Heads up challenge

[hithenose_home]

This is just ridiculous. First of all the arrogance that comes off from you bizkit is repulsive. Much like Plate wants to challenge Rock to play 100,000 hands at NL25, i have a challenge for you. Since you are so confident I would like to challenge you to a heads up challenge. The challenge doesn't need to be long, say 1,000 hands. And we can play NL25/50/100/200. Whatever you want. The challenge can be played live also (I would prefer) but obviously I don't think that is possible.

After reading your threads, I think that you are so defensive about online play because you are just a bad live player. You probably have many nervous tells, and this is why you like to hide behind your monitor.

Personally, I am not 100% certain if online is rigged/legitamate so that is why I keep my thoughts to myself when it comes to this thread, but you have now crossed the line. have experienced many, many of the things that rockart has spoken about (initial deposit winner, bad streak of cards after a significant cash, weird coincidences with teh same exact hand down to the suit when multi tabling, to name a few of many.

Not just that, but I am sure that there are cheaters out there. The one lesson in life that many people don't seem to understand is that "When there is money, there are theives. Obviously I know that there are cheaters inside the casino as well, but it is easier to do online. Friends play together, especialy in short handed tables, or 1 table sit n gos. Also with technology expanding, it only makes it easier for online hackers to do some sort of cheating, wheater it be fix the deck, check what cards are coming next, see other people's whole cards. I mean for god's sake I watched a 60 minute special on the guy they caught cheating for absolute poker, and he isn't even in trouble with the law, as these online poker sites are based out of islands, or some canadian indian land where there is no law.

All i am saying is that I am very skeptical, and would much rather play live.

Bizkit my challenge stands, lets do it.

[hithenose_home]

+ev.......

Do you want to play me HU Mike? I will now extend my challenge (same rules) to ANYONE on this website. I would prefer to play either Bizkit or Mike first (Bizkit 1, then mike 2) but if anyone has the balls please accept the challenge. Mike you think it is +EV to play, I find that comical. Put your money where your mouth is chump.

Also I forgot to mention this. I know some people will not believe me but here it goes anyway. I was watching a FTOPS event recently when it was very deep. I don't remember the tournament, but it was definitly a NLHE freeze. There were only 2 table left when i see the following. Also please note that I was currently not playing any online poker at that instance.

So I am watching and I clearly see pocket aces in front of someone. I figure it was just a showdown at first, buth then i realized it wasn't because the hand was still going on. At the same moment, my computer froze. The person with the supposed AA was a shortstack, and when I got back to the table after restarting my computer he was doubled up. I don't know if he had pocket aces, but I assume (considering the double up, and considering it was only literally a minute between the time i saw the AA and the time i resigned onto teh site) Take that for what its worth... Not even sure what it means.

BIZKIT/MIke/ANYONE accept this challenge
And Gerrard i don't appreciate the sarcasm.

[bizkit]

This is just ridiculous. First of all the arrogance that comes off from you bizkit is repulsive. Much like Plate wants to challenge Rock to play 100,000 hands at NL25, i have a challenge for you. Since you are so confident I would like to challenge you to a heads up challenge. The challenge doesn't need to be long, say 1,000 hands. And we can play NL25/50/100/200. Whatever you want. The challenge can be played live also (I would prefer) but obviously I don't think that is possible.

Why are we talking about how arrogant I am all of sudden? Yes, I feel I'm probably going to be the best player in nearly any game I play in. Yes, I feel none of you can beat the 200 NL FR Stars online game over a 100k or even 50k sample size. I know its hard to believe after seeing how bad the $1/$2 live games are. I know ROCKART plays $2/$5, so yes I can see how its hard to accept that you can't beat a lower game online but hey its a tough game. Plates throws in his comment simply because he feels you guys can beat 25 NL online if you would accumulate a large enough sample size and you probably would no longer think its a rigged game. I'm not going to take either side on this one as its definitely possible that you could beat this game but definitely possible that you would lose as well.

Of course you don't want the challenge to be long but I do. I've seen Plates or myself go on a 10+ BI downswing in this period. 1,000 hands just isn't enough to prove anything to me or you. I'd be willing to do it with a few changes though: Minimum 50k hands 200 NL(we can do a walkaway loss say minimum 20 100bb stack BI's if you want; but $4,000 minimum guaranteed to play and verified) played across 4 tables simultaneously. I'd prefer to play as deep as possible but anything 100 bb's or more is fine. I'd prefer picking a major credible site(I guess to you there really isn't one haha) with the least heads up rake.

After reading your threads, I think that you are so defensive about online play because you are just a bad live player. You probably have many nervous tells, and this is why you like to hide behind your monitor.

hahaha I really lol'd at this one.
1) I could have all the nervous tells in the world and I could still beat the $2/$5 or $5/$10 live game in most places. If you're still in that amateur phase where "ZOMG tells are the most important part of live poker" I wish you the best luck you can possibly have at the table sir.
2) What would I be nervous about? I don't really get that emotion about any hand or any pot for the most part.
3) What do you think I do that's bad?

·There is no empirical evidence to substantiate the conspiracy nuts claims - (Biz)
Plate - How can anyone argue with this sort of statement. It's utterly true
BIZ CALLS US NUTS - YOU CONCUR

I guess in hindsight I could have referred to you as people instead of nuts or something of that nature. But, why are we so focused on the one word? Why is the argument not about the rest of the actual post? If you look through this thread and others I've probably been insulted as much or more than anyone else. I haven't taken it personally and on several occasions have completely strayed away from seeking to attack them back. It doesn't do any good and defeats the purpose of posting altogether in my humble opinion.

Now Plates sometimes gets frustrated as I do. I can understand this as I spend my time making a post that really drives home why it is not rigged only to be a) bombarded with insults; b) anyone who agrees with me is bombarded with insults; c) the "rigged" persons seem to do anything they can to stray away from actually talking about the post; d) they(they being you) paraphrase my posts as well as Plates in a script to look as bad as it possibly can(To me this is as much insulting as some of the people who actually insulted me say. But I'm still not taking it personally); e) it promotes more tension between players who feel the game is rigged and players that don't.

