|
|
#11
06-24-2006, 12:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: no.
if cardplayer wrote that joe had 1/2 they were incorrect. it was someone else.
i already addressed in an earlier post what i thought the wpt policy is on backing, and that i could be incorrect. and it is not close to 50%. 
|
|
#12
06-24-2006, 12:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no.
guys,
amulet, if you're got info that's better than what cardplayer reported, why not just come out and say it instead of insinuating it and letting people guess? why are you so sure that your source is better than cardplayer's? in general, i think that backing can cause some problems like implicit (or explicit) collusion. zeebo, how do you think backing works? you put up all the entrance fee and take 100% of the profits? to answer your question, "because they think it's a good investment." amulet, i also think you're discounting the fact that a high % of people who go to these events sell some % of their action to someone or some group. that is backing, even if it is not for 100% of entrance. citanul
|
|
#14
06-24-2006, 12:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no.
"When Cassidy saw that Bartholdi was broke again, he helped him. Cassidy staked Bartholdi in several events at the 2005 World Series, and Bartholdi nailed fifth place in the last $1,500 no-limit hold'em event for more than $70,000, the biggest tournament score of his life. After several more tournament cashes, including a $27,160 win at the 2005 Ultimate Poker Challenge and two final tables at the 2006 Gold Strike World Poker Open that netted him more than $60,000, Bartholdi once again was playing with his own money. He returned to Bellagio's $10-$20 no-limit game and continued to run well. Along the way, he and Cassidy took half of each other at the 2006 World Poker Tour Championship."
|
|
#15
06-24-2006, 01:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no.
shush you, amulet clearly knows better than whatever incredibly credible sounding source you've quoted here which i'm sure was under no legal compulsion to make sure their facts were correct!!!
|
|
#16
06-24-2006, 01:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no.
Um, it's like common knowledge that Joe was backed by Joe for the event. Unless, it's, like, some elaborate lie that dozens of unconnected people are perpetuating for some mysterious reason before during and since the event (and then reported in Cardplayer), I am still pretty sure Joe C. was the beneficiary of half of Joe B's win.
As for the OP's assertion that a lot of people are upset about it: Who and why?
|
|
#18
06-24-2006, 01:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no.
[ QUOTE ]
shush you, amulet clearly knows better than whatever incredibly credible sounding source you've quoted here which i'm sure was under no legal compulsion to make sure their facts were correct!!! [/ QUOTE ] Well I'm not sure that Cardplayer a) has a legal compulsion to get non-libelous facts correct or b) got these particular facts correct (like, I don't think they "took half of each other along the way") but I'm pretty sure that CP is more credible on this issue than Amulet.
|
|
#19
06-24-2006, 01:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no.
[ QUOTE ]
shush you, amulet clearly knows better than whatever incredibly credible sounding source you've quoted here which i'm sure was under no legal compulsion to make sure their facts were correct!!! [/ QUOTE ] The source said nothing about Bartholdi being backed in the WPT Championship. It says he did a 50% swap.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
