It's threads like this that actually make me want to go to the bash so I can put faces to names
 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
-
05-10-12 03:24 PM #211
Nomination(s):This post was nominated 1 time . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: FuzzyDunlop
-
05-10-12 03:34 PM #212
Doesn't surprise me a bit! Po69 is always doing unethical shit at the tables. He's a fuk'in low life and should be banned for pulling shit like this. You guys can say it doesn't fuk with the game all you want, but is does. And as many have started, a casino would kick your ass to the door for a stunt like this. So glad I owned his stupid bluffing ass at final table heads up on Tuesday night.
Karma is a bitch who hates pieces of Po69 shit!
Last edited by mikejamm; 05-10-12 at 03:41 PM.
-
05-10-12 03:36 PM #213
po69 needs ban hammered.
-
05-10-12 03:39 PM #214
-
05-10-12 03:42 PM #215
Can't believe I just read all 7 pages...
Shari, you've got a sexy voice.
-
05-10-12 03:49 PM #216I'd never gamble again for Taylor Swift
Become A Pro!
Join Date: 08-31-11Posts: 12,722Betpoints: 14
A) Ban both ttwarrior1 and PO69
B) Ban neither
Let's vote.
-
05-10-12 04:02 PM #217
Ah OK...see I'm not too familiar with you. I see you're playing the part of a kid who has some cash. Cool. I'll play the part of a professional gambler.
Originally Posted by PickWinnerAllDay
-
05-10-12 04:07 PM #218
Wow, what a waste of life/energy this whole thread was.
-
05-10-12 04:08 PM #219
isn't that the point of sbr Originally Posted by tatddy
-
05-10-12 04:11 PM #220
Does anyone know if they banned this guy?
If they did they are saying it doesn't matter whether you are a DICK or well liked poster, you are getting banned for this.
Too much focus on people's personal opinions.
YOu prohibit member PO69 from playing his cards the way he wants, you must prohibit all members whether you consider them popular or what not.
I remember an old thread where they contemplated changing one particular's player clock to offer that player less time to think than all other players in the tourney.
Insane but the fact that it was considered, leads me to believe this guy will be punished & others who are found doing the same thing may encounter a completely different fate.
This thread has indicated to me some members, who I hope I can avoid completely during my time here at SBR.
-
05-10-12 04:14 PM #221
To each their own. I made it through 2 pages of this before my soul started to hurt. Originally Posted by milwaukee mike
isn't that the point of sbr
-
05-10-12 04:22 PM #222
having a soul was your first mistake Originally Posted by tatddy
Nomination(s):This post was nominated 1 time . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: ngates815
-
05-10-12 04:23 PM #223
I'm probably the most inexperienced Poker player here... I've been studying and learning since December 2011. Here's my take on this... Yes, PO had a motive. There's no question he did. There simply aren't any rules to punish him though. There are no written rules. He was in a position of power... and showed that. I wouldn't classify this as Chip Dumping either. It was more or less a Fu#$ YOU Warrior play. Period. PO could play to lose if he wanted to... it's his hand... his call...
I think everyone here is way too bent out of shape about this. There's no question he had motive... and his "hand play" told warrior... go f yourself. But you can't punish PO for it. Everyone needs to stop playing cops and robbers.Points Awarded:
eberetta1 gave TheMoneyShot 2 SBR Point(s) for this post.
-
05-10-12 05:03 PM #224
qft Originally Posted by Smoke
-
05-10-12 05:29 PM #225
wow this debate is probably more stimulating then the obama romney ones youll see in a few months
-
05-10-12 05:33 PM #226
bingo, thats the whole issue here, you cant do anything about stupidity or bad play, announcing youre folding on purpose is colluding. personally if someone killed my mother and i was getting 5-1 to take them out with 2-7 id still do it Originally Posted by BranchDavidian
-
05-10-12 05:34 PM #227
C. PO69 ban for the rest of the week Originally Posted by PickWinnerAllDay
-
05-10-12 05:38 PM #228
Nobody cares what you think. Originally Posted by Jayvegas420
There's a reason why PoS69 has been banned from virtually every board he's belonged to.
-
05-10-12 05:41 PM #229
personally i havent ever dealt with po69. warrior, ive seen his threads and they are pointless dribble 95% of the time, but he has a legit beef here, doesnt matter whether we are at sbr poker room or the bellagio.
