[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Until I read the Slate article about that self-professed "professional poker player" who gambled away his entire bankroll and then went through nearly all of the family's untouchable rainy day reserves, I would have been 100% dead set against this bill - couldn't see the other side. Now, I must admit that I find myself thinking about the damage that is done to families by problem gamblers. I'm no longer so sure that my position is as well-founded as I once believed it to be.
[/ QUOTE ]
The guy who was the subject of the Slate article is a 2+2er (handle: cero_z)with 1500 posts who many in the high stakes forums respect. Both he and his wife (who authored the article) posted here and admitted her article made the situation sound worse than it truly was.
The thread is here:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...page=&vc=1
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I read that thread completely. In my opinion, the subject of that article has some very well-developed table skills, but has a serious tilt problem and no money management skills. Right now, he's far from a professional - in my opinion.
And I do feel very sorry for his wife and kids (and for him), and for many unknown others who didn't have a miracle comeback once they lost $73.5k out of their $65k bankroll and $10k rainy day fund.
We all love poker, but we need to be honest and admit that the other side has a few pretty solid arguments to make. There are real victims here.