Most of the empirical hand evidence for why its rigged is over an extremely small sample size mixed with how it makes you "feel". The bottom line is it's likely Plates has played probably at least 10x more online real money hands than any of the "rigged" posters. Now, I can't really say cause even though you guys(the rigged posters) who don't seem to play for any serious money online you still manage to not produce these hand histories or even the screen names. I probably have 10x that sample(Plates) that I have done various statistical things with. Additionally my sample consists of a few winning players playing a very large number of hands at various limits and on various different poker sites. Can we talk this now instead of random pointless insults or how things "feel"?

+ev.......
Not really, I think I'd make more playing 50NL 6max but I have to stroke my ego a little. :)

[hithenose_home]

I do not have nearly enough free time to every finish 50,000 hands. I have a full time job, and could only put in maybe 10 hours max at this a week considering i also want to play live.
Also, no I dont want to play with 4 tables. I am not claiming to be better at you than being a computer, playing with 4 tables 4 me at least is just mechanical. You can actually think and concentrate about each and every hadn if you play just 1 table.

Also when did i ever say that ''physical tells are my the most important". I was just adding that in. Of the record, betting patterns from me is where i get my first read then i look at the physical tells.

I also find it funny that you talk down to me, when I am the better player with the better [proven] results, both live and online.
Just to list scores in the last 13 months (and i don't even play online or live that much)

$1500 freeze- 7th place for $52,000 (Borgata 500k GTD) 4/?/09
$3000 freeze- 49th place for $8,000 (Borgata Winter Open) 1/?/09
$1000 freeze- 6th/7th place for $5,500 (Bellagio Deepstack)
$26 freeze - 1st place for $8,550 (FTP 32k GTD) 5/12/08
$26 freeze - 4th place for $1,750 (FTP 28k GTD) 4/11/08

I also have 2 other 1k+ scores taht I don't want to publish here bc I was logged on a friends account at the time. I also coached my friend to come in 2nd place in the "Double Deuce" at FTP a few weeks ago for $20,000, $20 buyin.

[hithenose_home]

Irrelevant of who insulted who, you're still irrational and close-minded. You're just avoiding the actual issues by calling people arrogant. It's a common tactic used by people who have very little substance to their arguments.

Your challenge really does sound yummy. I havn't played much HU cash though. I'll think about it after exams :)

I would love to play if you have never played HU cash. Be my guest and accept.

[Browen]

$1500 freeze- 7th place for $52,000 (Borgata 500k GTD) 4/?/09
$3000 freeze- 49th place for $8,000 (Borgata Winter Open) 1/?/09
$1000 freeze- 6th/7th place for $5,500 (Bellagio Deepstack)
$26 freeze - 1st place for $8,550 (FTP 32k GTD) 5/12/08
$26 freeze - 4th place for $1,750 (FTP 28k GTD) 4/11/08

I also have 2 other 1k+ scores taht I don't want to publish here bc I was logged on a friends account at the time. I also coached my friend to come in 2nd place in the "Double Deuce" at FTP a few weeks ago for $20,000, $20 buyin.

Those are some pretty looking results...nice going! :clap:

[hithenose_home]

Those are some pretty looking results...nice going! :clap:

Thank you, also I forgot and should add

$10 Freeze 50k GTD 5th Place for $2,289 5/3/09 --> Jokerstars

[hithenose_home]

Agreed, I just don't want him to go broke over this little challenge.. Haha just playing :kiss: !!!!!!!!

Definitely everything summed up into a few simple bullet points.



May I add:

- Legit believers are able to accept that there is a reasonable chance of exploitable software
- Legit believers realise that there is no possible way that the RNG is not completely fair and random - the observed results = expected results.
- Rigged believers don't take anything into account and just conclude the RNG is rigged to the site's favour for various reasons that are supported by personal experiences and hearsay.

p.s Good response Biz. You two should really play against each other but don't play just so you can **** talk each other some more; play just as a bit of healthy competition.



As we've seen from this thread, no matter what is shown - maybe 5% of conspiricists will be convinced. 95% will never be satisfied with any sort of evidence. So PokerStars or whoever will spend money on gathering all the appropriate material, creating a study and publishing it just so they can get 5% of a very small community who will play low stakes anyway (low stakes = low money for the site). Just more rational business thinking, just like not rigging your site is just rational business thinking.

[ROCKART]

I am not claiming to be better at you than being a computer, playing with 4 tables 4 me at least is just mechanical. You can actually think and concentrate about each and every hadn if you play just 1 table.

not for him. like ive said before, its pretty much playing your cards to play 4 tables at once like that - playing your luck. the actual adjustments specific to the player in the hand is null.

you guys might as well have a slot machine tournament if your going to do that. that would be about as fitting as multi tabling 50,000 hands.

I also find it funny that you talk down to me, when I am the better player with the better [proven] results, both live and online.
Just to list scores in the last 13 months (and i don't even play online or live that much)

$1500 freeze- 7th place for $52,000 (Borgata 500k GTD) 4/?/09
$3000 freeze- 49th place for $8,000 (Borgata Winter Open) 1/?/09
$1000 freeze- 6th/7th place for $5,500 (Bellagio Deepstack)
$26 freeze - 1st place for $8,550 (FTP 32k GTD) 5/12/08
$26 freeze - 4th place for $1,750 (FTP 28k GTD) 4/11/08

I also have 2 other 1k+ scores taht I don't want to publish here bc I was logged on a friends account at the time. I also coached my friend to come in 2nd place in the "Double Deuce" at FTP a few weeks ago for $20,000, $20 buyin.

i will verify that 5 outta these 6 are accurate. i never heard of the 1st place for 8550 one, but im sure its equally as real as the rest.

not to mention hithenose has a ****ing sponsor........
something im SURE bizkit does not (becuase if he did, surely he would be bragging about it).

hell, even platefish was sponsored at one point.

so bizkit, if youre so good, and such a profitable online player, where is your sponsor?
oh wait, lemme guess, you had one, but figured you could make more money on your own?

yea. just like you dont play in the WSOP becuase you make too much multitabling at pokerstars. LAFFFFFF


basically when i see someone like bizkit, someone who is so full of himself and takes every opportunity to state how good of a player he is, i think one thing: INSECURITY. just like the guy who drives a big pickup truck, you are over-compensating for whatever it is you think you are lacking.




