Daniel parodies the Ivey vs. Vaswani/et. all golf "hustle"

[tiltseeker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
WTF is with the gay innuendo. Does Daniel have to include some of this in every blog? Not too mention his analogy is terrible, confusing and unnecessary.

Ram's reputation is far from slimey, while it's not so clear on the other side. There is definitely more to the story, and why is Ivey so against and arbitrator - cause his hustle was probably outrageous.

[/ QUOTE ]


DN goes to such great lengths to address the gay rumors that there is simply no other explanation than this: He is gay. If he wasn't he wouldn't care about the rumors in the slightest. Instead, he has to realy go overboard in his explanations that he is NOT gay. It's quite sad.

[/ QUOTE ]


You sound kind of cute. Are you tall? Are you handsome? Are you clean!!!

(from Swingers :-)

[/ QUOTE ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ambiguously_Gay_Duo

Still on c DN?

I liked Blair Rodman's posts on the subject in the original thread:

[ QUOTE ]
I’ve been golf gambling for over 20 years. In fact, it’s my favorite form of gambling. I learned early on that there’s a big difference between golfing gamblers and regular golfers.
Golf as played by normal people is a genteel sport set apart from most by its’ traditions of honesty and good sportsmanship. Golf to gamblers is simply another medium in which to try to get an advantage over your opponents. Standard protocols of normal golf have nothing to do with golf gambling. However, there are some protocols that apply to golf gambling.
The first thing I learned about golf gambling is that every experienced golf gambler lies about his abilities. This is part of the game! If you ask a group of golf gamblers how they are playing, virtually every one is going to say he hasn’t been playing, various body parts hurt, his game is off, etc. This is SOP! If you don’t understand this, or refuse to play that game, you are setting yourself up for a big fall. It’s not lying in this context, just as bluffing in poker isn’t lying in the traditional sense. It is within the context of the game. Once all the [censored]is out of the way, you can get down to real negotiations. Often in big money matches the negotiations fall flat and there’s no game. No big deal. I’ve been on the first tee many times when the game falls apart.
If this story is true, Phil simply used an age-old tactic in golf gambling. If you’re playing better than anyone expects and are going to play for serious money, are you going to tell your opponents the truth? Not if you want to survive in the golf-gambling world. How did Phil know his opponents weren’t trying to do the same to him, not that it matters for the scope of this discussion.
The bottom line is that Phil’s opponents are professional gamblers who got involved in a gambling game they seem to know little about. To get involved with someone in a golf match for serious money just on the basis of his word is dumb, and dumb people don’t survive in this milieu.

To quote Marc Goodwin, assuming that post was really from him:

“At the start of the game we said to Phil that as we haven't played for 3 months and he must have improved we need to adjust the handicaps. We could not agree and we were doomed to no game until Ram said "does Eric Lingdren still give you 10 shots" to which Phil replied yes!!On that piece of information we had a game. As we always ***** about handicaps throughout the match Phil suggested that we agree to play 18 holes with no adjustment and then adjust for the next series of games. We agreed

Think about it. They knew Phil was improving rapidly. They were on the verge of not having a match because Phil wouldn’t agree to an adjustment. But, instead of walking away they wanted to play so badly that they believed Phil when he said EDog still gives him shots. Perhaps this is because, as Marc states, they had been getting the best of him in the past and wanted more. Then they agreed to a match for very big money and, to make it worse, agreed to Phil’s stipulation that there’d be no mid-round adjustment. Sorry guys, you lost the negotiation game, which is every bit as important in golf gambling as the playing of the game itself. Pay up, lesson learned.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Some more thoughts on golf gambling:

It seems to me that many posters in this thread are confusing golf with golf gambling. I love golf and would play without gambling—if no one would bet with me. However, not many gamblers feel that way. (Russ Hamilton, one of the best golf gamblers ever, told me a few years ago that a guy invited him to Augusta. Most golfers would kill for the chance. I asked when he (we) were going. He said, “I’m not going there with him. He won’t play for anything.) Very few gamblers keep actual handicaps. I keep a legitimate handicap and like to play amateur tournaments. However, that’s where the real cheaters are! There isn’t an understanding in amateur tournaments that sandbagging is part of the game. To keep an illegitimate handicap is cheating, period. This is because there’s no negotiation involved. The players are taken at their word. I lived in Palm Springs a few years ago and couldn’t believe the things I saw. Handicaps are designed so that a player should only play to his handicap about 20% of the time. To shoot 10 strokes below your handicap should happen less than 1 in 50,000 times. Yet, in almost every tournament I played there someone with a 20 handicap would shoot in the ‘70s in the last round. A lot of guys make a living cheating these tournaments. It got so bad that I quit playing them, unless I really wanted to play and then I pretty much accepted that I couldn’t win.
The gamblers system is much more efficient. When I’d meet someone new at a course in Palm Springs, the standard conversation went like this:

Stranger: “What’s your handicap?”
Me: “About a 5.”
Stranger: “Ok I’m a 15, so I’ll take 5 shots a side. Let's go.”
Me; “No problem, unless you want to play for more than $5. Then we need to talk.”

