Phil Ivey Gossip

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
PHIL ILL PLAY U FOR WHATEVER U OWN AND WHATEVER I OWN, U NAME THE HANDICAP JUST MAKE IT FAIR AND ILL PLAY U BOUL. I KNOW U FROM AC AN KNOW PPL LIKE THE NOVAKS, I KNOW NANCY ALSO AND KNOW U GREW UP WITH HER, ILL BANKROLL CHALLENGE U IF U READ THIS, I PLAY GOLF WITH EBBY WHO I KNOW U KNOW, LETS DO THIS HOLLA

[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, Joey, I truly think you should play a hand of poker with Ivey first. And tell us all about it.

[HP]

[ QUOTE ]
Is gambling legal in Australia?

[/ QUOTE ]

I just had to bump this to defend a magnificent part of Australian culture

We [censored] love to gamble. dude you don't even know

edit: Just found some stats. In 2004 and 2005, Australians gambled $142 AU billion in turnover. We have a pop of ~20 million

142 AU ~ 116 USD

[Ellsworth T]

I know this argument is slightly diluted but I am truly interested in the ethical conclusion from my fellow twoers, and hopefully I can add my epistemological perspective on this affair.

There appears to be two sides to this debate: 1)that phil ivey's actions, namely his lying/deception with regards to his handicap were unethical and reprehensible and thus grounds for nullifying the bet. 2) that ivey's actions were within the bounds of gambling on golf and that the real fault lie not in ivey's deceit but in the irresponsibility of his competitors (brief and summarized i know).

It appears then that the component of this event most central to a proper and fair resolution is presented in the interpretation of the acceptable standards in the golfing/gambling world, not the comparable yet for for purposes of this argument entirely different boxing/poker/pool gambling rubric.

An example may help clarify my argument. You are playing poker and are asked if you have a certain hand, you say no and based off of this information your opponent makes a call they would not have if you had told them otherwise. Intuitively this is acceptable behavior in poker stemming from necessity. However, you cannot lie in a game of say highschool basketabll by claiming that your 26 year old brother is really 16. I think I may be running on because all of this is self-evident and clear-cut but I feel it was necessary to restate because of the tangible divergence in opinion on this subject. To them I wish to state: different moral standards exist in different settings. So your digust in Ivey's actions stemming from notions of ethical conduct may be misplaced, but maybe not...

Were Phil Ivey's actions cheating or not? I would imagine there would have to be some precedent in the golf-hustling world that would clearly state one way or the other. Either caveat emptor or direct violation of implied trust, but not so gray.

I wanted to ask you directly as obviously I am not accepting as readily as many of the posters have that Ivey's actions are blatant cheating because of the obvious contextual fallacy this conclusion accords. I am curious, however, about your conclusions and this seems to be where the other posters derive their animosity towards Ivey's conduct in that ostensibly this deception goes against the natural rythm of the hustle or angle shooting.

I think the staggering sums merely accentuate the moral dilemma in this situation but irrespective of the sums, if you had been told pregame that your opponent was a 15 handicap and then was found to be a scratch golfer what would your reaction be?

[Equal]

I apoligise if this point has been made already:

but golf is a gentleman's game. It is a TOTALLY different mindset than poker. When gambling on golf, angle-shooting, lying, sandbagging, etc is absolutely unacceptable. Any negotiating is to honestly come up with as FAIR a match as possible. The equity in the match is much more important than winning or losing.

Typical poker/prop betting angles are not welcome on the golf course.

[Mark1808]

[ QUOTE ]
This is cheating... that is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone who thinks Phil Ivey or any other gambler is looking for an even money bet on the golf course is dillusional and deserves to be hustled. Ivey knows he is a better poker player than most of the people he plays with but does not offer them a handicap. If he were looking for even bets he would offer a handicap at the poker table. Golf betting is no differant, a handicap was developed to give the hustler a tool to take your money not to "even" things out. The guys who left without paying, if true,are both stupid and dishonorable. Ivey's actions, if true, are only dishonorable.

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is gambling legal in Australia?

