Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ram pays Phil Ivey the money owed from the bet... then beats the living crap out of him for [censored] over a friend and takes his money back


[/ QUOTE ]

So, out of your total of nine posts, eight of them have been defending Ram's honour on this particular thread?

Has he started shipping that $20 to railbirds already?

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As much as I find it retarded that two Poker Pros are diddling on a golf course wagering for money most people won't see in a lifetime, I find it more retarded that so many people have so much to say about a bet between two guys.

[/ QUOTE ]





Nobody besides the fan boys gives a [censored] about the bet or the individuals concerned. People are talking about the ethical dilemmas involved. Given that ethical dilemmas is a subject that has fascinated philosophers since the days of Plato and before, it's hardly surprising that they continue to challenge us.



[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough....I personally don't see any ethical dilemas in this specific situation....they are both hustlers hustling each other. We will see who comes out on top.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As much as I find it retarded that two Poker Pros are diddling on a golf course wagering for money most people won't see in a lifetime, I find it more retarded that so many people have so much to say about a bet between two guys.

[/ QUOTE ]





Nobody besides the fan boys gives a [censored] about the bet or the individuals concerned. People are talking about the ethical dilemmas involved. Given that ethical dilemmas is a subject that has fascinated philosophers since the days of Plato and before, it's hardly surprising that they continue to challenge us.



[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough....I personally don't see any ethical dilemas in this specific situation....they are both hustlers hustling each other. We will see who comes out on top.

[/ QUOTE ]

A guy takes my wallet, so I chain him up in my basement and torture him until he eventually dies. I don't see the dilemma, we were both criminals victimizing each other, we saw who came out on top.

Not claiming this is a perfect analogy [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img], but it does illustrate the problem with reducing it to such a superficial, dismissive description. Clearly there are issues here besides 'two hustlers hustling each other.' The acts of the two parties are not the same.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As much as I find it retarded that two Poker Pros are diddling on a golf course wagering for money most people won't see in a lifetime, I find it more retarded that so many people have so much to say about a bet between two guys.

[/ QUOTE ]





Nobody besides the fan boys gives a [censored] about the bet or the individuals concerned. People are talking about the ethical dilemmas involved. Given that ethical dilemmas is a subject that has fascinated philosophers since the days of Plato and before, it's hardly surprising that they continue to challenge us.



[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough....I personally don't see any ethical dilemas in this specific situation....they are both hustlers hustling each other. We will see who comes out on top.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horrible analogy, you weren't out mugging someone elses wallet when they mugged yours.



A guy takes my wallet, so I chain him up in my basement and torture him until he eventually dies. I don't see the dilemma, we were both criminals victimizing each other, we saw who came out on top.

Not claiming this is a perfect analogy [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img], but it does illustrate the problem with reducing it to such a superficial, dismissive description. Clearly there are issues here besides 'two hustlers hustling each other.' The acts of the two parties are not the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horrible analogy, you weren't out stealing wallets when yours was stolen.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As much as I find it retarded that two Poker Pros are diddling on a golf course wagering for money most people won't see in a lifetime, I find it more retarded that so many people have so much to say about a bet between two guys.

[/ QUOTE ]





Nobody besides the fan boys gives a [censored] about the bet or the individuals concerned. People are talking about the ethical dilemmas involved. Given that ethical dilemmas is a subject that has fascinated philosophers since the days of Plato and before, it's hardly surprising that they continue to challenge us.



[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough....I personally don't see any ethical dilemas in this specific situation....they are both hustlers hustling each other. We will see who comes out on top.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horrible analogy, you weren't out mugging someone elses wallet when they mugged yours.



A guy takes my wallet, so I chain him up in my basement and torture him until he eventually dies. I don't see the dilemma, we were both criminals victimizing each other, we saw who came out on top.

Not claiming this is a perfect analogy [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img], but it does illustrate the problem with reducing it to such a superficial, dismissive description. Clearly there are issues here besides 'two hustlers hustling each other.' The acts of the two parties are not the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horrible analogy, you weren't out stealing wallets when yours was stolen.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? Who cares? The important part of the analogy is we are both criminals. The point I was trying to make is that refusing to distinguish between the types of 'hustling' going on is stupid. Just like refusing to distinguish between the types of crimes we were committing.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

Tell me you're not retarded?

