[ChicagoRy]

If Phil really did lie to the extent that has been claimed, and Ram told Phil he would pay before the match (not that you ever have to say that, it is a given if you enter a bet you will pay..) and later it is found that Phil lied about something, it doesn't mean Ram is lying because he won't pay. Going back on your word because the person in question lied to you doesn't make you a liar in all situations.

The argument, assuming we are pretty close to the truth of the story here, is basically why did Ram keep playing after he knew he was being hustled and does this mean he should have to pay? Given all the info provided it appears Ram will end up paying something, but not the total amount and not zero.

Also, the whole "anything goes when gambling in golf" thing is fine, whatever. If somebody who is not familiar with the "whatever goes" attitude to golf gambling is being hustled by a hustler and doesn't pay, it's sort of up to the person who "goes by those rules" to get him to pay.

No matter how big of a hustler you are, and how big of a fish you feel you are playing, if your con has been setup so that the fish will not pay you if he finds out about your con, you are no longer the hustler, you are the hustled. That's the way of the game of hustling, no? You can lie about anything you want beforehand but you cannot be lied to afterwards? I dunno, it's kind of murky to me here, and I doubt there is a threat of violence from one of the richest poker players alive to Ram, which is usually how these things get settled.

Using these sorts of tactics (assuming it is true) to hustle people are usually reserved for those who can physically force the fish to pay.

I guess what I'm trying to say is if this is all true and Ivey was just hustling Ram, if he is really upset about not getting paid what did he expect? It's obviously not worth the money Ram owes him to physically hurt Ram through whatever channel, that'd be stupid with the wealth and popularity Phil has.

I guess the most likely story here is we have two degenerate gamblers here and one of them got hustled, neither could probably stop if they were losing and now there is controversy about it. The most fair thing is probably a partial payment, as Shaniac suggested, as both players seem to be at fault here.

Blah, I'm done ranting.