing the odds.

Is this any different?

Lets go one more. How many players here use the calculators to (not me, I can do math) while playing? Is this not cheating?
It would be if you were taking a pencil and paper only math test and snuck a calculator in, correct?

Get over it, it is, in many ways, no different (though some) than what all players do when deep in the money or bubbling, working with other stacks to push out the SS players.

obg

[Skallagrim]

I work with people I dont personally like every day; if its good or necessary for my business, I put up with it and feel no need to mention it.

Whatever Annie's faults, to put her in the same league as the 1919 White Sox is way over the top.

She did a great job testifying, no question.

Leave the personal animosity outside of the cause, no one is asking you to socialize with her.

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

My point Skall, I am not against here in any way.

Those who are need to get over it.

I do hope the reply was not intended at my post, rather simply was the last post in line?

obg

[cmillard]

okay, I have used the search feature and I keep coming back to this! Someone tell me what she did/didn't do...or at least link the info.

Thanks.

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
I work with people I dont personally like every day; if its good or necessary for my business, I put up with it and feel no need to mention it.

Whatever Annie's faults, to put her in the same league as the 1919 White Sox is way over the top.

She did a great job testifying, no question.

Leave the personal animosity outside of the cause, no one is asking you to socialize with her.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone seems to be focusing on the one incident last year.
Daniel Negreanu has given many personal anecdotes of her BLATANTLY cheating.
HUNDREDS of posters here and on rgp have given personal anecdotes of her angle shooting, and THOUSANDS of posters posted condemning those actions. (feel free to use search engine)

The 1919 White Sox don't compare to Annie's compulsive problem imo.

I thought that by posting that I could drum up support to pressure the PPA into not being involved with Annie Duke. Obviously the posters of this subforum, or at least the ones trolling this post, are too starstruck to care about her credibility or how that might hurt our cause.

My mistake.

DN an AD (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-34,GGLJ:en&q=Daniel+negreanu+Annie+duke)

In case you missed it (http://www.bluffmagazine.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=936&PN=1&TPN=2)

Terrence's Nightmare (http://www.recpoker.com/article.php?article_id=990143&view=0&set_fav=1)

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]

I thought that by posting that I could drum up support to pressure the PPA into not being involved with Annie Duke. Obviously the posters of this subforum, or at least the ones trolling this post, are too starstruck to care about her credibility or how that might hurt our cause.

My mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not trolling nor starstruck.

The Chairman requested her personally. I personally didn't see her as the most persuasive speaker from the fly-in, I don't pimp the PPA.

All said I still totally disagree with your position on this issue. She was by all measures an effective witness. I can't stand Helmutt, but if he was effective I suport his use as well.

There are very few perfect allies in this world, none in politics.



D$D

[Skallagrim]

No, Emporer, you are the one who misses it.

Even if I agree (I dont know honestly) that AD is a despicable person and poker player, that does not mean that we should shun her when she is doing good work for all of us.

The idea that our opponents or members of congress would care even a small bit about AD's reputation in the poker community is laughable - most of them have no idea a poker community exists. The idea that they COULD try and use it against us is the only arguably legitimate point you have, but it too is minor compared to the other factors previously mentioned.

Consider: Larry Flynt is one of the most notorious pornographers out there, and his person life contains more than a small amount of human failings. Yet his defense of his parody of Jerry Falwell was one of the high points of free speech rights in the last 50 years.

By your logic the ACLU and other lovers of free speech should have distanced itself from Flynt and his case because of distaste for him personally and the fact that there are "better" representatives for the cause. If they (we) had done that, what fools we would like now.

You are asking us to make the obvious mistake of turning on an effective ally simply because (if you are correct) she is far from perfect in her personal/professional life.

Since when did being perfect become needed to represent a cause?

Ever heard the quote "let he who is without sin cast the first stone?"

And OBG, I guess I have to be more careful about using the "quick reply" option.

Skallagrim

[Emperor]

Thank you for educating me on the requirements to be an effective spokesperson. I guess this also translates to the current election.

Hillary's lack of credibility isn't deterring the liberal base.

Ron Paul's exceptional credibility isn't inspiring the conservative base.

Hijacking my own thread due to the fact that nobody cares about credibility.

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
Thank you for educating me on the requirements to be an effective spokesperson. I guess this also translates to the current election.

Hillary's lack of credibility isn't deterring the liberal base.

Ron Paul's exceptional credibility isn't inspiring the conservative base.

Hijacking my own thread due to the fact that nobody cares about credibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

Emperor,

As long as the members of that Congressional Committee find Annie credible that is all that matters. In war, a common phrase that is tossed around is "my enemy's enemy is my friend". That is the approach you need to take with Annie.