They're both are degen gamblers and know 100% what is up.

Quit being so stupid.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

So if someone attempted to kill you and you defended yourself and killed him, you're a criminal?

bwahahahah.

Dude, quit posting for life.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]

Fair enough....I personally don't see any ethical dilemas in this specific situation....they are both hustlers hustling each other. We will see who comes out on top.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, Ram has a dilemma. Does he pay or does he not pay? What are the likely consequences of not paying? How do people feel about whether he pays or not? Presumably, these are all issues of interest to readers of 2+2, because most of us are gamblers who either have faced or may face similar situations in the future, regardless of our interest or lack of same in the personalities involved.

I do think it somewhat peculiar that some people here are so insistent that it's incumbent on a golf gambler to minimize their edge, when there's no such obligation on a poker player.

If a rich businessman wants to sit down at the big game, nobody is going to allow *him* 'points', yet presumably most of the money will be made from his mistakes -- mistakes arising due to his relative lack of skill.

Why is this situation acceptable to everybody in poker, but not in golf gambling? Is it just custom and practice?

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

No-one seems to have discussed that the reason Ram hasn't paid the money is that he can't afford to. I think it seems likely his bankroll is no more than $2 or $3 million, and his net worth is under $5 million. Together with the hurt put on him by Sbrugby, to pay this money would mean him losing the majority of his roll, being out of action, and perhaps even selling his house. Ram Vaswani is not super-robusto; and, after this, he will find it harder to get staked. He is trying to avoid paying because he'd be almost ruined if he did; he will be merely semi-ruined if he doesn't. It seems clear to me if he could pay, he would have paid.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
So if someone attempted to kill you and you defended yourself and killed him, you're a criminal?

bwahahahah.

Dude, quit posting for life.

[/ QUOTE ]
...No and his post didnt lead you to that conclusion either.

Torturing somebody that steals your wallet is a crime. On the other hand, killing somebody in self defense is not. So yeaaaaa, dont really see where you were going with that. His analogy is obviously exaggerated, but it does show the point he is trying to make. Saying that "a hustle is a hustle" is like saying "a crime is a crime," and that is incredibly ridiculous and to say that Ivey's hustle is on the same level as Ram's "hustle" makes no sense.

This really is not a tough concept to grasp, so it surprises me that so many people in this thread share that view.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
No-one seems to have discussed that the reason Ram hasn't paid the money is that he can't afford to.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes what he is doing so much worse. There is some shame in incurring a gambling debt you don't have the means to pay, but reneging (based on dubious cheating accusations) rather than negotiating payment is just about the most dishonorable thing a person can do.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well, Ram has a dilemma. Does he pay or does he not pay? What are the likely consequences of not paying? How do people feel about whether he pays or not? Presumably, these are all issues of interest to readers of 2+2, because most of us are gamblers who either have faced or may face similar situations in the future, regardless of our interest or lack of same in the personalities involved.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think the implication of this for us is that we need to be aware that there is yet one more factor involved for us in our calculations as gamblers. Will we be paid? It's another cost of doing business, just like taxes and the rake. Unless we want to resort to unsavory collection methods there is always going to be some chance that we will have to eat it. This factor can't be ignored.

That's why gamblers take it as an extreme insult for any question to be raised as to their integrity on this point. Once word gets around that you've welched on a bet you find doors closed on you. No more little loans on your word in the middle of a game. Who's going to put you into tournaments if you need to go that route someday? You may never pay them if you score. It's no fun working in an environment where everybody thinks you're a lowlife.

[ QUOTE ]
I do think it somewhat peculiar that some people here are so insistent that it's incumbent on a golf gambler to minimize their edge, when there's no such obligation on a poker player.


