really?

ill take that wager

 

Originally Posted by Nels316

I remember MY first beer!!

wat, so if Ivey doesn't win gg internet poker?

nothing to be said of the fact that most of the people left consider themselves pros?
much rather see the chick win, think Ivey winning would make alot of recreational players give up on ME, sensing they have little shot which they do.

WSOP made ALL of their tourneys deeper this year, THAT is why SO many pros went deep/got bracelets. Pros have rallied to take some of the luck factor out of the WSOP and its working. C'mon chick, we need more hotties at the table.

plz give me what you're smoking
................
soon

if Ivey wins he has to take on Obama HU4rollz to determine the state of online poker

 

Originally Posted by Imustcall

Wow. Please understand that the government wants money. If they were truly concerned about it being a game of skill, then they would look at the fact that Ivey's deep runs in 2003 and 2009 are much higher than mathematically probable.

And when you say poker is in trouble, I assume you mean online. Live poker is stronger than ever, and isn't going anywhere.

also op you act is if all the other players in the field are scrubs. theres also two ranked online players still in, j cada is no fluke and esfandiari who is also a pro. your comments are silly and like imustcall said, live poker is as big as ever, field sizes are bigger every year and theres more money in this game now then ever.

Banter i can see your point, in the fact it will be great for poker if Ivey wins, and really be nice evidence to the governments that poker is a skill game, but i think the fact hes got this far is proof enough with the size of that field. Startin stack was it 30k this year and hes up to 15mil or something.. i think if he makes final table it will be very justifiable particularly as we have until to nov to dwell on the fact.

The fact is people like Mike Sexton travel all around the US putting a winning case forward to governments that poker is a skill game, this will great for the game if Ivey wins but really if he doesn't its not going to change anything to might have happened in the future anyway

 

Originally Posted by bantersaurus

will ivey winning the ME prove it once and for all? i think if he wins this then poker governments worldwide can see that poker is all a skill game. but if he loses i fear they actually do have a point and a strong case to the fact that poker is just gambling with no skill, as it is rumoured ivey is the best so the best should win basis counts. don't want to put too much pressure on him but he needs to win if poker is to be free'd and recognised as a skill game rather than gambling
ivey ftw please, willing to bet poker will be made legal in america all over if he does but i fear for the game if he doesnt because its on a downward trend

Hmmm, I misjudged you in the other thread by calling you an idiot. You're beyond retarded. This is the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum. And I've been here for 90% of the "Should I fold AA prf?!?!?" threads.

 

Originally Posted by wny2nyc47

 

Originally Posted by Imustcall

Wow. Please understand that the government wants money. If they were truly concerned about it being a game of skill, then they would look at the fact that Ivey's deep runs in 2003 and 2009 are much higher than mathematically probable.

And when you say poker is in trouble, I assume you mean online. Live poker is stronger than ever, and isn't going anywhere.

If the government simply wanted money� then UIGEA wouldn't have passed in the first place. They're certainly not going to stroke their chins and say "you know what? We were wrong. I guess poker is a game of skill." There's several players with multiple bracelets - hell there's about 32874982374832 pieces of evidence to back the skill argument. This has never been what it's about. What a certain segment of a certain party wants is for children (of shitty parents) and adults (who have no impulse control) to be protected from the vice internet poker. They're the same ass-backwards shitheels that got me to drop their party when UIGEA passed. They got to advance their agenda when they tacked their shitty pork legislation onto a legitimate bill. Since that time� poker interest groups have been able to do zero about the state of online poker.

And for every deep run of skill� there's a 300 chip super turbo or some other coin-flip game that the sites push that involve almost zero skill. Because unlike the government� poker sites are interested in money.

You're forgetting money gained by the live poker/casino lobby. Obviously any online gaming hurts their bottom line big time and they're willing to spend a lot of money to make sure that doesn't happen. So in the end, yeah the gov't (particularly the reps who pushed this horseshit through) care about the money, but not from taxes from online gaming. Campaign cash/getting re-elected/pandering to the public most of whom don't particularly care about online gaming/furthering their political careers and standing in the "conservative" movement, etc.

If the stock market is legal, poker should be legal. /thread

Yes because Phil Ivey is clearly the only skilled player left in the ME...

 

Originally Posted by lordxixor101

I think there is a problem with this line of argument. Are we saying that Moneymaker/Hachem/Raymer/Eastgate/Gold/Yang are the best players in the world? Yet, they won the Main Event. Yet, I believe every one of them played the following year, and outside of Raymer, none made a deep run.

Poker is a game of skill over time, but there is definitely luck in it, especially in any one tournament. It is what it is. This is the fact that has to be shown, and for any politician (or anyone else for that matter) who will look at Ivey winning and only call it a game of skill then, those people either need more education on the game, or may willingly just not want to accept poker as anything but gambling.

Politicians just don't do anything unless they get something in return. Everything they do is part of a self-serving plan to further their careers and give them more power. Anyone who believes otherwise is just fooling themselves. Getting politicians to sign on with online gaming isn't a matter of convincing arguments, overwhelming facts or saavy debating skills. It's a matter of finding something to offer them that can further them in the political realm or make them look good. This is why I laughed when it seemed poker players thought with Obama being elected poker would just magically be legalized. With all the things we have going on today, any politician who decided to make online poker his defining issue to the public would be curbstomped in the next election. And any politician who actually stood up for principles wouldn't be a politician, so don't hold your breath on that one.

 

Originally Posted by paidchex

wat, so if Ivey doesn't win gg internet poker?

nothing to be said of the fact that most of the people left consider themselves pros?
much rather see the chick win, think Ivey winning would make alot of recreational players give up on ME, sensing they have little shot which they do.

WSOP made ALL of their tourneys deeper this year, THAT is why SO many pros went deep/got bracelets. Pros have rallied to take some of the luck factor out of the WSOP and its working. C'mon chick, we need more hotties at the table.

What chick?

This whole thread assumes the government cares if it is a game of chance or skill or some combination. It doesn't, therefore, the question is based on a false premise and completely irrelevant.