I would love to play if you have never played HU cash. Be my guest and accept.

mike is just bizkits lap dog. he will never disagree with him and will always back what he says. hes like that dweeb in highschool that follows around the cool crowd because he thinks that makes him special.

pay him no mind.


1) It wasn't one word - it was several posts (e.g., must be loser, must be a beginner, must not know how to play, etc) where you insulted other posters on this site. Biz - you have been one of the worst offenders - read the posts!

As a note, I would welcome a moratorium on all insults. Early on - that is how this thing started and it was a much more enjoyable, thought provoking experience. Rockart gave a thoughtful why it is rigged post, Plate gave a compelling response and no one had to resort to guessing the other posters personality traits.

2) My screen name has always been available.

3) Since you brought it up - There are 14 Bizkits of some form or another on the official poker rankings site - which one is you?


exactly right. bizkit was the one who got this personal-attack-ball rolling by calling the riggers "losing players" and trying to divide the site into the so-called "winners" and the so-called "donators". everything was pretty civil in this thread until he decided to give his two cents.

im not prone to this type of petty quarrelling, but i think its amusing. and the most posts bizkit types about how great he is, and how the rest of us are stupid broke losing poker players, the more absurd it all gets.

if bizkit was all that he says he is, given the fact that he boasts about his poker skills in every related post, he would surely have more proof that he is so profitable. if there is one thing that online poker has, it is documentation.


but thats that for now.




and who names themself after limp bizkit? are you some teen-angst goth living in your moms basement? do you have pictures of fred durst on the wall of your bedroom?

[Gerrard48LFC]

Poor Mike, getting attacked every which way here!

Anyways i don't see how a HU challenge proves who is the best at FR Cash? The NL25/50/100/200 50k - 100k hands sounds like a much better way to find that out, no?

[bizkit]

For those of you who think the heads up will never happen you are probably right. I am, however, 100% committed to trying to make this happen over a large sample size so be ready for a ton of excuses from the other side.

I do not have nearly enough free time to every finish 50,000 hands. I have a full time job, and could only put in maybe 10 hours max at this a week considering i also want to play live.
Also, no I dont want to play with 4 tables. I am not claiming to be better at you than being a computer, playing with 4 tables 4 me at least is just mechanical. You can actually think and concentrate about each and every hadn if you play just 1 table.

not for him. like ive said before, its pretty much playing your cards to play 4 tables at once like that - playing your luck. the actual adjustments specific to the player in the hand is null.

you guys might as well have a slot machine tournament if your going to do that. that would be about as fitting as multi tabling 50,000 hands.

So when Dwan put out his heads up challenge offering 3 to 1 playing 4 tables simultaneously he essentially gave everyone a slot free roll to win 3 to 1 on their money. But, somehow, the only takers on the challenge were Ivy, Benyamine and Antonious?

I'm not going to dignify ROCKART's personal attacks with a response beyond this line. For me, 50k hands is a much better sample size at determining who is a better player than 1k. Since you've indicated your friend's results make him so much better a player than me why is it an issue to just "play your cards" over 50k hands? I don't mind if we only play 10 hours a week it just means the heads up challenge will have to be longer. The number of tables is not overly important to me of course I would prefer 4 tables of 200 NL but if you want 2 tables of 400 NL I'd be ok with that as well.


$1500 freeze- 7th place for $52,000 (Borgata 500k GTD) 4/?/09
$3000 freeze- 49th place for $8,000 (Borgata Winter Open) 1/?/09
$1000 freeze- 6th/7th place for $5,500 (Bellagio Deepstack)
$26 freeze - 1st place for $8,550 (FTP 32k GTD) 5/12/08
$26 freeze - 4th place for $1,750 (FTP 28k GTD) 4/11/08

I'm glad you've won so much money. How about we throw in an early exit clause too. We agree to play at certain hours and certain times(10 hour/week). If you try to pick up and leave after lets say you won a buy in and refuse to play anymore you lose an escrow of say 4k? Just an idea, I don't want to either of us the opportunity to hit and run.

[eldave1]

[QUOTE=bizkit;24734]I don't use the Bizkit alias on any poker sites. It happens to match my email so I happened to use it when I registered here. Don't read too much into it. I have no intention of providing you with any information about me now. I'm sick of you purposefully talking around the issues(Go back through the thread and see how many times I've asked for your screen names without you ever giving an answer).

If you want to play a heads up match under the same conditions I gave hithenose_home then you'll get a screen name. You'll also probably get one if he happens to accept the challenge. I'm through with the meaningless boring double talk. Don't expect a response from me again unless its to play heads up or its to comment on the hand history proof I have but for obvious reasons cannot provide to you.

Well then - you are a liar and a hypocrite. My screen name is eldave1, always has been on this site as well as on FT and you have never asked for it anyway one time let alone several. Show me the post where I refused you my screen name - and btw - why would I since I foking use it on this site. You are also chicken **** - you are the one who had posted this:

The bottom line is it's likely Plates has played probably at least 10x more online real money hands than any of the "rigged" posters. Now, I can't really say cause even though you guys(the rigged posters) who don't seem to play for any serious money online you still manage to not produce these hand histories or even the screen names.

[B]So all I did was accept your challenge (the one you foking made) - ask you for the same info and all of a sudden you go limp. But that's not enough for you - after you can't even step up to your own challenge (with one of the weakest ass excuses I have ever seen) you go on with your diatribe against ROCKART. How did you manage to type it through all the sobbing? So the minute you are caught for the fraud you are - "you're done responding to my posts" - NICE. You have the nerve to go after ROCKARTS and others reasoning but not the cajones to support your own BS. Question - since I don't have the evidence for this - does it hurt when your testicles shrink up your insides like that?? Here is a skit for you:

Limpy Bizkit: I AM THE BEST POKER PLAYER ON THE PLANET AND THOSE WHO DON'T AGREE WITH ME SUK - HELL - THEY WON'T EVEN POST THEIR SCREEN NAME - THEY MUST SUK.

ELDAVE1 - HI LIMPY - MINE IS ELDAVE1 - ALWAYS HAS BEEN - WHAT'S YOURS?