[/ QUOTE ]

There's a big difference between poker and golf. The skill levels in poker are not so obvious and short term luck dominates. In golf, a player who has never broken 100 could never win playing even against a scratch golfer. So in golf a Spot must be negotiated or there is no match. The point of honor in negotiations is that truthful information be provided. An example of a "Hustle" would be if a Scratch golfer claimed he had an established 20 handicap. If Ram had actually been playing every day for the last 4 months but instead lied and said he hadn't played at all, that would be a "Hustle". As our UK friends have pointed out, regardless of the relationship Gentlemen are expected to give truthful information in the negotiations for the Spot.

But that's not to say the players are not trying to negotiate a favorable Spot for themselves, within the framework of Truthful Information. It's like when you sell a house. All pertinent information must be included in the Listing. If the house is in Escrow and something is discoverd that wasn't in the listing, the agreed to price in Escrow can be adjusted. The Listing Agent can be sued. So a framework of pertinent information should be in the Listing. But that information does not determine the Price settled on in negotiations. When the Seller shows the house she points out all the wonderful things about it. On the other hand, the prospective buyers point out all its faults. Both try to negotiate the best deal for themselves. That's been the nature of negotiation since time immemorial.

So when Ram said he hadn't played in the last 4 months, Ivey naturally countered with, "I haven't been playing either", meaning he hadn't played in the last couple of weeks if Ram had bothered to ask more about it. Ivey told him he was shooting hot and cold and that he recently had a round in the low 90's. That's a breakthrough round for Ivey and Ram should have realized it. From that framework of truthful information Ram should have known what he was getting into.

Ram simply failed to accept the possible perfect storm that was coming. His real stupidity was continuing to deny that reality even when in the midst of that storm. He should have walked away long before the boat capsized. In fact, if Ivey was intransigent with the negotiations in the face of the evidence Ram should have never started the match. Ram had the evidence availbale to him for what might happen. As it turned out, he was just stupidly overoptimistic. He was like the buyer of dot-com stocks at Nasdaq 5000. The information was available. He just didn't want to see the downside risk.

PairTheBoard

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
So if someone attempted to kill you and you defended yourself and killed him, you're a criminal?

bwahahahah.

Dude, quit posting for life.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. You are a moron. Do you seriously not understand analogies? You giving a ocunterexample demonstrates my point exactly. We need to be concerned about what TYPE of crime both of us are committing, not just that we are both committing crimes. Just like in the real example, we need to be concerned with what TYPE of hustle or whatever each person is doing, not just say something moronic like "They were both hustling." It is hilarious to me that you are arguing with me and calling me a moron while simultaneously making my point.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

Idle thought: Maybe the reason some people here are on Vaswani's side here, is that we don't understand the point on gambling with a handicap in a game of skill? I mean, we don't give handicaps to weaker players in poker, so looking at a game like golf (or billiards I believe) where you can use that system for hustling, it seems a little foreign.

Personally my gut is with Ivey here, but somehow I think I'll never truly know what happened that one day on the course.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that the Group of Arbitrators, despite possibly being weighted in Ivey's favor, suggested the outcome of the wagers be adjusted indicates that . . .

[/ QUOTE ]
What are you talking about? Where are you getting this "Group of Arbitrators" stuff from?

[/ QUOTE ]

As I read the story, Phil and Ram talked about putting the question to Arbitration. They met at a Tourny where Phil had gathered some people, including Barry G, to possibly act as Arbitrators. As I understood it, the Group made the suggestion that an adjustment be made to what Ram owed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, okay. Your reading differs from mine. (When Ram said that the Phil walked in with his "very own arbitrators" who "were obviously on his side" I took that to mean that Ram declined to arbitrate.)

But thanks for the answer. Now I understand your post and agree with your general take on things.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So if someone attempted to kill you and you defended yourself and killed him, you're a criminal?

bwahahahah.

Dude, quit posting for life.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. You are a moron. Do you seriously not understand analogies? You giving a ocunterexample demonstrates my point exactly. We need to be concerned about what TYPE of crime both of us are committing, not just that we are both committing crimes. Just like in the real example, we need to be concerned with what TYPE of hustle or whatever each person is doing, not just say something moronic like "They were both hustling." It is hilarious to me that you are arguing with me and calling me a moron while simultaneously making my point.

[/ QUOTE ]



Your analogy was retarded to begin with and not realistic.

