DN loses respect for Raymer

[NCAces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, you could be wrong, since you are engaging in nothing but sheer speculation like you usually do, which you should know is inadmissible, counselor. LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, troll, you wanta provide some insight I missed?

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, I think I'll pass on pulling something out of my rear-end. You seem to have handled that pretty well yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to have to put you into my twit filter. Every time I challenge you to respond to something I've said that you attack, you refuse to do so because you can't. Classic nit. Bye ... twit filter being turned on.

NCAces

[ShakeZula06]

Lawman, do you want to be the biggest douchebag on this board or just the biggest troll?

[okterrific]

[ QUOTE ]
Lawman, do you want to be the biggest douchebag on this board or just the biggest troll?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there a difference?

[palman]

Greg-

What you seem to be missing is evident in this analogy. First, the bully is only bullying less than 50 poker players. The online card affects hundreds of thousands. Thus it shouldn't be surprising that a large amount of people could agree with Daniel and not be a shill for the WPT.

Secondly, the bully hasn't bullied anyone yet. The whole issue is that they could hypothetically bully you. To this point, the amount of income lost to this point as a result of the current release (as I understand it) is negligible at best. You're fighting for what they could potentially do against you.... and since you're risking the online card just for a hypothetical, it seems like something understandbly the poker community as a whole will and should be against.

You are correct that they have no legal basis to bring up the online card. The problem is that isn't how the media or someone from the outside looking in will see it. This is bad press, and this industry simply doesn't need any bad press at all at this time.

[Burno]

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi CEO:

Tonight I had a conversation with a very knowledgeable and famous poker player whose name I won't mention. We both have the same opinion. The WPT is going down. ESPN will simply crush them. In fact, we think, and I think I stated this to you over a year ago, that ESPN will eventually crush most of the other shows. Of course that's just my opinion, but I would be curious to know if you agree, and if you do, in a sense the WPT will eventually then lose this suit even if they win.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

Even if you think that the WPT is going to play the "online gambling card" (analogous to playing the "race card" in theoretically racial situations that don't actually have anything to do with racism)...

[/ QUOTE ]

Greg,

It's stunning how often you are making yourself look foolish during this whole thing. You've called Negreanu a sock puppet for the WPT. You called somebody in this thread a shill for the WPT (while giving yourself a backdoor to say you really didn't call him that). And, now you're using this stupid race analogy.

I'm sure lots of people remember how stupid Annie Duke sounded when she said "We're not even slaves. We're people paying to pick the cotton." in reference to WPT issues. Your comment isn't much better.

Hyperbole like that just makes you sound less credible. You come across as somebody who is overstating a weak case.


[ QUOTE ]

I'm just amazed that somebody can be so gung-ho against the position we are taking, without being aligned with the WPT.


[/ QUOTE ]

You need to stop being amazed. In fact, you should be expecting the majority of poker players to be against you in this issue. Lots of people think you look greedy for filing a lawsuit suggesting the WPT is a monopoly when there are so many other opportunities to play poker.

Your claims that you are doing this for the benefit of others rather than yourselves is always going to sound disingenuous. People believe those who file lawsuits are doing it for their own benefit. The louder litigants claim to be doing it for altruistic reasons, the more likely they are to be seen as hypocrites.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
The WPT is going down. ESPN will simply crush them.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is ESPN supposed to do this? They don't seem to have the product.

The only poker they have a contract to televise is the World Series of Poker. They don't even have the Circuit events form 2007 forward and don't seem to have much interest in signing a contract for them. The # of WSOP events being covered have gone down since 2004.

Overall, it seems ESPN is reducing its poker coverage going forward. Does anybody have any data for the # of original hours broadcast by ESPN in 2004, 2005, and 2006?

[odellthurman]

[ QUOTE ]
Greg-

What you seem to be missing is evident in this analogy. First, the bully is only bullying less than 50 poker players. The online card affects hundreds of thousands. Thus it shouldn't be surprising that a large amount of people could agree with Daniel and not be a shill for the WPT.

Secondly, the bully hasn't bullied anyone yet. The whole issue is that they could hypothetically bully you. To this point, the amount of income lost to this point as a result of the current release (as I understand it) is negligible at best. You're fighting for what they could potentially do against you.... and since you're risking the online card just for a hypothetical, it seems like something understandbly the poker community as a whole will and should be against.

You are correct that they have no legal basis to bring up the online card. The problem is that isn't how the media or someone from the outside looking in will see it. This is bad press, and this industry simply doesn't need any bad press at all at this time.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the best post in the thread.

[Wynton]

Greg,

Has the WPT filed its answer yet? And do you have a link to the answer?

I'm a lawyer and very interested in this lawsuit. I've only heard third or fourth-hand the objections to the lawsuit, and so far really don't understand them. I simply don't grasp how this could threaten poker for anyone. Is the concern merely that ANY litigation concerning poker somehow will make courts take a closer look at its legality?