60k "Staking" dispute

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
All in all, the biggest issue here seems simply to be the fact that Boosted

[/ QUOTE ]

Is broke/busto. From my perpsective it's wierd. Unlike a guy like StephenNuts, who seems to be happy to see a former high flying guy down, I get no satisfaction from this.

This situation is a train wreck.

There's an old saying "If you have to ask how much, you can't afford it." To me, that sums up Boosted's position in poker right now. And anyone else's who needs money to play.

I'd tell Boosted I was done giving him money and he should give me 500 a month. I'd wash my hands of him. If he told me couldn't give me 500 a fckn month without me giving him more money, how the hell could he pay me back 60K? Run good? Think about it. It's a joke.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
All,

All in all, the biggest issue here seems simply to be the fact that Boosted portrayed this as a very safe staking arrangement instead of what it really was, an insanely high variance shot at very big limits with huge chance of busto. But, even though I feel like Boosted conducted himself in a shady manner through parts of this, at the end of the day the responsibilty for knowing what he's getting into falls on OP. OP was given an offer that was too good to be true (super low-risk investment with chance to win huge money at nosebleed stakes) and instead of questioning it, jumped right in to gamboooool away.

[/ QUOTE ]

El D,

In your subjective opinion as a poker player, on a scale of 1 to 10, (1 being filthy cheat 10 being completely ethically trustworthy) how do you rate boosted's ethics in handling the loan/100% no risk stake?

What % chance would you put on the previous 12K payout to OP being used as a psychological tool to engender trust a la '100% risk free to you'? (either consciously planned or simply aware he had established trust so consciously played off that)

And for everyone:

Who (besides Buffy the Vampire Slayer) wants to stake boosted now?

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]

Moreover, whether or not you consider the deal "fair" or profitable for Filth, the point persists that he did in fact agree to it. Our considerations about it equitability are therefore of very little consequence.

[/ QUOTE ]

isnt the main issue that filth did not understand what he was agreeing to b/c of the way boosted lied/manipulated him?

in that case equitibility is more imporatant than the actual language of the deal.

[SlowHabit]

[ QUOTE ]
All,

To sum things up:

"me: sounds like a win win situation for both of us
boosted: I think so"

[/ QUOTE ]
Now I know what this thread reminded me of, "Conspiracy of Fools!"

Andy Fastow created special purpose entities to help Enron hedge itself against risk. Andy's genius idea was to hedge Enron with Enron stocks obv. Why? Because if Enron's stock goes up, Andy gets the profits. If Enron's stock goes down, Enron has to pay Andy's entities moneys. 100% safe!

[El Diablo]

Dragon,

"Moreover, whether or not you consider the deal "fair" or profitable for Filth, the point persists that he did in fact agree to it."

Let me re-post what I wrote in the conclusion to my earlier post describing my understanding of the situation based on this thread:

All in all, the biggest issue here seems simply to be the fact that Boosted portrayed this as a very safe staking arrangement instead of what it really was, an insanely high variance shot at very big limits with huge chance of busto. But, even though I feel like Boosted conducted himself in a shady manner through parts of this, at the end of the day the responsibilty for knowing what he's getting into falls on OP. OP was given an offer that was too good to be true (super low-risk investment with chance to win huge money at nosebleed stakes) and instead of questioning it, jumped right in to gamboooool away.

So, I agree with you that all Boosted OWES is 60k of makeup under terms TBD.

[fees]

you got




BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS TEEEED

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
All,

To sum things up:

"me: sounds like a win win situation for both of us
boosted: I think so"

[/ QUOTE ]

How many people who would lend you 30K would you manipulate into a deal with huge upside potential for yourself with zero risk and limited upside and considerable risk for the lendee?

[jomatty]

i really dont think im understanding what happened with the 10k that he payed another staker with. that is money that never hit the bankroll right? if that is so he should at least owe that. what am i missing in this regard?

[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
Dragon,

"Moreover, whether or not you consider the deal "fair" or profitable for Filth, the point persists that he did in fact agree to it."

Let me re-post what I wrote in the conclusion to my earlier post describing my understanding of the situation based on this thread:

All in all, the biggest issue here seems simply to be the fact that Boosted portrayed this as a very safe staking arrangement instead of what it really was, an insanely high variance shot at very big limits with huge chance of busto. But, even though I feel like Boosted conducted himself in a shady manner through parts of this, at the end of the day the responsibilty for knowing what he's getting into falls on OP. OP was given an offer that was too good to be true (super low-risk investment with chance to win huge money at nosebleed stakes) and instead of questioning it, jumped right in to gamboooool away.

So, I agree with you that all Boosted OWES is 60k of makeup under terms TBD.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't agree with that at all. He was playing 25/50 for the most part, and perhaps some 50/100 (not totally sure). I don't think that constitutes "huge chance of busto" in the least, although I do agree it's somewhat high variance.

[apefish]

El D-
One thing your post points out is that Boosted has chosen to deny he ever did anything misleading or wrong regardless of his intent.
That obviously is a wrong position to take, as it takes two people to [censored] this thing up. Yet Boosted insists the [censored] is only on OPs end.
OP has seemingly gone so far as to realize at least some of his fault by saying yes to a redo of the mess whereby he only gets 30K back and none of it immediately.
What has Boosted done?
He has chosen to distance himself from anything other than "give me more money and we'll see what happens".

It doesn't take being a high stakes player or understanding what makeup means to realize there are other issues here. The bigger picture includes Boosted's name/reputation, something he still somehow says he values over everything else, yet insists on muddying further with every reply.

What is true about most misunderstandings is that the truth is somewhere between both stories or there wasn't a meeting of the minds. I don't think this instance is any different. I just happen to think only OP has said yes to any compromise to get past this.