-
05-10-12 05:48 PM #230
jayvegas your way off on your observation
Go look at the hand, not the posts of other members
-
05-10-12 05:49 PM #231
yeh but how does anyone know im gonna be the next one out unless its intentionally done
Originally Posted by TheMoneyShot
-
05-10-12 05:51 PM #232
well said.. and honestly.. these games are for fun more or less.. i mean .. you guys aren't really playing a large cash game here... Honestly i think its funny as shit that he did this.. and I am happy as shit TTwarrior is so bent out of shape over this shit.. i swear it's awesome.. i hope it starts a trend.. and he gets all bent out of shape.. Originally Posted by TheMoneyShot
-
05-10-12 06:15 PM #233
Nash, I've been avoiding you for months now, it wasn't your stupid posts in this thread, you have an anthology of ignorance I could point to.
He's been banned from other boards so, therefore he obviously broke a forum/poker rule?
All my post indicated was my desire for all decisions to applied fairly & evenly, no matter who the member is.
If we all decided who was to punished on your scale, it would just be a popularity contest.
-
05-10-12 06:22 PM #234
Do you wanna know what I really think of this thread.
It reminds me of the kids I hated in grade school.
You know the ones who used to partake in group activities but when they lost, they would go tell on the winner.
Even back then, we all knew these kids would grow up to be sore losers.
Then they'd attract the attention of the bus patrols or the hall monitors who would scurry around enforcing their own rules or their interpretation of them, while "trying to get the bottom of everything".
I hated those kids when I was in school & instead of smashing their heads into a climber bar or the school wall
I try to just avoid them now.
-
05-10-12 06:34 PM #235
I personally find nothing wrong with that specific play that rises to the level of cheating. Originally Posted by BernardMadoff
I'll issue a mild warning to him to watch his table talk and play in a fashion that does not cause a disruption especially prior to making the last table. Banter on the final table is part of the game. Everyone is in the money and can choose to turn off their chat and play seriously.
Prior to the last table the game is more social and ultimately guys become short stacked. I view it as bad for business if a player is overly insulting for any reason and would encourage players to report anything that could be considered disruptive.
-
05-10-12 07:06 PM #236
Originally Posted by Jayvegas420
Anthology of ignorance? Really?
You've failed to point out any ignorance on my part, I've called you out on it, you've failed to produce.
Once again, it doesn't matter what you think.
I get it, you don't like me, boo-fukkin'-hoo.
-
05-10-12 07:40 PM #237
you cant win in poker without cheating a bit
ever heard of minh the master? jamie gold? they got caught and ended up keeping every penny they won!
-
05-10-12 07:48 PM #238
SBR poker can't be taken seriously Originally Posted by SBR_John
-
05-10-12 08:18 PM #239
If SBR plans to do anything with the poker room, I suggest hiring someone that knows poker rules.
I highly suggest people that think nothing wrong happened to look up chip dumping and report their results.Last edited by RudyRuetigger; 05-10-12 at 08:21 PM.
Nomination(s):This post was nominated 1 time . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: BiTeMe UsAdOj
-
05-10-12 08:25 PM #240
Chip dumping, as defined by most poker rooms, is INTENTIONALLY LOSING TO A FRIEND Originally Posted by RudyRuetigger
If SBR plans to do anything with the poker room, I suggest hiring someone that knows poker rules.
I highly suggest people that think nothing wrong happened to look up chip dumping and report their results.
please explain how this action fell into that category
-
05-10-12 08:30 PM #241
let me guess, you didn't google chip dumping? Originally Posted by milwaukee mike
Intentionally losing chips to another player for the purposes of cheating. This subterfuge is not permitted online and is ethically questionable.
Now go back and read the 1st post. Did he intentionally lose chips to another player for the purpose of cheating?
Normally you can't say for certain if someone chip dumped, is too stupid to realize whats going on, or misclicked. His chat pretty much cleared it all up though.
-
05-10-12 08:30 PM #242
How do you know he didn't lose intentionally, Mike? Originally Posted by milwaukee mike
-
05-10-12 08:33 PM #243
You answered your own question - FOR THE PURPOSE OF CHEATING Originally Posted by RudyRuetigger
just like fraud/forgery, there has to be evidence that you are doing it to benefit yourself or a friend unfairly
It's perfectly acceptable to do something that intentionally negatively affects someone else
-
05-10-12 08:34 PM #244
He probably DID lose intentionally, but it wasnt to a co-conspirator Originally Posted by The Giant
-
05-10-12 08:47 PM #245
Regardless of his intentions to screw over ttwarrior or help out the guy that he folded to on purpose the results still remain the same......Chip dumping definitely took place, maybe not collusion, but 100% chip dumping Originally Posted by milwaukee mike
Reply With Quote
