Horrible ESPN article about PPA and on line poker

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I responded...everyone else who reads it should, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for reminding my how to think Dom......... Do you cry-babies realize that you are actually siding w/ Jesus-Freak DN on this issue? Furthermore, EVERYONE, even the author of this article is entilted to his oppinion. Moreyetstill, said author did a better job stating his oppinion than most of you crybabies did in this tread. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

no problem. if you have to take a dump, I'll let you know when you should. i'm here, for you, Sparky.

[Suigin406]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wow what a dick

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[CrazyEyez]

I obviously disagree with him, but I didn't think it was that bad. It's certainly weird - what's his motivation for writing it? The only problem I have with it, as far as it being "unfair" as an opinion, is that he mocks the effort to exempt poker from the UIGEA but doesn't mention the horse racing and lottery exemptions.

[SplawnDarts]

The article seems to capture the situation pretty accurately. I see no reason to object.

[Avatar of Wine]

[ QUOTE ]
I obviously disagree with him, but I didn't think it was that bad. It's certainly weird - what's his motivation for writing it? The only problem I have with it, as far as it being "unfair" as an opinion, is that he mocks the effort to exempt poker from the UIGEA but doesn't mention the horse racing and lottery exemptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

The biggest problem, from my point of view, is that the writer really never makes a point - like, at all.

He bumbles around, mocks lobbyists and congressmen, and basically tries to mock the idea that poker is a sport . . . but he doesn't really say "this is a bad idea" or "I do not support their position," just that they haven't played their hand yet. Just a bizarre article, all the way around - unlike HumblePie, I can't really agree that he laid out his argument at all. It was a diatribe, and poorly formed at that.

[Hopey]

[ QUOTE ]
just sent him this........

For you to characterize poker players as "calculated liars, convicted cheats and general obfuscators" is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

The quote is:

"D'Amato is one of the more famous poker players in congressional history, assuming such a list might exist, and that takes in a whole lot of territory normally reserved for calculated liars, convicted cheats and general obfuscators -- and we still haven't gotten to the poker table yet."

He's referring to politicians as being the liars, cheats, and obfuscators. He's trying to be funny.

[mingorama]

Kreidler's sarcastic tone belies his complete ignorance about poker. the article is a discredit to him and to ESPN.

[Wongboy]

Bob - I agree with your point, but I think there is an important distinction here.

It is not unusual top see an ESPN columnist who bemoans the fact that the NBA has gotten "thuggish", or that player salaries are out of control, or that the average American family is priced out of a day at a MLB ballpark. All of these are negative aspects of the sports, but the key here is that the writers are usually genuinely interested in the success of the sport and they are voicing their concerns in an effort to make the sport better.

I also see articles that say a sport is dumb, boring, or whatever. Usually the writer makes it very clear that this is a personal opinion.

The difference here is that the writer is supporting the criminalization of a sport that generates a substantial portion of ESPN's coverage. He isn't saying "Online poker is dumb, I don't know why anyone plays it". He is saying "Online poker is evil, people should not be allowed to play". This contrasts greatly with the extensive coverage of Moneymaker's story as an online qualifier and the highlights of online poker pros when they play in ESPN televised events.