Ram Vaswani speaks about that 'Golf Game'.

[okterrific]

To me the more ive heard about this game the more scummy Ivey looks. But i know nothing about golf gambling.

and it would seem this would not be good for business for either sides.

[marcj85]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe this is a cultural issue.

Many Americans seem to think that Ivey is a hero for carrying out this hustle, and think that Ram is a scumbag for not paying.Most British posters seem to think the opposite.
I am going to go out on a limb here.

I think the American culture is far more individualistic and money seems to be the bottom line.

In the uk we do see things a little differently.Our society has institutions like the welfare state and the National health service.We do see value sacrificing some individual benefits for the greater good.
I know this point is a little off topic,and I am not saying Ram is a saint,but I do think that Ram and Ivey come from different cultures.
In the UK we have a profound sense of fair play.So beating someone at a poker table is fine, because of the nature of the rules and the equality of the participants ,regardless of skill levels.
To a British person, scamming or "hustling" someone out of money is not cool.Its not cricket.Its a no class move.
To some americans it seems to be a badge of honor.

If I was in Rams spot I would not pay.I believe Ram was honest about his handicap.No way I am giving Ivey 1 mill just because he lied to me.Ivey lying to me would void the game.Ram didnt make this up.FFS Iveys best friend basically told him that he had lied and cheated!!

If I play Ivey, beat him for a mill, then I find out that he lied about his handicap and still lost,no way i am giving the money back.Seriously why should I?I was playing fair, he tried to [censored] me,at that point all bets are off, and I will [censored] him back.He forfeits his right to any mercy by trying to [censored] me.
Its interesting that Ivey ( doyle,greenstien and daniel) feels that he might shame Ram into paying by citing the "code of the gambler" arguement.And I can see why many americans would agree with this.I can see why Americans see this as Welching.
But in the uk this is not even a issue.We might not be very bright , but we are not stupid.What kind of a muppet would Ram be if he paid 1 mill to a guy who lied to him and tried to scam him?
The only way that I would pay would be if I was in debt to a Gangster who hustled me,because he would break my legs and/ or kill me.I would have to pay because he would be a cheating hustler with muscle.According to me Ivey is a cheating hustler with no muscle.So he tries to use public opinion as muscle,so Negreanu, Doyle and others chip in.
But that cant work coz Rams value system is different.Sam Torrence has chipped in and has sided with Ram.But he is British.
I am losing my train here a bit , but one last thing.Maybe Ram doesnt have the money to pay, maybe he was on mad tilt.I really dont think that is the point.Even if he wasnt on tilt and he does have the money, he still shouldnt pay.Would you? and if you would, why?.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said.. a really good post

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
aaargh once again:

[ QUOTE ]
yea ram thought they were great friends and could never think he could do this, oh wait he was hustlin ivey since he started playin golf, and it was for way more than he says. please anyone who doesnt golf gamble SHUT UP AND JUST READ THE POSTS by blair rodman and limon and others. I cant believe how many people still continue to open thier mouths and give thier 2 cents when theyre all completely wrong and just have no clue. you dont tell your doctor how to give open heart surgery do you? no because you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. and yet people keep coming up with their own golf gambling rules and guidelines and code of ethics just shut up

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm just going to refer you guys to this post here as well, since you seem to refuse to listen to its advice. You are spouting off about stuff from a point-of-view that is wholly different from people who actually do this for a living. That doesn't mean your conclusions are illogical, just that they are meaningless. IOW, it is an entirely justifiable argument that bluffing and checkraising are wrong. They are clearly forms of lying. However, they are accepted forms within the context. Reasonable people can say it is wrong, and reasonable people can say it is right. Neither is really wrong, but the people who play poker, who ALL say it is right, are the only ones whose opinions matter. I could care less that my grandma finds checkraising to be sneaky and bad, just like I could care less that you guys find lying about your handicap to be sneaky and bad.

[odellthurman]

This thread needs less quoting of extremely long posts.