[/ QUOTE ]

I just had to bump this to defend a magnificent part of Australian culture

We [censored] love to gamble. dude you don't even know

edit: Just found some stats. In 2004 and 2005, Australians gambled $142 AU billion in turnover. We have a pop of ~20 million

142 AU ~ 116 USD

[/ QUOTE ]

How on earth do you know what was gambled by tourists and by locals? Are you remotely serious?

Oh, and that $5800 a person isn't that impressive, far less so when you net out the Packer family! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Jackal69]

did this get posted yet?

http://www.pokertube.com/ShowMovie.a...0-5ebc597b4c47

[dupree]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is cheating... that is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone who thinks Phil Ivey or any other gambler is looking for an even money bet on the golf course is dillusional and deserves to be hustled. Ivey knows he is a better poker player than most of the people he plays with but does not offer them a handicap. If he were looking for even bets he would offer a handicap at the poker table. Golf betting is no differant, a handicap was developed to give the hustler a tool to take your money not to "even" things out. The guys who left without paying, if true,are both stupid and dishonorable. Ivey's actions, if true, are only dishonorable.

[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly, just like he only plays craps when he has the edge.

[luckyjimm]

Uh, did this get posted a bunch already?

"Daniel,

I have just read your blog in which you complain of your friend's treatment and the hands of a couple of “hustlers”. I understand that you have jumbled the letters in their names, although as a chronic dyslexic this makes absolutely no difference to me. As is your intention, the whole world of course knows exactly who you are talking about.

I feel that I know you fairly well, both through our meetings across the poker table and through your public persona. I often cite you as one of the people in poker I most admire and I know that your take on any issue connected with poker is always going to be worth hearing.

That is why I am particularly disappointed that you have made a public pronouncement on a private matter about which - as you readily accept - you do not have all the facts, and have only heard from one side.

I quote from your blog: 'You played for days and days, continued to raise the stake unprovoked, set the rules for the game...'

The first two words are spot on, but everything beyond that tells me that your information is not exactly from the horse's mouth, and I don't think we should be playing Chinese Whispers with people's reputations.

I do not know your buddy very well but he has always struck me in the past as a good guy. I do not doubt that he feels aggrieved, and I would not dream of making a public judgment about a dispute he is involved in; Particularly when I have never discussed it with him. Notwithstanding the pressure to find regular content for your blog, it is a shame that you do not accord my buddy the same courtesy.

Ram is a man of infinite patience and very few words. For the past few months he has maintained a dignified public silence whilst seeing his character attacked and misinformation spread. I know he does not feel under any obligation to respond to the flamers and gossips, and I don't suppose he will thank me for writing this, but I feel it's time I made one very simple observation.

Of all the people I have known both inside and outside poker, none is more fundamentally honest and thoroughly honorable than Ram Vaswani. No one who has spent any time with him on or off the poker table would ever seriously question that. This is not to imply otherwise about any other party, it is simply that I know this about Ram to the extent that I would stake my life on it.

Even if I did not know the facts of the case I would therefore be quite certain that he would have to have a very good reason, and certainly to be utterly convinced in his own mind, if he were to dispute a gambling debt.

I know that this matter is already in the public domain and that you are only repeating in good faith what you have been told. Perhaps by way of balance though, you might feel it would be appropriate to publish this letter.

All the very best.

Barny Boatman"

http://www.thehendonmob.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13816

[Worm75]

[ QUOTE ]
I apoligise if this point has been made already:

but golf is a gentleman's game. It is a TOTALLY different mindset than poker. When gambling on golf, angle-shooting, lying, sandbagging, etc is absolutely unacceptable. Any negotiating is to honestly come up with as FAIR a match as possible. The equity in the match is much more important than winning or losing.

Typical poker/prop betting angles are not welcome on the golf course.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you kidding me???? Golf has been a game for hustler's for as long as it's been around!! You've never heard some of Doyle's and Amarillo slims stories about golf hustling? Plus there is a reason that Palmer, Nickalus and their contemporaries would never play with Lee Trevino for cash, because he would out hustle them in the cash game!!
The other guys in this deal were obviously eager to take Ivey's money, and agreed to play huge stakes without seeing phil play. Sounds like they got what they deserved, if you think a smart gambler like Phil is going to continually take the worst of it, you deserve what you get.