(silence ensures as the post is not responded to)

ELDAVE1 - LIMPY - YOU THERE? C'MOM - WHAT'S THE SCREEN NAME

LIMPY: AH -AH - YOU SUK - SO - UM - I AM NOT GOING TO TALK TO YOU AND BESIDES IT WOULD BE UNWISE FOR ME TO GIVE OUT MY SCREEN NAME (limpy inside voice - hope they don't remember that I said they didn't have the guts to provide theirs). AND THEREFORE - I - UM - DECLARE THAT ALL WHO CHALLENGE ME ARE - WELL THEY ARE - WHAT'S THAT MOM - NO, I HAVEN'T BEEN ON THE COMPUTER - GOOD NIGHT MOMMY - WELL THEY ARE FOOLS?

I'll get your name - I'll just search for hypocrite, coward, arrogantsob and stuff like that and I am sure to get a hit

Oh yeah - the ban on insults lasted a long time - so FU moron.

[bizkit]

So, another skit for fun since I said I can't reply to eldave1:

hithenose_home: I have won so much playing tournament I even have someone backing me I'm so amazing. Hey, bizkit, you make too many valid points in my friend ROCKART's arguments so I'm going to talk crap to you. Lets play heads up over the smallest possible sample size I can get away with.
bizkit: Ok, increase the sample size sit a the highest level your listed and play a few tables at once and I guess its worth my while.
hithenose_home: Whoa, no way I can actually think about my opponents in multiple hands once. I know its the same opponent at all 4 tables but I just can't do it. Plus, I am really so busy I can't play much at all.
ROCKART: HEY HEY GUYS. I just got done tearing those 200/400 NL play money fish apart. If online poker wasn't rigged I'd win them all. There's no way any player can evaluate 4 hands at once I mean wow bizkit clearly you're afraid to play hithenose_home is a skill game. Clearly, the one table 1000 hands is a much better way to determine who is a better. No, I don't really have any facts to back this up just like my rigged online poker argument but it just feels right. Oh btw bizkit: [insert 20 of the lamest insults I've ever bothered reading here]
bizkit: I don't mind playing a long sample size over limited hours over the course of many weeks. As long as the money is locked in and nobody can hit and run unless the lose their entire initial stake of around 20 buy ins.

(very very very silent)

eldave1: Man, that bizkit guy is so arrogant, I mean I'll go on now and insult him passively so I won't look like a bad guy.
bizkit: eldave1, doesn't it ever get old man? I'm done with the pointless arguments. I'm not going to talk to you anymore.
eldave1 [smiling thinking to himself]: Now I can force him to contradict himself. Since I can't win at online poker I'll at least annoy the people that do win.
eldave1: Ok bizkit, I'll tell you my screen name now and um since you're not talking to me I will ask for your name afterwards and bash you saying you must be a hypocrite fish if you won't tell me now. Oh yeah! And I caught you in a fraud(for what I'm not exactly even sure.)
bizkit:Ok (http://i42.tinypic.com/13zdbaa.jpg), I don't mind that for right now. Heads up anyone?(eldave1, ROCKART, hithenose_home)

(very very very silent again from eldave1, ROCKART, hithenose_home until they can talk about something not related to the challenge or the statistical data Plates or I have about poker not being rigged.)

[ROCKART]

So, another skit for fun since I said I can't reply to eldave1:

hithenose_home: I have won so much playing tournament I even have someone backing me I'm so amazing. Hey, bizkit, you make too many valid points in my friend ROCKART's arguments so I'm going to talk crap to you. Lets play heads up over the smallest possible sample size I can get away with.
bizkit: Ok, increase the sample size sit a the highest level your listed and play a few tables at once and I guess its worth my while.
hithenose_home: Whoa, no way I can actually think about my opponents in multiple hands once. I know its the same opponent at all 4 tables but I just can't do it. Plus, I am really so busy I can't play much at all.
ROCKART: HEY HEY GUYS. I just got done tearing those 200/400 NL play money fish apart. If online poker wasn't rigged I'd win them all. There's no way any player can evaluate 4 hands at once I mean wow bizkit clearly you're afraid to play hithenose_home is a skill game. Clearly, the one table 1000 hands is a much better way to determine who is a better. No, I don't really have any facts to back this up just like my rigged online poker argument but it just feels right. Oh btw bizkit: [insert 20 of the lamest insults I've ever bothered reading here]
bizkit: I don't mind playing a long sample size over limited hours over the course of many weeks. As long as the money is locked in and nobody can hit and run unless the lose their entire initial stake of around 20 buy ins.

(very very very silent)

eldave1: Man, that bizkit guy is so arrogant, I mean I'll go on now and insult him passively so I won't look like a bad guy.
bizkit: eldave1, doesn't it ever get old man? I'm done with the pointless arguments. I'm not going to talk to you anymore.
eldave1 [smiling thinking to himself]: Now I can force him to contradict himself. Since I can't win at online poker I'll at least annoy the people that do win.
eldave1: Ok bizkit, I'll tell you my screen name now and um since you're not talking to me I will ask for your name afterwards and bash you saying you must be a hypocrite fish if you won't tell me now. Oh yeah! And I caught you in a fraud(for what I'm not exactly even sure.)
bizkit:Ok (http://i42.tinypic.com/13zdbaa.jpg), I don't mind that for right now. Heads up anyone?(eldave1, ROCKART, hithenose_home)

(very very very silent again from eldave1, ROCKART, hithenose_home until they can talk about something not related to the challenge or the statistical data Plates or I have about poker not being rigged.)

is this how you get to sleep at night?

[Gerrard48LFC]

$1500 freeze- 7th place for $52,000 (Borgata 500k GTD) 4/?/09
$3000 freeze- 49th place for $8,000 (Borgata Winter Open) 1/?/09
$1000 freeze- 6th/7th place for $5,500 (Bellagio Deepstack)


Wow. I knew live games were soft, but this really takes the bizkit.

v nice skits bizkit!

[eldave1]

“(very very very silent again from eldave1, ROCKART, hithenose_home until they can talk about something not related to the challenge or the statistical data Plates or I have about poker not being rigged.)”

