Phil Ivey Gossip

[dinopoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Devil- if you think due diligence was not taken in this bet you would have a hard time finding a game with an overwhelming majority of the people who actually play nassaus/skins.
Blairs post only applies if at all to a certain select few people who have decided that no rules that pertain to how the real world treats golf apply at all.

"Lack of due diligence" only applies if the participants in the bet think it does. It is pretty obvious that Marc thinks a line has been crossed. How do you reconcile that? He's just bitter?

Blair, I am curious. Since lying is apparently perfectly fine when asked a precise question, is there any line at all that is drawn? For instance what if one person pulls a firearm on another player on the course. How about if he shoots him in the leg on the second hole?
Seems like a good way to gain an edge no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of lean this way on the situation. A line was crossed, and despite what others may think, I believe (assuming the story is true, of course) that Ivey would, and should, have trouble finding action in the future. One thing is for sure, people will be less likely to believe him when he talks about his game. In fact, his credibility will be damaged in all things by this, if the story is true.

ONe thing I note - Daniel N. said a couple of times on HSP that people he golfed with kept shooting the 'round of their life' against him. My guess is that, since both Phil and DN started golf at the same time, many of the more experienced golf husters in the poker world have beat them for some pretty good money over the last couple of years, and I suspect that they've been lied to many times. Maybe Phil was just getting some of his money back. If that's the case, maybe we're in a grey area.

Either way, the bet has to be payed off. I think that's a given no matter what.

[fatshaft]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Devil- if you think due diligence was not taken in this bet you would have a hard time finding a game with an overwhelming majority of the people who actually play nassaus/skins.
Blairs post only applies if at all to a certain select few people who have decided that no rules that pertain to how the real world treats golf apply at all.

"Lack of due diligence" only applies if the participants in the bet think it does. It is pretty obvious that Marc thinks a line has been crossed. How do you reconcile that? He's just bitter?

Blair, I am curious. Since lying is apparently perfectly fine when asked a precise question, is there any line at all that is drawn? For instance what if one person pulls a firearm on another player on the course. How about if he shoots him in the leg on the second hole?
Seems like a good way to gain an edge no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of lean this way on the situation. A line was crossed, and despite what others may think, I believe (assuming the story is true, of course) that Ivey would, and should, have trouble finding action in the future. One thing is for sure, people will be less likely to believe him when he talks about his game. In fact, his credibility will be damaged in all things by this, if the story is true.

ONe thing I note - Daniel N. said a couple of times on HSP that people he golfed with kept shooting the 'round of their life' against him. My guess is that, since both Phil and DN started golf at the same time, many of the more experienced golf husters in the poker world have beat them for some pretty good money over the last couple of years, and I suspect that they've been lied to many times. Maybe Phil was just getting some of his money back. If that's the case, maybe we're in a grey area.

Either way, the bet has to be payed off. I think that's a given no matter what.

[/ QUOTE ]Judging by the comment attributed to Phil, that the last person to take as much money off him as Marc is now driving a taxi in VEgas, I think the motive was there, and Ivey has done whatever he can to win.

Doing it on the golf course however is a major faux pas.

It is also fair to point out that Marc is a scratch golfer, so taking a mark from there that is fair is as much down to Ivey as it is Marc, and if he kept losing he should have been negotiating gradually more shots per round until he started to break even. This may be slightly different from the DN case where it sounds like he played a lot of different players, so may have been getting shorted on a handicap, but against the same players many times, Ivey should have negotiated a better handicap if he lost every game, to instead up the stakes and claim 10 shots is well below anybody's belt.

[fungaimike56]

I wonder if E-Dog saw an opportunity here to stick it to Ivey because otherwise what on earth is he doing in there? Think about it. These guys go off for a million and their 'appeal' hangs on the testimony, E-Dog's, of a guy who wasn't even there! He needs this? 'You guys settle this among yourselves and leave me out of it' would be a normal response. But if he wanted to stir the pot...just wondering?

