Phil Gordon Says Bluff Magazine Best in Industry. WTF??!!

[gaboonviper]

Bluff Mag Editor:

If you are indeed as serious about constantly improving your mag as you say you are, how exactly does one submit an article for possible publication?? I am working on what will be one of the best poker articles ever written.

This article completely changes the perception of how one looks at poker from that of a game to that of a MARTIAL ART. If you really want to see great poker content in Bluff this article will have no equal. Since you had the balls enough to respond to my post I may give Bluff first dibs before sending the article to other sources for publication.

So tell us all exactly how articles are submitted to Bluff for possible publication.

[BluffMagEditor]

gab, you can send your submission to the publisher@bluffmedia.com. If it is as good of an article as you say, then we should have no problem running it in the July issue!

However Jman, might disagree about the claim of being the best! Looking forward to reading your piece!

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
This article completely changes the perception of how one looks at poker from that of a game to that of a MARTIAL ART.

[/ QUOTE ]

too late

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
However Jman, might disagree about the claim of being the best!

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
BluffMagEditor

[/ QUOTE ]

[Eagles]

[ QUOTE ]
I just picked up this issue and while I enjoyed the coverage of the Aussie Millions, thought you really sucked for your obviously biased stabs at Jimmy. Yes I'm understandably prejudiced, but clearly this remark: "To be kind, Jimmy definitely has a face for online poker" was juvenile, unprofessional, and definitely UN-kind. I'm glad you followed up the attempts at cuteness with Gus's critique; at least he succeeded in providing a mature, professional, balanced report.

[/ QUOTE ]
Gobbomom,
I understand why this upset you and I'm sure that if something like that was written about me my mother would be furious. I haven't read the article but from reading your post I don't think there is anything biased, unprofessional, or juvenile in there. The writer was simply providing an honest account of the event. While the comment was certainly unkind you can't expect a professional journalist to just write a fluff piece with no criticism of Gobbo.

[Eagles]

[ QUOTE ]

This article completely changes the perception of how one looks at poker from that of a game to that of a MARTIAL ART. If you really want to see great poker content in Bluff this article will have no equal.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL

[sonofstev]

This isn't the first time Bluff has joined. As I recall, they've been banned numerous times for spamming and/or picking fights with mods.

BTW, is it true that you're basically locking out all other online media outlets (i.e. bloggers) from covering the WSOP this year, similar to what CardPlayer did last year?

[shane88888]

Does Antonio Esfandiari have any friends? I saw one of his articles on a NON-POKER website advertised as a must-read for douchiness.

Do any of his buddies read his articles first and then go, "Hey Antonio, ya know this article makes you look douchier than anyone or anything ever posted in 2+2 BBV? Do ya wanna tone it down some?"

Because, they might wanna try it sometime.

[gobbomom]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just picked up this issue and while I enjoyed the coverage of the Aussie Millions, thought you really sucked for your obviously biased stabs at Jimmy. Yes I'm understandably prejudiced, but clearly this remark: "To be kind, Jimmy definitely has a face for online poker" was juvenile, unprofessional, and definitely UN-kind. I'm glad you followed up the attempts at cuteness with Gus's critique; at least he succeeded in providing a mature, professional, balanced report.

[/ QUOTE ]
Gobbomom,
I understand why this upset you and I'm sure that if something like that was written about me my mother would be furious. I haven't read the article but from reading your post I don't think there is anything biased, unprofessional, or juvenile in there. The writer was simply providing an honest account of the event. While the comment was certainly unkind you can't expect a professional journalist to just write a fluff piece with no criticism of Gobbo.

[/ QUOTE ]
I appreciate your response Eagles, but as you said, you hadn't read the article. Compounding the issue is the fact that for 3 months I've been reading similar "critiques" of Jimmy all over the place and they NEVER address his play. Additionally, one NEVER sees such adjectives applied to other players that I personally find quite "ugly". You think Raymer is an attractive man? It's quite ridiculous for Bluff to consider themselves a serious poker magazine when they exhibit such an obvious bias that has nothing to do with poker mechanics. I'm just fed up with hearing all the remarks and am extremely disappointed that Bluff took such an unprofessional route and added fuel to them. As I stated, Gus redeemed their coverage by addressing the tournament in a professional manner and it's obvious the difference in quality of the reports.

edit: of COURSE I'm furious, but that's partly because if Bluff wants to be taken seriously as a poker player's magazine, then they should examine their journalistic integrity and leave any obvious gossipy bias to the internet. After all, the magazine costs 5 bucks, I would've bought 10 more copies of this issue had they exhibited more professionalism.

2nd edit: Last month's issue featured a glowing redeeming article on ZEEJustin. I guess he fit Bluff's scale of acceptable attractiveness?

Bluff magazine dude: if you want to be considered relevent, then adjust your articles to less National-Enquirish type of writing skills please.

[WutRUTryin2Hit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just picked up this issue and while I enjoyed the coverage of the Aussie Millions, thought you really sucked for your obviously biased stabs at Jimmy. Yes I'm understandably prejudiced, but clearly this remark: "To be kind, Jimmy definitely has a face for online poker" was juvenile, unprofessional, and definitely UN-kind. I'm glad you followed up the attempts at cuteness with Gus's critique; at least he succeeded in providing a mature, professional, balanced report.

[/ QUOTE ]
Gobbomom,
I understand why this upset you and I'm sure that if something like that was written about me my mother would be furious. I haven't read the article but from reading your post I don't think there is anything biased, unprofessional, or juvenile in there. The writer was simply providing an honest account of the event. While the comment was certainly unkind you can't expect a professional journalist to just write a fluff piece with no criticism of Gobbo.

[/ QUOTE ]
I appreciate your response Eagles, but as you said, you hadn't read the article. Compounding the issue is the fact that for 3 months I've been reading similar "critiques" of Jimmy all over the place and they NEVER address his play. Additionally, one NEVER sees such adjectives applied to other players that I personally find quite "ugly". You think Raymer is an attractive man? It's quite ridiculous for Bluff to consider themselves a serious poker magazine when they exhibit such an obvious bias that has nothing to do with poker mechanics. I'm just fed up with hearing all the remarks and am extremely disappointed that Bluff took such an unprofessional route and added fuel to them. As I stated, Gus redeemed their coverage by addressing the tournament in a professional manner and it's obvious the difference in quality of the reports.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I gotta say, without knowing what he looks like, I can't see how there is any way that should show up in an article, that's ridiculous and unprofessional. I would challenge anyone to find another magazine that wrote something like that about anyone in a piece reporting on a sports event or whatever. That's just way out of line and ridiculous.

Of course, after reading the Bluff editor's posts in this thread, I wouldn't expect much in the way of professionalism, has anyone seriously seen all the spelling and punctuation errors this guy has been spewing? It's kind of shocking. Did this guy take english lessons from Mike Matusow or something? I mean seriously, noone who spells like that should ever be an editor, someone who really has any right to edit anything COULD NOT make mistakes like that, period, it'd be like a guy being hired as a Cordon Blue chef who occasionally takes a crap in the soup. It just is not part of the makeup of anyone who should really be an editor to write THAT badly, it should really be practically physically impossible for them.

No offence.