LIMPY, LIMPY, LIMPY – you make me laugh:

1) Not silence – sleep.
2) Let’s talk about your “challenge (I can’t help laughing as I type that)

So YOU get challenged to play. Your typical BS response would make a contortionist like Houdini jealous. “Yeah – I accept except I want minimum 50,000 played across 4 tables simultaneously” (I’m pretty sure that’s how the Brunson-Ivey showdown went). LMAO.

This is LIMPY’s no-challenge challenge:

· If you played 100 hands a hour on a single table, 24 hours a day, it would take you 20 days to finish.

· If you played 8 hours a day, it would take you 63 days to finish.

· Even if you bought the ridiculous 4 tables at a time requirement (and why????) and somehow managed to get in a miraculous 100 hands per table per hour it would still take you almost 16 days at 8 hours a day.

Or – easily longer then any Main Event in history. And speaking of that – what does a ridiculously long match mean anyway – the WSOP is the longest poker tourney on the planet – do you think that it means it is the tourney that is won by the best player? Hell, why not throw in some more stupid stuff – how about you play only if all hole cards are dealt face up, no river card and the blind structure works in reverse. Better yet – no flops – we’ll see who can really play hole cards that way.

LIMPY – Hitennose was not challenging you to stat-off. He was challenging you to a poker match. In your predictable, non-responsive, convoluted, world you pretend you respond to his challenge by issuing a moronic counter-proposal. This is gist of why you are so reprehensible. If you had merely said “no – a poker challenge won’t prove anything about whether on-line is legit or not” – okay – folks could buy that. But no LIMPY – you revert to modus operandi – smoke and mirrors. I have no interest in a “challenge” – but at least I have the integrity to say so. You do not.

So you don’t have a challenge out there – please, step up just once. .

And stop with the how many hands/stats you have – you don’t post them or your screen name – imagination doesn’t count.

All that being said, I am starting to feel guilty because I can’t help thinking you are just some 15 year old in a dark basement at your Daddy’s computer (have you kissed a girl yet?). Go outside and get some sunshine.

[eldave1]

Limpy - I forghot to mention I finally found you on-line:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-0dzKH1Rfs

[hithenose_home]

So, another skit for fun since I said I can't reply to eldave1:

hithenose_home: I have won so much playing tournament I even have someone backing me I'm so amazing. Hey, bizkit, you make too many valid points in my friend ROCKART's arguments so I'm going to talk crap to you. Lets play heads up over the smallest possible sample size I can get away with.
bizkit: Ok, increase the sample size sit a the highest level your listed and play a few tables at once and I guess its worth my while.
hithenose_home: Whoa, no way I can actually think about my opponents in multiple hands once. I know its the same opponent at all 4 tables but I just can't do it. Plus, I am really so busy I can't play much at all.
(very very very silent)

(very very very silent again from eldave1, ROCKART, hithenose_home until they can talk about something not related to the challenge or the statistical data Plates or I have about poker not being rigged.)


Your logic is illogical to say it nicely. Sorry if you thought I was silent because I was afraid to type to you. I am not even going to comment further on that. I will like my future smack talk be between me and you in our heads up challenge if you accept. I have a life outside this forum and dont make it my #1 priority to check up on it on the hour. Listen even if we played 2 tables at once (which is the most i would consider) it would take 250 hours to complete if we played at a quick 100 hands/hour/table. That would take between 1/2 a year and a full year to complete, and I am honestly not interested in that. I am not issuing the challenge to declare who is the better player, rather for some fun, and some fun smack talk.

I am willing to play NL100 for 5,000 hands. I prefer to run 1 table at a time, but am willing to run 2. Each session must be at least 100 hands/table. Buyins must be for $100, and if at any point one of us drops below 25BB, you must reload to at least 50BB. For me the best times to play will be between 9-12 PM EST Monday-Thursday. Must be played on PokerStars



hit the nose home, do you have a ft job or do you just play poker? genuine question, no level.

I have a fulltime job. I play online sometimes after work, maybe one time time a week max in the cash game. Then i play maybe once every 1.5 months or so i play at a casino for my backer in a 1k+ event. That has drill for the past year or two.

[hithenose_home]

To be honest I would actually prefer to play NL50 since I only have several hundred online currently, let me know

[eldave1]

HIT - he ain't going to play you - he's just a kid.

[bizkit]

Now my challenge, which happens to be along the lines of what Dwan is using to play Ivy, Benyamine & Antonious gets attacked? lol ok. Yes, I realize even at 4 tables it would take a month putting in full time hours. I'm not the one who set the minimum limit of hours at 10/week which has now been extended to a max of 12/week...supposedly.

To be honest I would actually prefer to play NL50 since I only have several hundred online currently, let me know

I don't want to play with you for a few dollars or for fun. I want to play for a substantial portion of money(at least to me I mean you have 60k in profit recently so you should be able to play for an amount between 4-10 g's for fun if you want). You already said you were willing to play as high as 200 NL why are you suddenly backing down and dropping lower?

I am willing to play NL100 for 5,000 hands. I prefer to run 1 table at a time, but am willing to run 2. Each session must be at least 100 hands/table. Buyins must be for $100, and if at any point one of us drops below 25BB, you must reload to at least 50BB. For me the best times to play will be between 9-12 PM EST Monday-Thursday. Must be played on PokerStars

This is a bit constructive actually...here's my thoughts:
Is the time frame 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. OR 9 p.m. to 12 a.m.? Higher stakes(200 NL or maybe 400 NL); more hands; an escrow'd amount that you lose if you attempt to hit and run(20 BI or 4k seems good); greater stack sizes(maybe a forced reload if you drop below 90 bb).

Several hundred isn't enough to play for anything worthwhile. Just add a zero to your bankroll in stars and lets get this started. I may need a couple days to put funds into poker stars to get this done on my end. Let me know.


Although I am game for a heads up challenge (for the fun of it rather than bragging rights) can you please take this challenge to a different thread. It's clogging up all the important information being archived here.

haha I'm sorry for hijacking this ever so important thread of amazing information. Hold the escrow'd money if this happens?

[Browen]

So YOU get challenged to play. Your typical BS response would make a contortionist like Houdini jealous. “Yeah – I accept except I want minimum 50,000 played across 4 tables simultaneously” (I’m pretty sure that’s how the Brunson-Ivey showdown went). LMAO.