[Blair Rodman]

The point of all this is that there are at least 3 different golf arenas:

1) The professional or scratch arena where there are no handicaps and all the rules and traditions of golf apply.

2) The world of handicap golf. This encompasses sanctioned amateur tournaments, private amateur tournaments, and friendly wagering among golfers who keep handicaps and use them as a basis for making wagers. Sandbagging, or lying about handicaps, is considered cheating in this arena. However, it is a far too common practice, especially in certain parts of the U.S, notably Palm Springs, Dallas and Vegas (although I found it far worse in Palm Springs). Sandbaggers also tend to play fast and loose with the established rules of golf.

3) The world of serious golf gambling. This is the subject of this thread. Too many here are confusing these different arenas, including, possibly, Ivey’s victims. The golf gambling world is a world unto itself. Some areas of difference:

-There are no established handicaps. In this world they have no significance. If someone were to pull out a forged handicap card, they’d get laughed off the tee. No one would believe them. Games are made on the basis of negotiation. This is fully a part of the game, perhaps the most important one. Negotiations are made on the basis of past experience and gathered intelligence. The more diligent you are in gathering intelligence, the better chance you have of getting the best of the negotiations. Lying is part of the negotiation process. Just as bluffing is in poker. When my group meets before playing, we all tells our lies, fake our pains, etc, laugh about it and then get on with the real talks. For the most part, our games are already set from previous experience and adjustments. This is a matter of necessity, because otherwise we might never tee off. However, there are usually some team bets or other odd wagers negotiated to make it more interesting. If you are out-negotiated, you accept it and go on.

For big money matches, the negotiation process is more involved, with more involved intelligence gathering. Asking opinions from other players who are respected for their match-handicapping ability is common. Often people not playing in the match will have action on one side or the other and will come out to sweat the match and maybe make more side bets. Watching respected handicappers closely as far as who they want to bet on which side can give clues as to the balance of the match.

-There are established rules and protocols. They are just different from the other golf arenas. Often specific things, such as how to play a ball if it’s hit into the desert, are negotiated. The fact that practices such as using grease (which does help high handicappers, BTW) carrying more than 14 clubs, etc, are verboten in the other golf arenas means nothing. However, the rules that are establishes must be followed. (Occasionally the stipulation will be that actual golf rules are followed). To do differently is cheating, and cheaters will be ostracized. It’s silly to say that shooting someone or even moving a ball when it’s against the rules is fair game. Golf gambling isn’t golf per se. The game is just a means of gambling, just as a deck of cards or a pair of dice. The rules evolve to facilitate the gambling, but the rules of the day must be followed.

This thread is a perfect example of people living in different worlds and not understanding others than their own. I think one of the things that is obvious from this thread is that people from outside the US are more traditional than Americans and have trouble fully comprehending the golf gambling arena as practiced by Americans. It’s possible that Ivey’s non-American victims didn’t fully understand which arena Phil was playing in. But, I think they did. Here’s a quote from Goodwin;

"tomorrow we head off with Phil Ivey and Gus Hanson for a high stakes golf match with my partner in crime Ram Vaswani. One round of golf is worth a year’s winnings on the Europen Tour so, as you can imagine, some serious verbal takes place, with all sides trying to negotiate the best handicap - the reason we win is that Ram is different class at winding up Mr Ivey."

To me it’s obvious that they simply lost the negotiation game. They made a bad game, and then compounded the mistake by agreeing to a no-adjustment stipulation, thereby not leaving themselves an out. To get mad is one thing. To not pay is another. I think they’ll pay. They are gamblers and there’s a code. Whether they’ll play with Phil again is another question.

There is a real question of being able to move seamlessly from world to world without the lines becoming blurred. Very similar to poker. Bluffing is basically lying. Does this mean that all poker players are liars away from the table? Of course not—some may be, some not. Is someone who lies in a golf negotiation in the gambling world a liar otherwise? No, he’s simply playing the game by the rules. However, if he carried this over to the handicap golf arena, he’d be a liar and a cheat in that world.

