Fossilman's Account Hacked?

[john voight]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
greg, if you are going to court, I wouldn't be posting anything on here. I'm guessing the WPT lawyers are all over this thread. Don't feed them.

gl, I hope you win.

and to all the ppl who are agaisnt greg; US gives him power to sue if he feels it is right. the court will decide wether its valid or not. no need to judge him for standing up for his beliefs.

peeece

[/ QUOTE ]


UUUUUUUUUHH...I think Greg knows what he can and can't say publicly. He is a lawyer and not a retard.

[/ QUOTE ]

ooooohhh. i confused him with moneymaker hahaha jk. I didnt know greg was a lawyer. sorry

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

My point is the kindling for a poker boom was already in place. The WPT didn't come up with any innovative ideas to set this off, or any huge investments. They just cheaply filmed a final table, cut it up, and threw it on TV.


[/ QUOTE ]

I see no reason to denegrate Stephen Lipscomb's accomplishments by saying he just "cheaply filmed a final table, cut it up, and threw it on TV".

Simply putting poker on U.S. TV, making it appear glamourous and exciting, and promoting the players as stars was itself innovative.

The kindling wasn't there. The kindling is the televised product itself. Poker would never have exploded in popularity without it being promoted on TV the way Lipscomb did.

[/ QUOTE ]


completely agree dynasty.
I think a lot of people take it for granted now.

But back when he did this it was done in a pretty creative way including the lights, set, editing, etc.

Also the graphics for the hole-cards (and board cards) and percentages and little facts.

Lipscomb deserves a LOT of credit for the poker boom and certainly paved the way for ESPN to get into the act more significantly as well.

Before the WPT I had never heard of Hellmuth, Brunson, anybody (maybe Chan from Rounders I guess).
Now these guys are house-hold names even to non-poker players.

I was on a sportscasters' message-board at the time the WPT started (mostly guys with minor-league teams and small colleges). Non-poker players mostly of course.
One guy posted something like, "Guys, you won't believe this. I was at a friend's house and we were flipping around the dial and they had POKER on TV. It was complete with announcers and everything. Geez, who watches this stuff. Is the play-by-play announcer instead called a card-by-card announcer? I couldn't stop laughing."

This was 2003 or so.
It goes to show you how far we've come in a relatively short time as there is certainly NOBODY out there who would be shocked to see poker on TV today.

[if1995]

long ago when baseball was in its infant, the players were just glad someone came along, put together a league and gave them a job. as the game becomes so big, the players begin to want this and that from the owners who originally gave them the job at the first place.

this is an analogy i just thought about as i read along all the posts. it's a natural progression of capitalism, both sides wants the best for themselves. As Gekko says, greed is good.

However, i do have an issue with that "just seven" of the players are involved in the lawsuit. i think if they have the support of the majority of the players, then it would have appeared more like that they are doing this for everyone. but who are they to think that they represent everyone or if their action will help the players in the future. I think that's for the majority to decide and not just the "seven".

btw, raymer's comment on DN is out of line....and a laywer doesn't always know what he is talking about (based on prior exp.)

just my 2 cents.

[MicroBob]

I'm not positive and I'm too lazy to look it up on his blog right now, but I thought I read that Greenstein was also against this lawsuit.

If this is true, then it appears Daniel is not the only big-name semi-intelligent pro who has such an opinion about it.

Yes, Barry didn't go to law-school either, but I do respect him as a pretty intelligent guy. And it does show that Daniel is not totally out in left-field with a completely ridiculous opinion.

Now, the fact that Daniel may have harped on this excessively is one thing.
But just holding the opinion that he has about it is not uncommon I suspect.

[bruceypants]

You are correct, Micro. Barry has indeed criticized the lawsuit:

[ QUOTE ]
Poker pro Barry Greenstein, who is not part of the suit, said the action amounted to a dog biting the hand that fed it, although he sympathized with both sides.

"All of us as poker players were degenerates until the World Poker Tour started the whole ball rolling," the 51-year-old said, adding he had parlayed fame on the tour into a sponsorship deal with a major online poker site and is selling a poker advice book.

"I've been involved in DVDs and video games and all these types of things, even though I've got no money out of it," he said. "I know that I get a lot of perks from being a celebrity."



[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercuryne...ia/15074349.htm

This lawsuit is all about greed on the part of the 7 plaintiffs and is not supported by all poker players. For Greg to claim that is disingenous at best.

[Eleusis]

Sorry if this post is a little all over the place, there's a few things I want to address briefly.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look at the case for what it is, not what it might become if they win.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the point - I don't think Negreanu indicated whether he believes they can win or cannot win...

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, read the thread he started on 7/28. He does believe the plainiffs have "no shot".


Regarding who is responsible for the Poker Boom, (from about.com)

[ QUOTE ]
Harry Orenstein patented the idea of the "hole cam," a camera that would show poker player's hole cards to TV viewers, in 1997.

The hole cam was first used by the Travel Channel in 2003 for the World Poker Tour, and it sheparded in all the TV poker shows that followed.

[/ QUOTE ]
If this is correct, and the WPT was the first to use hole cams on TV, then that's a big argument that they had big hand in it.


The nasty release is one thing, but I think the anti-trust aspects of the case are frivolous, and likely another "bargaining chip" akin to "treble damages".


I Like both Negreanu and Raymer, I wish they'd be more civil.

[Eleusis]

[ QUOTE ]
long ago when baseball was in its infant, the players were just glad someone came along, put together a league and gave them a job. as the game becomes so big, the players begin to want this and that from the owners who originally gave them the job at the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]
I keep seeing this analogy to pro sports, but IMHO it's really off base.

The players here pay their own money to get in. They aren't employees of the WPT, it's more the other way around.

[WoolyHat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Harry Orenstein patented the idea of the "hole cam," a camera that would show poker player's hole cards to TV viewers, in 1997.

The hole cam was first used by the Travel Channel in 2003 for the World Poker Tour, and it sheparded in all the TV poker shows that followed.

[/ QUOTE ]
If this is correct, and the WPT was the first to use hole cams on TV, then that's a big argument that they had big hand in it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Late Night Poker aired in the UK in 1999 and used hole cams...

[bruceypants]

Good, unbiased analysis of the lawsuit can be found here:

http://ftrain.blogspot.com/2006/07/q...is-of-wpt.html

The author and the commenters conclude that the chance of success for the 7 plaintiffs is minimal.

[liveatthebikefan]

Raymer and Negraneau should settle their dispute with a heads-up match to be televised. Don King should be the promoter.