So there are differences in what kind of "hustling" someone is doing?

I think some people are being obtuse, look at who we are talking about.

Anyway, I guess Ive spent to much time already talking about two multi millionaires and their gambling problems.....

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So if someone attempted to kill you and you defended yourself and killed him, you're a criminal?

bwahahahah.

Dude, quit posting for life.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. You are a moron. Do you seriously not understand analogies? You giving a ocunterexample demonstrates my point exactly. We need to be concerned about what TYPE of crime both of us are committing, not just that we are both committing crimes. Just like in the real example, we need to be concerned with what TYPE of hustle or whatever each person is doing, not just say something moronic like "They were both hustling." It is hilarious to me that you are arguing with me and calling me a moron while simultaneously making my point.

[/ QUOTE ]



Your analogy was retarded to begin with and not realistic.

So there are differences in what kind of "hustling" someone is doing?

I think some people are being obtuse, look at who we are talking about.

Anyway, I guess Ive spent to much time already talking about two multi millionaires and their gambling problems.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course my analogy was retarded. It was crafted for the sole purpose of demonstrating how retarded your comment that 'they both hustled each other, a hustle is a hustle, blah blah blah' was. I'm glad it was effective in its purpose.

Like previous posters have mentioned, I don't really care if Ivey gets his money or not, I don't know him and it won't benefit me. However, this incident brings up a bunch of interesting questions and debates that ARE relevant for anyone who intends to make gambling any significant part of their life.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
As much as I find it retarded that two Poker Pros are diddling on a golf course wagering for money most people won't see in a lifetime, I find it more retarded that so many people have so much to say about a bet between two guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouting about nothing is great because once this "issue" is "resolved" you can pretend you played a role in it and got to interact with some real "pros" along the way.

My personal favorites are the people who write posts saying this is going to trash the outside world's view of poker and gambling, as if there were more than 2,000 people on Earth with even a vague awareness of this entire thing.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

Thanks to Barry certainly for articulating his take on all of this.

Understanding that this is well trodden ground, I still can't figure out how anyone can feel Ivey hustled Vaswani. For any of us who have played any stakes in golf, players always have to be suspect of claims regarding where their opponent's play is. It is why the handicapping system was put in place in the first place and why so much work goes into ensuring that scores are logged in. When I play a friend who I haven't played with in quite awhile, we go back and forth until we decide upon what the strokes are. Then I get beat normally if I haven't been playing much.

Vaswani had all the opportunity to quit, to keep the stakes where they are, to renegotiate strokes (very common practice after nine holes, much less after a round). To Barry's point, it seems like it was the wrong extremes of variation combined with Vaswani wanting to win his cash and pride back. Anyone who has played golf has been exactly where Vaswani was, albeit not for $1.4M.

To the point regarding the cash and Vaswani's ability to pay, I'm sure that can be figured out. I mean, I've seen movies like Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Rounders. It's called a payment plan (see the plasma screen television rental industry for appropriate interest rates).

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

Apparently the situation is solved, both Ram and Marc talked to our team at the WPT Main Event at Bellagio (last two broadcasts). The commentary is in german but all the interviews (www.raise.tv) are in english. We will try to talk to Phil as well - he left very quickly after he exited the event.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that the Group of Arbitrators, despite possibly being weighted in Ivey's favor, suggested the outcome of the wagers be adjusted indicates that . . .

[/ QUOTE ]
What are you talking about? Where are you getting this "Group of Arbitrators" stuff from?

[/ QUOTE ]

As I read the story, Phil and Ram talked about putting the question to Arbitration. They met at a Tourny where Phil had gathered some people, including Barry G, to possibly act as Arbitrators. As I understood it, the Group made the suggestion that an adjustment be made to what Ram owed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, okay. Your reading differs from mine. (When Ram said that the Phil walked in with his "very own arbitrators" who "were obviously on his side" I took that to mean that Ram declined to arbitrate.)