The motto of this story—know what game you are playing before you play it.

[disjunction]

Blair,

Nice posts.

If you haven't seen it, check out limon's sweet OOT thread on hustling golf.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&vc=1

[NCAces]

Blair ...

Great post. Your posts, along with that article about Hanson, makes sense to me now. The quote from the losers that there was going to be some serious negotiations is seriously damning for them.

Question ... since one of the losers walked off the course, what do the rules of serious golf gambling say about that?

NCAces

[fatshaft]

[ QUOTE ]
Blair ...

Great post. Your posts, along with that article about Hanson, makes sense to me now. The quote from the losers that there was going to be some serious negotiations is seriously damning for them.

Question ... since one of the losers walked off the course, what do the rules of serious golf gambling say about that?

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]He didnt, he makes it clear on Blonde that this part of the rumour was made up. The full round was completed.

Blair makes a few good points, and I admit ignorance of the "gambling game" he cites.

However I would put a lot of money on the fact that none of the cheats he mentions were ever in play in previous games, Ram is a 5, Marc scratch, I bet other than what the strokes were going to be, there were no other non-standard rules being played.

[NCAces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Blair ...

Great post. Your posts, along with that article about Hanson, makes sense to me now. The quote from the losers that there was going to be some serious negotiations is seriously damning for them.

Question ... since one of the losers walked off the course, what do the rules of serious golf gambling say about that?

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]He didnt, he makes it clear on Blonde that this part of the rumour was made up. The full round was completed.

Blair makes a few good points, and I admit ignorance of the "gambling game" he cites.

However I would put a lot of money on the fact that none of the cheats he mentions were ever in play in previous games, Ram is a 5, Marc scratch, I bet other than what the strokes were going to be, there were no other non-standard rules being played.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to what Blair is saying, their handicaps are not relevant to what they knew or didn't know. Someone with a middling handicap (say because they are short off the tee) who has a killer sand game, and can always get up and down in two, may be a successful golf hustler if he can negotiate the game so that he is rewarded for sandies and greenies to the extent that the hustle is +EV.

While the golf game that Blair describes is not known to you, or to me until Blair's posts and the article sited above, it makes total sense. Moreover, it is clear that Marc and Ram knew this ... their own words indicate that the negotiating is going to be key.

Blair describes 3 worlds of golf wagering. I think it is clear that what Ivy did would be in controvention of the spirit if not rules of the first two - what you and I probably play, but not in the third which is where you one is when they play for $50K a hole. I am convinced.

NCAces

[Flacks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Blair ...

Great post. Your posts, along with that article about Hanson, makes sense to me now. The quote from the losers that there was going to be some serious negotiations is seriously damning for them.

Question ... since one of the losers walked off the course, what do the rules of serious golf gambling say about that?

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]He didnt, he makes it clear on Blonde that this part of the rumour was made up. The full round was completed.

Blair makes a few good points, and I admit ignorance of the "gambling game" he cites.

However I would put a lot of money on the fact that none of the cheats he mentions were ever in play in previous games, Ram is a 5, Marc scratch, I bet other than what the strokes were going to be, there were no other non-standard rules being played.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't bet on it. More often than not in these games theres is something out of the ordinary. Handicaps are irrelevant its all about the bets. There are scratch hustlers and 30 handicap hustlers and they will all play together under unconventional rules in these games. Took me along time to learn this.

They screwed up.

[Devil Duq]

Now, for the second time, Mr. Rodman has appeared and validated every key point I've made in this thread. Of course, I get flamed and he gets "great post, Blair". That's the price for posting anonymously, I suppose.

In any event, thanks to Blair for his support and his on-point posts, and thanks to all those who engaged in such a spirited debate last night. I can't believe I stayed up until 0430 fulfilling my role as lone voice in the wilderness, but so I did. I can't help it; I so love a good street fight.

BTW Fatshaft, I'll gladly retract the "insufferable Brit" remark if you recant the "pompous oaf" attack that instigated it.