I would never play a stranger for any kind of serious money unless I had some reliable information about their game. I would also never get in a big match with someone who I knew might have improved rapidly unless I knew his story. Among gamblers this information is fairly easy to gather. I’ve never played golf with Ivey, but I know though the grapevine that he’s worked very hard on his game and has improved a lot. I’ve also heard that he was a live one when he first started playing the game, but now he’s almost impossible to match up with. If I had any doubts about someone’s current game, if I played him at all it would be for small stakes until I got a good feel for what I was up against.
I have a fairly large group of players I gamble with. We all know each other’s games pretty well and generally have to resort to a system of adjusting after each match if someone wins or loses a certain amount of bets. For the most part the money goes back and forth and we play those matches because we like the game and the action. (The same thing happens in the big game with Doyle, Chip, Bobby Baldwin, occasionally Michael Jordan and a few others. Their back and forths are just bigger). Big money heads up matches are fairly rare among players who know each other’s games. However, this doesn’t mean there are never any big money decisions. A big part of the skill of golf gambling is handicapping different types of bets. If a game can be devised where both sides think they have an edge, you have the conditions for a big bet. If you sit around B&M poker tables, a lot of the conversation is about golf and setting up matches for the next day. Scrambles are popular these days. For instance, a negotiation might go like this:

“Me and Jeff will scramble Richard, Jack, Greg and Greg. And Greg gets the blue tees.” (Greg and Greg are the same person, but he hits two shots)
“OK but Greg only gets one putt.”
“No, he needs two putts.”
“Then he has to play the black tees.”
“No he gets blue tees and two putts on 9 holes.”
“Ok, I don’t like it but we’ll try it. How much…..”

Often these kinds of matches will be negotiated for an emergency 9 or 18 after the early round of heads up matches.

When poker players get the urge to enter the golf gambling world the pattern is generally the same. They are often very bad players who don’t understand the golf-gambling game and get taken advantage of by experienced gamblers. Eventually they figure out that something isn’t right and smarten up to the fact that they are being hustled. Then they either quit playing, or accept the realities and learn how to negotiate. If they stay in the game, eventually they figure out that they have an opportunity to recoup their losses and then some if they get better without their opponents’ knowledge and get games in which they have a big edge. Sound familiar? Getting this edge is a limited opportunity. The improvement curve in golf is sharp at the beginning but levels out as a player gets better. While it’s fairly easy to go from a 40 handicap to a 20. it’s much harder to go from a 10 to a 5. Even with a system of adjustment the bad player figures to win a lot of money as he improves. The smart gambler won’t fall for this, insisting or major adjustments as his opponent gets better.

I’m not saying that the things I’ve described are good or bad( other than the handicap sandbagging), but they are the realities. I’m also not saying there’s no cheating in golf gambling. The rules of play are established, and breaking them is cheating. Since most gambling golfers don’t know the rules, a bastardized version is often used. The most extreme variation is called “gambler rules”. Under gamblers rules, you can’t touch your ball anywhere before you’re on the green without incurring a penalty. On a sprinkler head—hit it. Cart path—hit it. On top of a golf cart—you guessed it. Many players use grease (Vaseline or something like it) on their club face to straighten out shots. Occasionally this is specifically outlawed. Few players adhere to the 14-club rule. I knew one guy who carried about twelve woods and four putters

There are people who will move balls, drop balls from their pocket, step on your ball, and lots of other things. Never take a partner you don’t trust, as you may get dumped. Just like in any gambling endeavor, you need to have your eyes wide open and your senses acute. The good thing about the gamblers’ system is that cheating players are usually exposed and shunned in games. That is, unless they are so bad that they are still live even with cheating.

So what happens when the game is a fair matchup? That’s when the really talented golf gamblers step up. In my mind there are two kinds of successful golf gamblers (other than cheaters). Some will never play a game where they don’t have an edge off the first tee. Their whole game is in the negotiation and it’s fairly easy to play when there’s little pressure. Games often dry up for these players. The serious ones take to the road looking for new suckers. Read abut Titanic Thompson if you want to see a real hustler in action. The other type of successful player is the one who can play under pressure. Sure, he’ll take a good game if it comes up, but he relies more on his ability to outperform his opponent when it counts. Many players can’t make the shot when it counts. A player who can step up when it counts doesn’t need a lopsided game. In fact, against certain players he can take a bit the worst of the matchup and still be successful.