I have no idea about her conduct because I do not keep up with what the pros are doing. I only know that Congress is interested in her testimony so that is what counts. The fact that our opponents are not attacking Annie does speak volumes. (To be fair, maybe they realize that arguing that collusion can have any impact on the outcome in a supposed "game of chance" isn't in their best interest.)

[Skallagrim]

Would anyone disagree that Annie Duke is knowledgeable about the game of poker, how and where it is played, who plays it, and what is needed to preserve the freedom to play it? I dont think even Emporer would deny she has credibility on those points, and those are the points the committee was interested in. She also did pretty good on WTO questions, and "problem gambling" questions.

When they have a committee hearing on INTEGRITY in poker rather than the LEGALITY of poker, I will then investigate your claims to see if she has credibility as a spokesperson.

Skallagrim

[metsandfinsfan]

[ QUOTE ]
My mistake.

DN an AD (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-34,GGLJ:en&q=Daniel+negreanu+Annie+duke)

In case you missed it (http://www.bluffmagazine.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=936&PN=1&TPN=2)

Terrence's Nightmare (http://www.recpoker.com/article.php?article_id=990143&view=0&set_fav=1)

[/ QUOTE ]

all i see is stupid forum bs gossip ... there is not one shred of evidence that any of this is true

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I work with people I dont personally like every day; if its good or necessary for my business, I put up with it and feel no need to mention it.

Whatever Annie's faults, to put her in the same league as the 1919 White Sox is way over the top.

She did a great job testifying, no question.

Leave the personal animosity outside of the cause, no one is asking you to socialize with her.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone seems to be focusing on the one incident last year.
Daniel Negreanu has given many personal anecdotes of her BLATANTLY cheating.
HUNDREDS of posters here and on rgp have given personal anecdotes of her angle shooting, and THOUSANDS of posters posted condemning those actions. (feel free to use search engine)

The 1919 White Sox don't compare to Annie's compulsive problem imo.

I thought that by posting that I could drum up support to pressure the PPA into not being involved with Annie Duke. Obviously the posters of this subforum, or at least the ones trolling this post, are too starstruck to care about her credibility or how that might hurt our cause.

My mistake.

DN an AD (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-34,GGLJ:en&q=Daniel+negreanu+Annie+duke)

In case you missed it (http://www.bluffmagazine.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=936&PN=1&TPN=2)

Terrence's Nightmare (http://www.recpoker.com/article.php?article_id=990143&view=0&set_fav=1)

[/ QUOTE ]

TL;Dr do not care. She did a FANTASTIC JOB(volunteered her own time and received no payments) was personally asked to testify by a Congressmen that was so impressed by her he called for the Hearing....

Yeah what a terrible choice she was...I would like to hear OP opinion on who would've made a good choice because I am at a loss for what it take to satisfy some people..

[Emperor]

[quoteI would like to hear OP opinion on who would've made a good choice because I am at a loss for what it take to satisfy some people..

[/ QUOTE ]

Satisfying me would have been really easy actually.

Anyone other than Annie Duke. A random person off the street would have been better.

[Richas]

Why is it that the Poker "community" feels the need to eat its own young?

I suspect that to be a good player you need to be driven, selfish, pursue any edge, to be aggressive and to be inividualistic. You also have to be perceptive, aware and understand the maths but the "negative" attributes are very visible. Poker is not a team game and many players and commentators lack inter personal skills, they just want to win. I'm afraid like in many sports the nice guy comes last.

So - my advice is if you can't be nice to our friends just STFU. Annie was an effective spokesperson, she is on our side. Stop attacking allies and use your natural venomistic attitude to attack our enemies instead.

[Richas]

As an aside I think Annie get more stick because she is a woman. Don't believe me? Try reading Ghosts at the table by Des Wilson. Many great players have dubious personality traits and flexible ethics but they are still respected.

Me I think some blokes don't like the girlie to win or to be as tough as them. Mind you from the links they do seem to have a good line in bitching.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is it that the Poker "community" feels the need to eat its own young?

[/ QUOTE ]

Aint that the truth!



D$D

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is it that the Poker "community" feels the need to eat its own young?

I suspect that to be a good player you need to be driven, selfish, pursue any edge, to be aggressive and to be inividualistic. You also have to be perceptive, aware and understand the maths but the "negative" attributes are very visible. Poker is not a team game and many players and commentators lack inter personal skills, they just want to win. I'm afraid like in many sports the nice guy comes last.

So - my advice is if you can't be nice to our friends just STFU. Annie was an effective spokesperson, she is on our side. Stop attacking allies and use your natural venomistic attitude to attack our enemies instead.

[/ QUOTE ]

High stakes poker IS a team game.