[marcj85]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
aaargh once again:

[ QUOTE ]
yea ram thought they were great friends and could never think he could do this, oh wait he was hustlin ivey since he started playin golf, and it was for way more than he says. please anyone who doesnt golf gamble SHUT UP AND JUST READ THE POSTS by blair rodman and limon and others. I cant believe how many people still continue to open thier mouths and give thier 2 cents when theyre all completely wrong and just have no clue. you dont tell your doctor how to give open heart surgery do you? no because you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. and yet people keep coming up with their own golf gambling rules and guidelines and code of ethics just shut up

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm just going to refer you guys to this post here as well, since you seem to refuse to listen to its advice. You are spouting off about stuff from a point-of-view that is wholly different from people who actually do this for a living. That doesn't mean your conclusions are illogical, just that they are meaningless. IOW, it is an entirely justifiable argument that bluffing and checkraising are wrong. They are clearly forms of lying. However, they are accepted forms within the context. Reasonable people can say it is wrong, and reasonable people can say it is right. Neither is really wrong, but the people who play poker, who ALL say it is right, are the only ones whose opinions matter. I could care less that my grandma finds checkraising to be sneaky and bad, just like I could care less that you guys find lying about your handicap to be sneaky and bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you keep referring to check-raising and bluffing as lying... all you are doing are hiding the truth strength of your hand... There is an obvious difference

[TheTid]

I read that post and he talked extensively about how people were lying about their handicaps and it was cheating in golf tournaments. He then goes on to talk about the negotiation in golf gambling. In his world i guess everyone just starts out picking a number and they golf and gamble blind. But the "negotiation" is all based off of handicaps, i.e., playing ability. I golf alot and when we gamble the first thing is everyone states their handicaps. The negotiation may move them 1 stroke or 2 up or down, but if someone said they were an 18 and they were really a 4, no one would pay him and everyone would consider the bet void. And we would also think he is a piece of [censored] and never golf with them again.

[ZeTurd]

limon, vhawk, etc.

So, you're professional golf hustlers. You make a living lying about your abilities to gullible fools with too deep pockets and too much gamble in them. That's fine by me. Idiot tax I says.

But.. Stop projecting your own experiences onto the situation that is being discussed here. Consider the following facts:

1) Ram considered Ivey a friend before the match.
2) Ram isn't a professional golf hustler in the sense you are. Sure, he plays golf for money, but don't assume he lives by your so-called ethical code.
3) For most people, apparently outside your circle, sandbagging is not only considered unethical, but also as downright cheating.

Consider those facts, and consider that Ram isn't privy to your insider-golf-hustler-douchebag ethical code, is it so far fetched to say that Ram has a legitimate grievance here?

[ QUOTE ]
limon, vhawk, etc.

So, you're professional golf hustlers. You make a living lying about your abilities to gullible fools with too deep pockets and too much gamble in them. That's fine by me. Idiot tax I says.

But.. Stop projecting your own experiences onto the situation that is being discussed here. Consider the following facts:

1) Ram considered Ivey a friend before the match.
2) Ram isn't a professional golf hustler in the sense you are. Sure, he plays golf for money, but don't assume he lives by your so-called ethical code.
3) For most people, apparently outside your circle, sandbagging is not only considered unethical, but also as downright cheating.

Consider those facts, and consider that Ram isn't privy to your insider-golf-hustler-douchebag ethical code, is it so far fetched to say that Ram has a legitimate grievance here?

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[ZeTurd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
limon, vhawk, etc.

So, you're professional golf hustlers. You make a living lying about your abilities to gullible fools with too deep pockets and too much gamble in them. That's fine by me. Idiot tax I says.

But.. Stop projecting your own experiences onto the situation that is being discussed here. Consider the following facts:

1) Ram considered Ivey a friend before the match.
2) Ram isn't a professional golf hustler in the sense you are. Sure, he plays golf for money, but don't assume he lives by your so-called ethical code.
3) For most people, apparently outside your circle, sandbagging is not only considered unethical, but also as downright cheating.

Consider those facts, and consider that Ram isn't privy to your insider-golf-hustler-douchebag ethical code, is it so far fetched to say that Ram has a legitimate grievance here?

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]
Please elaborate mr. Bear

[pnazari]

can someone explain the difference between lying about your handicap to gain an edge and lying about paying after the match (should u lose) to essentially be on a freeroll? arnt they both forms of hustling and therefore acceptable?

I dont see how u can find one acceptable and not the other