This is LIMPY’s no-challenge challenge:

· If you played 100 hands a hour on a single table, 24 hours a day, it would take you 20 days to finish.

· If you played 8 hours a day, it would take you 63 days to finish.

· Even if you bought the ridiculous 4 tables at a time requirement (and why????) and somehow managed to get in a miraculous 100 hands per table per hour it would still take you almost 16 days at 8 hours a day.

Or – easily longer then any Main Event in history. And speaking of that – what does a ridiculously long match mean anyway – the WSOP is the longest poker tourney on the planet – do you think that it means it is the tourney that is won by the best player? Hell, why not throw in some more stupid stuff – how about you play only if all hole cards are dealt face up, no river card and the blind structure works in reverse. Better yet – no flops – we’ll see who can really play hole cards that way.


It's not that ridiculous...see the Tom Dwan - Patrik Antonius match going on at the moment. Terms of play: 50k hands on 4 tables. Whoever is up at the end of that time wins. And even that isn't enough to discount variance.

Comparison of 50k hands cash game to a single deepstack tournament - do I really need to show they aren't the same in terms of variance? Really?

[eldave1]

It's not that ridiculous...see the Tom Dwan - Patrik Antonius match going on at the moment. Terms of play: 50k hands on 4 tables. Whoever is up at the end of that time wins. And even that isn't enough to discount variance.

Comparison of 50k hands cash game to a single deepstack tournament - do I really need to show they aren't the same in terms of variance? Really?


First - Tom and Patrik are playing for $1.5 million. Second - so what, two guys are playing 50K hands - what does that have to do with HITs challenge? It's like me saying to someone who challenged be to a basketball game - yeah - I accept but only if we play at the Staples Center, play for seven days and do two games at once because these other two fellas did it. Finally, - from what I could tell from HIT's post - this was not about proving variance in a statistically valid sample size - it was a poker challenge is all - they aren't trying to discount variance any more then they do at the WSOP.

[hithenose_home]

First - Tom and Patrik are playing for $1.5 million. Second - so what, two guys are playing 50K hands - what does that have to do with HITs challenge? It's like me saying to someone who challenged be to a basketball game - yeah - I accept but only if we play at the Staples Center, play for seven days and do two games at once because these other two fellas did it. Finally, - from what I could tell from HIT's post - this was not about proving variance in a statistically valid sample size - it was a poker challenge is all - they aren't trying to discount variance any more then they do at the WSOP.

Thank you for furthering my point, and making it clear. I would like to start a new thread somewhere to follow what Plate has suggested.

Also- I need to consider your conter-proposal bizkit. I would honestly rather just do NL50 as the WSOP is coming up and I will be using a lot of my own money out there in teh cash games.

[bizkit]

I don't want him flopping nuts vs second nuts then running and talking crap as if he's so much better than me for the rest of the time I spend on this forum. I also don't want him to run hot over a few thousands hands and be winning and do the same. I'm not asking for anything unreasonable. I want the challenge to be so your EV(expected value) becomes as close to your AV(actual value) as possible. So yes, I'm trying to cut out as much of the variance as possible. I feel Durrrr's model is a good place to start. If you felt you were the better player why would you dispute this? Especially vs a supposedly horribly arrogant teenage angst kid who lives at home with his mom. :)

Pretty sure Plates was joking but I will start up a thread in a few minutes.

[eldave1]

I don't want him flopping nuts vs second nuts then running and talking crap as if he's so much better than me for the rest of the time I spend on this forum. I also don't want him to run hot over a few thousands hands and be winning and do the same. I'm not asking for anything unreasonable. I want the challenge to be so your EV(expected value) becomes as close to your AV(actual value) as possible. So yes, I'm trying to cut out as much of the variance as possible. I feel Durrrr's model is a good place to start. If you felt you were the better player why would you dispute this? Especially vs a supposedly horribly arrogant teenage angst kid who lives at home with his mom.

Pretty sure Plates was joking but I will start up a thread in a few minutes

I concur that 50K hands is a better measure of let's say 1K. Of course it is. But the reason the PROs are playing in the DURRRRs challenge is because they ARE PROS and have the two months 7-24 available to play along with the incentive $1.5 million) that makes it worth their while to dedicate to that event (I think it is a safe bet that they would not take the Biz challenge). That does not translate to it being a reasonable model for two random posters to hash out a pissing contest. You are taking a new, unique model used my million dollar pros and want to apply it here? - please. You know it won't happen. I am pretty sure that is why you selected the model (and now have also added an escrow account condition - egads).

I will respect PLATE's request on this as well and am looking forward to the BIZ-HIT showdown blog.

[ROCKART]

i think you guys should just have a fistfight.

[eldave1]

i think you guys should just have a fistfight.


I agree Rock - but I think it should be 50,000 rounds, 3 referees from 3 different countries to ensure fairness, size 12 gloves only and all the proze money in an escrow account :) - BIZ - I am kidding here

On a totally different note - I have signed up to play the WSOP Seniors (50 and over) Event this June at the Rio (only a 1K buy-in!)- Currently I play with a lot of young folks so it'll be interesting to see if the overall style of play has an age element to it - I'm guessing yes, but it'll be interesting. I'll let you all know what I see.

[ROCKART]

I agree Rock - but I think it should be 50,000 rounds, 3 referees from 3 different countries to ensure fairness, size 12 gloves only and all the proze money in an escrow account :) - BIZ - I am kidding here

On a totally different note - I have signed up to play the WSOP Seniors (50 and over) Event this June at the Rio (only a 1K buy-in!)- Currently I play with a lot of young folks so it'll be interesting to see if the overall style of play has an age element to it - I'm guessing yes, but it'll be interesting. I'll let you all know what I see.

yea this is clearly bizkits intention here. instead of just owning up to some stats or accounts, he would rather make some ludicrous and impossible stipulations to this matchup that would allow him to not have to play without losing face.

brilliant.