But thanks for the answer. Now I understand your post and agree with your general take on things.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is what Ram said in the Post linked to by OP:

[ QUOTE ]
Ram -
When we arrived in Monte Carlo and had our meeting to try and resolve this Phil walked in with his very own arbitrators, Barry Greenstein and Martin De Knijff, who were obviously on his side only having heard his side of the story. The four players were there as well as Richard Redmond who is a mutual friend and who also played with us on the second day. Of course it wasn’t long before it was agreed that the handicaps were more than a few shots out.

Then there was talk of finding the value of the missing shots in the handicap and taking it off the money that was won/lost but I didn’t agree that I should pay anything due to the fact that it was a total con. As far as I am concerned it’s a void game.

[/ QUOTE ]

So according to Ram there was Talk about adjusting the amount owed which Ram disagreed with, wanting a Void Game. Ram's reasoning for why he declined at that time is not really relevant to what I was saying about the implications of that "adjustment" idea.

Of course the whole thing is moot now with these latest developments. Although I wonder if this new Arbitration Group of 3 decided that payment should be made In Full. I wouldn't be suprised if they kept the terms of the final agreement confidential.

PairTheBoard

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just feel its fine to try and gain some kind of edge in the game.. however there has to be a line which when crossed the behaviour becomes unacceptable. You can't gain an advantage at any cost. I would say it is perfectly acceptable for Ivey to pretend to play badly to gain extra shots from Ram then when he's happy he has an edge then to up the stakes... but when directly asked how muched he had played and to lie about it then this becomes unacceptable and the game should be deemed void.

I 100% agree with Ram... but I don't really blame Ivey for having a go.. but its a bit bad to try and con a friend.

[/ QUOTE ]


what???!?!?!?! this is like the exact opposite of what is acceptable. him playing poorly then upping the stakes and kicking ass is by far a hustle.

both people negotiated to play a game on set terms. PI and RV are both gamblers. they look for +EV situations. they both felt upon agreement that they each were +EV in hte game regardless of what was said.


if they had been playing poker HU and agreed to play 2-7 triple draw and during negotiations PI says he hasnt played that too often in the past month, then waxes RV because he actually had been playing it a fair amount is it unacceptable.


why do you think the corporation plays andy beal HU for 50k 100k blinds. they think they are +EV. if he tells them he hasnt played poker in a year and wants the game, then the best players in the world sit with AB, and he cleans them out because all he has been doing is studying and playing poker, should the corporation not have to pay?????


lets be serious here guys. If RV took the bet and killed ivey there would be no discussion here. all the top pros used to take action from PI years back because he was horrible and they knew they were +EV in the game, so i guess PI was hustled all these years by his friends.


cmon now

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

if RV said ill give u a 5 HC and PI takes it and gets spanked ohh well PI shouldnt have agreed to that. RV probably thought he was getting a great +EV situation, hence him agreeing to it. if RV thought it was even, like a handicap is supposed to do, he wouldnt have taken the bet cause hes not playing to break even

if ivey boasted about how much better he got, him training with top instructors and wants to spot rv strokes, rv wouldnt tell ivey he is out of his mind and not accept the bet, he would agree to it whether it were true or not because of an increased edge.


both players are by far looking for an edge. PI got it

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

so.... what was the number? What did Ram lose in the game?

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
so.... what was the number? What did Ram lose in the game?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe it was $1.4m.

Has anyone heard anything about the terms of the settlement somebody posted about?

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
It is hard or me to believe how gullible the people on here and on the Hendonmob forum are. Someone trying to get out of a debt comes up with a reason not to pay, and so many of you bought it.

1. Phil never lied to them. And he didn't shoot better than he said he would. He putted well, but hit the ball worse. He shot in the 90's as expected.

2. Erick Lindgren gave Phil 10 shots during the summer. He now gives Phil 8 shots. They played even in a nine-hole TV match in Australia, and Erick clobbered Phil. When Mark and Ram asked Erick if they ever played even, he admitted they had, but he made sure that Ram knew that he was a much better golfer than Phil. That conveniently got left out of Ram's post.

3. Mark and Ram beat Phil five times in a row. The last time was in Barcelona where Phil lost six of the first seven holes and then walked off the course. Ram says Phil lost only $34,000, which is hard to do playing in increments of three different $10,000 bets per hole. (Two individual bets and a team bet.) Ram forgot to mention that the reason they are not much ahead of Phil is that Phil won most of the money back at Chinese Poker.