Sorry this got long, but I love this game!

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
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.


[/ QUOTE ]

[OrigamiSensei]

[ QUOTE ]
This is the point that really decides the "case" as it were. I've heard from many golfers that lying about your handicap is part of "the hustle", but I've heard from many other golfers that say just the opposite: that lying about your handicap is outside the rules of golf and is therefore cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]
I would say lying about your handicap is cheating. Certainly if you're asked "does so and so still give you ten strokes" and answering yes if you no longer get any it's a big lie.

The hustle is manipulating your handicap and being able to play better than that. My uncle's golf course hustling was a source of great entertainment for me as teenager. He used to shoot in the low 80s for his USGA "handicap" round; all legitimate with some tanked holes and putts (if you're losing the hole in the match anyway, time to pad the score a little). Then he would go shoot 1-over for the "money nine".

[bettyqs]

Funny how the story has changed.....I used to think Ivey hustled them but now, after hearing over 70 holes in 2 days..I changed my mind. Thanks Daniel! I liked Phil but this situation had made me question his intergity. Now I know better.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
WTF is with the gay innuendo. Does Daniel have to include some of this in every blog? Not too mention his analogy is terrible, confusing and unnecessary.

Ram's reputation is far from slimey, while it's not so clear on the other side. There is definitely more to the story, and why is Ivey so against and arbitrator - cause his hustle was probably outrageous.

[/ QUOTE ]


DN goes to such great lengths to address the gay rumors that there is simply no other explanation than this: He is gay. If he wasn't he wouldn't care about the rumors in the slightest. Instead, he has to realy go overboard in his explanations that he is NOT gay. It's quite sad.

[/ QUOTE ]


You sound kind of cute. Are you tall? Are you handsome? Are you clean!!!

(from Swingers :-)

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon. Makes self-depricating jokes, quotes Swingers, isn't afriad to share an opinion to a group of people largely undeserving of the insider info. How is there all this hate.

Also, it should be obvious by a post with a compliment in it that I must have an attraction to DN, and obviously his ability to introduce me to Antonius (wait...).

Cody

[bettyqs]

what is with men and the fear of "gay"???
It's so gay....

[TStoneMBD]

all these hustlers live with the consequences of their hustle. ivey has to live with the reputation of being a liar/cheater and the victims have to live with the consequence of being known as dirtbags who try to hustle a hustler but dont pay up when they are hustled themselves.

these golfers who lose on the green and then complain are either:

a) trying to make bread hustling and then cry when they fail and lose more than they can handle

or

b) as naive as negreanu in thinking that people gamble on golf just because they like the action, not because theyre trying to make bread.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
all these hustlers live with the consequences of their hustle. ivey has to live with the reputation of being a liar/cheater and the victims have to live with the consequence of being known as dirtbags who try to hustle a hustler but dont pay up when they are hustled themselves.

these golfers who lose on the green and then complain are either:

a) trying to make bread hustling and then cry when they fail and lose more than they can handle

or

b) as naive as negreanu in thinking that people gamble on golf just because they like the action, not because theyre trying to make bread.

[/ QUOTE ]

But to a majority of people, both those views of the two groups can't be true. One of them has to be right, or at least less at fault.

If Ivey cheated, he's branded a cheater. If Ivey's ligit then those two are cheaters (an oversimplification, but it's basically the case).

They can both be at fault, but almost certainly someone is a cheater here.

Cody

[certifiable]

"We have had the better of Phil in golf games over the last year but our biggest victory was 3 up. We had been spanked but arranged a new revised game later that week. We went out together that night (even though we have severed ties and have all this supposed ill feeling).

Later on we met Eric who informed us that he gives Phil NO SHOTS. We therefore felt aggrieved and Ram asked Phil for an apology. As to whether we pay or not will be discussed in Vegas in April when we next meet." - Marc Goodwin

[Ellsworth T]

I have followed this debacle because it is very interesting but some of your conclusions are hilarious. Many of you are making these conclusions based off of not only interested parties but on top of that SECOND-HAND interested parties.

Sure of all the accused persons in the court of law or wherever, there has undeniably been people who have said "I didnt do it" and were telling the truth. But you don't convict or acquit someone based on THEIR word when their direct interets are involved. Both sides have a reciprocal amount of money involved. One side stands to lose that staggering amount equal to the amount one side has to gain, but the net loss is still exactly the same if the decision (however it is obtained) results in a figurative 'loss'.

I suggest you delay your conclusions until there is more evidence. I understand that sometimes you are forced to make a tough decision based on shoddy or insufficient evidence and occassionally we will convict an innocent man, but it is more righteous to wait for proper evaluation of the evidence rather than pre-determining someone's guilt or innocence simply from your favored parties perspective or character.