|
|
#152
01-30-2007, 06:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Phil Ivey Gossip
[ QUOTE ]
okay, I'll take your word for it, Blair. You're right that lying about your abilities is part of golf gambling, so I guess I jumped the gun on Phil. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ]nonsense 
|
|
#153
01-30-2007, 08:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Ivey Gossip
[ QUOTE ]
Goodwin: Does Eric still give you 10 shots? Ivey: yes [/ QUOTE ] If this "bet" would have been a written legal agreement, I think it would probably go something like this (I'm not a lawyer, neither golfer): "On the basis that Eric Lindgren gives Phil Ivey 10 shots HC on date YYYY-MM-DD, we will have a bet of this size: .... " If you took that agreement into court there would probably be EDog testifying and a decision could be made?
|
|
#154
01-30-2007, 08:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Ivey Gossip
I knew I’d get raised
 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!
|
|
#156
01-30-2007, 10:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Ivey Gossip
Blair,
Did you see the previous thread regarding Ivey's bet with Corey Pavin? Ivey got to scramble with himself (2 shots only) from the reds and Pavin played straight up from the tips. Played at TPC Summerlin. 10k/hole or 10k overall not sure which. This bet was discussed on Poker After Dark between Huck, Sheiky, and Hellmuth. Who's your $$ on? 7n7
|
|
#157
01-30-2007, 10:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Ivey Gossip
I said then and I still say I like Ivey. It was 10k a hole, which makes a difference.
|
|
#159
01-30-2007, 10:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Ivey Gossip
I can't help but chime in here. I agree with Blair that golf betting involves all manner of deception, puffing, and otherwise trying to get an edge. I agree that this is part of the game, and people should expect it (and not complain when they make a bad deal). However, I also agree with many others that a flat out lie changes things. I think if you are asked a legitimate, objectively-verifiable question, and you lie about it to gain an advantage, it is cheating.
So, questions such as "how have you been hitting it," "you getting out much lately," etc. are all subject to "shaping" the answer. On the other hand, "what is your handicap," "how many times have you played in the last 30 days," "how many strokes do you get from X" are all objective, specific questions -- and I think lying about the answer is cheating. As an example, let's say two players haven't seen each other for a while and one tries to gauge how many strokes to give up by asking "How many times have you played in the past month?" If the other player has hit balls seven days a week and taken 15 lessons but never actually played a round, he can legitimately say none, even though he may well be much better than the other player expects based on what he's done. On the other hand, if that player had played 10 rounds of golf in the last 30 days, I do not think he can answer none. The first example is a combination of a bad question and a deceptive, though technically honest answer that will probably get the player an undeserved advantage. The second example is, in my opinion, cheating.
|
|
#160
01-31-2007, 12:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Ivey Gossip
[ QUOTE ]
I can't help but chime in here. I agree with Blair that golf betting involves all manner of deception, puffing, and otherwise trying to get an edge. I agree that this is part of the game, and people should expect it (and not complain when they make a bad deal). However, I also agree with many others that a flat out lie changes things. I think if you are asked a legitimate, objectively-verifiable question, and you lie about it to gain an advantage, it is cheating. So, questions such as "how have you been hitting it," "you getting out much lately," etc. are all subject to "shaping" the answer. On the other hand, "what is your handicap," "how many times have you played in the last 30 days," "how many strokes do you get from X" are all objective, specific questions -- and I think lying about the answer is cheating. As an example, let's say two players haven't seen each other for a while and one tries to gauge how many strokes to give up by asking "How many times have you played in the past month?" If the other player has hit balls seven days a week and taken 15 lessons but never actually played a round, he can legitimately say none, even though he may well be much better than the other player expects based on what he's done. On the other hand, if that player had played 10 rounds of golf in the last 30 days, I do not think he can answer none. The first example is a combination of a bad question and a deceptive, though technically honest answer that will probably get the player an undeserved advantage. The second example is, in my opinion, cheating. [/ QUOTE ] The same is very true in the pool world. I totally agree with you about which ones are cheating and which ones aren't, but many many hustlers don't feel the same way. I guess fish attract sharks and that's all there is to it. Also, Blair, how did the handicap sandbaggers make a living in amateur tournaments? I wouldn't have thought there would be any prize money. Do they take part in the calcutta wagering? I mean, I guess they would have to. Are the golf calcuttas as crazy as I've heard?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