4. After they played the first nine holes in Australia, they made a small adjustment in the match, and Ram and Mark asked for a contract. (A contract means no more adjustments while in Austrailia.) They continued for a total of 72 holes. (Mark didn't finish the last nine.) At what point, should they have taken responsibility for their loss? Or is it OK to play to try to win money back, and not pay if you lose?

6. Except for nine holes where Mark parred seven holes, as expected, since he is nearly a scratch golfer, I don't think Mark shot less than 45, where his average was expected to be 38. And Ram, who was supposed to be better than Phil, was having trouble breaking 100 for 18 holes.

7. If $140,000 had been won instead of $1,400,000, the money would have been paid and a new match would have been negotiated. As Benny Binion once said, "I usually find that people are honorable as long as they can afford to be."

8. I was not brought in as an arbitrator or to fight Phil's battles. Phil wanted me to show up because he said, "You're never going to believe what they have to say. Their whole argument is that since they didn't realize they were clear underdogs in the match, the match should be voided."

9. Phil usually tells me about his matches. I invariably tell him he is an underdog. He always says he likes to win as the underdog by being tougher under pressure, and if he loses he will practice and get better and eventually win the money back.

10. The reason Phil has never defended himself is that he is a private person, and he didn't even know these forums existed until I told him about what was being posted. I have a feeling Phil may have someting to say or write once this is settled.

I can't believe that this thread has gotten so big, starting from a false hypothesis.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]

how many times do i have to be exactly right about something before people stop f'ing with me? i knew i should never leave the diablo forum, but even on that forum their are some morons who question my authority. why do you little worms come here? is it just to spout nonsense or learn from real pro gamblers who have paid their dues and know the score.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is hard or me to believe how gullible the people on here and on the Hendonmob forum are. Someone trying to get out of a debt comes up with a reason not to pay, and so many of you bought it.

1. Phil never lied to them. And he didn't shoot better than he said he would. He putted well, but hit the ball worse. He shot in the 90's as expected.

2. Erick Lindgren gave Phil 10 shots during the summer. He now gives Phil 8 shots. They played even in a nine-hole TV match in Australia, and Erick clobbered Phil. When Mark and Ram asked Erick if they ever played even, he admitted they had, but he made sure that Ram knew that he was a much better golfer than Phil. That conveniently got left out of Ram's post.

3. Mark and Ram beat Phil five times in a row. The last time was in Barcelona where Phil lost six of the first seven holes and then walked off the course. Ram says Phil lost only $34,000, which is hard to do playing in increments of three different $10,000 bets per hole. (Two individual bets and a team bet.) Ram forgot to mention that the reason they are not much ahead of Phil is that Phil won most of the money back at Chinese Poker.

4. After they played the first nine holes in Australia, they made a small adjustment in the match, and Ram and Mark asked for a contract. (A contract means no more adjustments while in Austrailia.) They continued for a total of 72 holes. (Mark didn't finish the last nine.) At what point, should they have taken responsibility for their loss? Or is it OK to play to try to win money back, and not pay if you lose?

6. Except for nine holes where Mark parred seven holes, as expected, since he is nearly a scratch golfer, I don't think Mark shot less than 45, where his average was expected to be 38. And Ram, who was supposed to be better than Phil, was having trouble breaking 100 for 18 holes.

7. If $140,000 had been won instead of $1,400,000, the money would have been paid and a new match would have been negotiated. As Benny Binion once said, "I usually find that people are honorable as long as they can afford to be."

8. I was not brought in as an arbitrator or to fight Phil's battles. Phil wanted me to show up because he said, "You're never going to believe what they have to say. Their whole argument is that since they didn't realize they were clear underdogs in the match, the match should be voided."

9. Phil usually tells me about his matches. I invariably tell him he is an underdog. He always says he likes to win as the underdog by being tougher under pressure, and if he loses he will practice and get better and eventually win the money back.