[bizkit]

Skit Time:

bizkit: So, the empirical evidence that Plate has and I have pretty much closes the door on majority of the rigged arguments.
hithenose_home: How dare you disrespect ROCKART like this? I demand to play you or anyone who disagrees with ROCKART heads up right now! RIGHT NOW!
bizkit: Sorry, I don't check the thread every minute of every day. I'm perfectly content to play you heads up at the highest stake you offered. Also, I'd like us to accumulate a sample size as large as possible to give the best player the best chance at winning. Also, I'd prefer to play more tables to make this go quicker. Additionally an escrow'd amount would be a good thing to keep either party from attempting a hit and run.
ROCKART: HAHAHA BIZKIT sucks he wants you to play a slot machine game cause he's a horrible poker player.
eldave1: bizkit you're so arrogant and your challenge clearly wouldn't prove anything its like a marathon holy **** WSOP doesn't even do it like that
hithenose_home: I want to play lower even though I'm going to proceed to brag about all my "big" tournaments winnings. But I only have a few hundred dollars I can play with.
[other people chime in here about how a 50k sample size would be much better than a 1k]
bizkit: I want to play as high as we can possibly play. Although, currently with the escrow situation, I can't afford to play past 400 NL. I would also like to play as many hands as possible as the sample size you want to play is too tiny. I also am not going to play a long heads up for a few hundred dollars.
ROCKART: uh uh uh [lame insult here]
hithenose_home: I need some time to think about this.
eldave1: BIZKIT you can't possibly be serious you tried to throw this challenge out there cause you knew hithenose_home couldn't accept it. YOU'RE JUST SCARED TO PLAY HIM.
ROCKART: YEAH GENIUS! clearly bizkit's intentions here. He won't even post a screen name of his win rate man that guy's a joke.
bizkit: I can gladly give you 30 screen names of highly losing players if that makes you feel more content about your assumptions. I'll even given you one to start "eldave1" on full tilt poker. I have no intentions of posting a screen name that shows me winning at any level especially when I already have a scared heads up player contemplating whether or not to play me. Tell your buddy to start putting the money into stars and we'll see who is serious.


It's simple really. We both start to put money on Poker Stars and paste screen shots to Platesfish then provide our screen names to him and show him we can type in a Poker Stars chat for authenticity. The one with less money in their account has to put in more. I think, depending on the conditions and terms, each party will need somewhere between 6k-8k. Once we reach that point and all terms are agreed upon we can ship Plates or some other neutral party the escrow amount and start playing.

[hithenose_home]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If there is a way can an administrator copy and paste the text from the "Is Poker Rigged" so we can start from there.

Personally, I want to start and finish this challenge. I don't believe that we need to copy the durrrr challenge, mainly for the reasons listed before by other people. Also if you know Daniel Negreanu has a 10/20 HU challenge right now on Stars running as well, and they are only playing 10,000 hands I believe. 15k max.

Here is what I want to do

- NL50
- 1,000-5,000 hands To be decided.
- Must buyin for 100BB.
- When a player drops to 25BB he must reload to atleast 50BB.
- Each session must last at leats 100 hands, and should be decided upon before play each time
- 2 tables played maximum simultaneously
- Most of the play will be done between 8PM -12AM EST
- I do not support an early exit clause unless

[bizkit]

Administrators feel free to delete my thread as I'll just reply on the heads up challenge in this one.


- NL50
- 1,000-5,000 hands To be decided.
- Must buyin for 100BB.
- When a player drops to 25BB he must reload to atleast 50BB.
- Each session must last at leats 100 hands, and should be decided upon before play each time
- 2 tables played maximum simultaneously
- Most of the play will be done between 8PM -12AM EST
- I do not support an early exit clause unless

There's no way I'm playing this heads up 50 NL during premium poker hours. The absolute minimum NL limit I'm willing to play is 200 NL(100 bb's). I would rather play more hands than less but may take something in the neighborhood of a 10k sample size if forced to. This stack size feels too low to me and I'd rather it must buy in for 100 BB's and must reload to 100 bb's at 90 bb's. Longer daily commitments to sessions would get this over with quicker. 100 hands is like 1/2 hour 2 tabling at 100/hour. I can play at those hours but like I said this is premium time and I'm not wasting it playing extremely low. I don't know what that last line means I would seriously prefer some type of substantial figure if a party runs away from the challenge to avoid anyone doing a hit and run after perhaps a one buy in win. I don't want to play for hundreds I want to play for thousands of dollars.

[hithenose_home]

Let it be known that I am a 2/5 regular when I play cash games, and buy in for $500. Its not that I don't want to play for thousands of dollars. Right now i only have a few hundred online, mainly because I usually only play smaller stakes online (1/2 or $25-$50 MTTs) If you don't want to play it because of "premium hours" then I can be flexible with those hours and make it between. 6-9 PM EST I know for a fact that the prime hours start maybe at 9PM-4AM or later. And also since we are playing for smaller stakes, the challenge can be less hands, like 5,000 hands which will be plenty at NL50

-The above challenge is for anyone that wants to accept on this website, not just limpbizkit.

[Pates]

Don't get me wrong but this thread is about seeing who is better right? So why should there be any medium/high limits played. You could play playmoney if you wanted to, it's not about taking each others money from what I can see.

If you want my opinion, not that it's my business - play low stakes and play more hands.

[ROCKART]

Don't get me wrong but this thread is about seeing who is better right? So why should there be any medium/high limits played. You could play playmoney if you wanted to, it's not about taking each others money from what I can see.

If you want my opinion, not that it's my business - play low stakes and play more hands.

but limpbizkit wants to make it so unattainable that it will be impossible to actually follow through with this. that is the goal here.

[bizkit]

Don't get me wrong but this thread is about seeing who is better right? So why should there be any medium/high limits played. You could play playmoney if you wanted to, it's not about taking each others money from what I can see.

If you want my opinion, not that it's my business - play low stakes and play more hands.

Not to sound conceded or anything but it's a money proposition to me. I don't want to play at a limit where I expect my profit to be less than I'm playing currently now. I don't mind player a lower stake limit if it involves more hands and a large prop bet lump sum win to the winner. I'd rather have your input than not have your input Plates.

If you are a 2/5 regular then you can easily afford to play for thousands of dollars. 1/2 online is playing for thousands of dollars as well. Premium hours differ for different sites and different limits surely you must know this. Just start depositing more money so we can get this thing going. Plate's is probably willing to verify amounts in poker accounts for both parties.

