[ QUOTE ]
Daniel's defense in writing the blog:
http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poke...96153&st=0
A couple of tidbits in there that hadn't been posted. E.g. At the time of play, Lindgren did still give Ivey 10 shots. It was after this match, that Erick stopped doing that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Daniel wrote: "If they would have quit after 9 holes, or cried foul then, and stopped playing, that would be understandable. However, when you continue to play 36 holes for two straight days you lose all credibility when it comes to crying foul.
I mean really, are we to believe that these guys thought they had the worst of the match but continued to play, and not only play, but raised the stakes?"
-------------------------
It might be that they figured out they were gettng hustled early on but decided to play on anyway. essentially freerolling Ivey considering they did not intend on ever paying. If in the middle of a bet I found out I was being cheated I would say nothing and just play my freeroll. If I win, then HE got hustled, if I lose, no problem, he STILL got hustled.
But If Ivey lied about his handicap, then he didn't hustle them, he flat-out cheated them.
This is probably a situation where BOTH sides of the dispute are guilty of doing something very wrong.