10. The reason Phil has never defended himself is that he is a private person, and he didn't even know these forums existed until I told him about what was being posted. I have a feeling Phil may have someting to say or write once this is settled.

I can't believe that this thread has gotten so big, starting from a false hypothesis.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]

how many times do i have to be exactly right about something before people stop f'ing with me? i knew i should never leave the diablo forum, but even on that forum their are some morons who question my authority. why do you little worms come here? is it just to spout nonsense or learn from real pro gamblers who have paid their dues and know the score.

[/ QUOTE ]

*there

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is hard or me to believe how gullible the people on here and on the Hendonmob forum are. Someone trying to get out of a debt comes up with a reason not to pay, and so many of you bought it.

1. Phil never lied to them. And he didn't shoot better than he said he would. He putted well, but hit the ball worse. He shot in the 90's as expected.

2. Erick Lindgren gave Phil 10 shots during the summer. He now gives Phil 8 shots. They played even in a nine-hole TV match in Australia, and Erick clobbered Phil. When Mark and Ram asked Erick if they ever played even, he admitted they had, but he made sure that Ram knew that he was a much better golfer than Phil. That conveniently got left out of Ram's post.

3. Mark and Ram beat Phil five times in a row. The last time was in Barcelona where Phil lost six of the first seven holes and then walked off the course. Ram says Phil lost only $34,000, which is hard to do playing in increments of three different $10,000 bets per hole. (Two individual bets and a team bet.) Ram forgot to mention that the reason they are not much ahead of Phil is that Phil won most of the money back at Chinese Poker.

4. After they played the first nine holes in Australia, they made a small adjustment in the match, and Ram and Mark asked for a contract. (A contract means no more adjustments while in Austrailia.) They continued for a total of 72 holes. (Mark didn't finish the last nine.) At what point, should they have taken responsibility for their loss? Or is it OK to play to try to win money back, and not pay if you lose?

6. Except for nine holes where Mark parred seven holes, as expected, since he is nearly a scratch golfer, I don't think Mark shot less than 45, where his average was expected to be 38. And Ram, who was supposed to be better than Phil, was having trouble breaking 100 for 18 holes.

7. If $140,000 had been won instead of $1,400,000, the money would have been paid and a new match would have been negotiated. As Benny Binion once said, "I usually find that people are honorable as long as they can afford to be."

8. I was not brought in as an arbitrator or to fight Phil's battles. Phil wanted me to show up because he said, "You're never going to believe what they have to say. Their whole argument is that since they didn't realize they were clear underdogs in the match, the match should be voided."

9. Phil usually tells me about his matches. I invariably tell him he is an underdog. He always says he likes to win as the underdog by being tougher under pressure, and if he loses he will practice and get better and eventually win the money back.

10. The reason Phil has never defended himself is that he is a private person, and he didn't even know these forums existed until I told him about what was being posted. I have a feeling Phil may have someting to say or write once this is settled.

I can't believe that this thread has gotten so big, starting from a false hypothesis.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]

how many times do i have to be exactly right about something before people stop f'ing with me? i knew i should never leave the diablo forum, but even on that forum their are some morons who question my authority. why do you little worms come here? is it just to spout nonsense or learn from real pro gamblers who have paid their dues and know the score.

[/ QUOTE ]

*there

[/ QUOTE ]
oh boy.

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

[ QUOTE ]
ram said the average winnings from the other rounds played with ivey where like 10 - 50 k and ivey was actually up on him by something close to 30k. For vaswani to then go and lose 2 million in two rounds is pretty incredible and shows something was completely [censored] in the negotiations. No way im paying if im Ram. He lives in the UK i really dont think he will care about losing ivey and his friends either

[/ QUOTE ]

Gambling debts are not enforceable under UK law. Vaswami would not have to pay even if everything had been on the up and up never mind as it stands. Did Phil Ivey think he was Titanic Thompson?

Re: Ram Vaswani speaks about that \'Golf Game\'.
 

If they both agreed to the stakes, that's all that matters IMO (means zero). Ram should pay regardless of how he "feels" about the situation. A gamblers word means everything, he didn't need to stay and keep playing, whether to try and get even or whatever. He lost, he should pay up and be done with the situation.