[GarrethUoL]

Why don't you play for play money, over 10,000 hands or so... and whoever is losing at the the end of the hands, loses the challenge.. and loses say $500 to the other person?

Thats a more reasonable challenge for you two. And a bigger hand sample is definitely better!

[bizkit]

Why don't you play for play money, over 10,000 hands or so... and whoever is losing at the the end of the hands, loses the challenge.. and loses say $500 to the other person?

Thats a more reasonable challenge for you two. And a bigger hand sample is definitely better!

Add a zero(the money not the hands) and I'd probably be in. I'd rather play micro...I don't think you can make private tables on poker stars for play money otherwise everyone doing a heads up would do it to avoid rake.

[GarrethUoL]

I don't think you can make private tables on poker stars for play money otherwise everyone doing a heads up would do it to avoid rake.

You dont set them up.. they're always running, just wait for a new one to open and then both join. I often do it with friends and then transfer the money after.

[bridgey321]

Would involve a lot of trusting and honesty though! Could easily just say afterwards: nahhhh mate, was only joking bout the bet :p

[Gerrard48LFC]

Would involve a lot of trusting and honesty though! Could easily just say afterwards: nahhhh mate, was only joking bout the bet :p

got to escrow the money mate to stop this from happening.

Way i see it you can either do it 2 ways,
1- Play HU Play Money and then who ever is up after X hands gets the money that you bet before hand.
2- Play NL50/100/200 and play for X hands and then whoever is up at the end is the winner.

[bizkit]

Would involve a lot of trusting and honesty though! Could easily just say afterwards: nahhhh mate, was only joking bout the bet :p

Obviously there's going to be some intermediary holding the money(possibly PlateFish). Then again, I don't think we're going to be in the situation where we're actually going to play for thousands of dollars although I'd be happily surprised if it happens.

I'm not sure PokerStars will like the fact that we're using their system to completely not pay for rake. I'm not trying to get my account, PlateFish's account and hithenose_home banned for this. Of course, if hithenose_home happens to put the necessary funds into his poker stars account I will begin to read through poker stars TOS in an attempt to search for the most viable solution. Gerrard48LFC, thanks for the input learned something new about the play money stakes.

[bridgey321]

Wtf is escrow? Have heard of it but have no idea what it actually is. Just like a holding place for money in a way?

[Gerrard48LFC]

Wtf is escrow? Have heard of it but have no idea what it actually is. Just like a holding place for money in a way?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=escrow

you posted the 2nd option on there , right?

[bridgey321]

haahhaa yeah my urbandictionary alias is Tony :(

EDIT: Thanks btw

[Browen]

For our Premier League, I am holding all the buyins in escrow til we play the final table...am very interested to see this match happen!

[eldave1]

Skit Time:

bizkit: So, the empirical evidence that Plate has and I have pretty much closes the door on majority of the rigged arguments.
hithenose_home: How dare you disrespect ROCKART like this? I demand to play you or anyone who disagrees with ROCKART heads up right now! RIGHT NOW!
bizkit: Sorry, I don't check the thread every minute of every day. I'm perfectly content to play you heads up at the highest stake you offered. Also, I'd like us to accumulate a sample size as large as possible to give the best player the best chance at winning. Also, I'd prefer to play more tables to make this go quicker. Additionally an escrow'd amount would be a good thing to keep either party from attempting a hit and run.
ROCKART: HAHAHA BIZKIT sucks he wants you to play a slot machine game cause he's a horrible poker player.
eldave1: bizkit you're so arrogant and your challenge clearly wouldn't prove anything its like a marathon holy **** WSOP doesn't even do it like that
hithenose_home: I want to play lower even though I'm going to proceed to brag about all my "big" tournaments winnings. But I only have a few hundred dollars I can play with.
[other people chime in here about how a 50k sample size would be much better than a 1k]
bizkit: I want to play as high as we can possibly play. Although, currently with the escrow situation, I can't afford to play past 400 NL. I would also like to play as many hands as possible as the sample size you want to play is too tiny. I also am not going to play a long heads up for a few hundred dollars.
ROCKART: uh uh uh [lame insult here]
hithenose_home: I need some time to think about this.
eldave1: BIZKIT you can't possibly be serious you tried to throw this challenge out there cause you knew hithenose_home couldn't accept it. YOU'RE JUST SCARED TO PLAY HIM.
ROCKART: YEAH GENIUS! clearly bizkit's intentions here. He won't even post a screen name of his win rate man that guy's a joke.
bizkit: I can gladly give you 30 screen names of highly losing players if that makes you feel more content about your assumptions. I'll even given you one to start "eldave1" on full tilt poker. I have no intentions of posting a screen name that shows me winning at any level especially when I already have a scared heads up player contemplating whether or not to play me. Tell your buddy to start putting the money into stars and we'll see who is serious.


It's simple really. We both start to put money on Poker Stars and paste screen shots to Platesfish then provide our screen names to him and show him we can type in a Poker Stars chat for authenticity. The one with less money in their account has to put in more. I think, depending on the conditions and terms, each party will need somewhere between 6k-8k. Once we reach that point and all terms are agreed upon we can ship Plates or some other neutral party the escrow amount and start playing.


Just keep ignoring the arguements dudette:

A) No one wants to play in a foking tournament that is more complex then buying a house (and would take longer) and everyone knows you just set up the model because you knew that it would be impractical for anyone to play. Yeah - you're going to get someone to accept a 50 day poker challenge - what a fool.

B) Mr. Hyprocrite rides again - YOU are the one that started the screen name challenge - oh - and as a note - I am still waiting for you to provide the posts where you claimed you asked for my on several occassion and did not receive it. - Where are they junior? oh - Just another lie from Limpy. And despite the fact that you were the one that made the screen name challenge - it took you one post to back down from it with another lame ass excuse. So - the one challenge that you made which was immediately accepted you (1) post a lie, (2) back away from - such an obvious puss.

c) You keep citing your and Plate's emperical evidence but don't ever produce it as you criticize those that do not provide their evidence (of course you do cause you are limpy the hypo-critter).

You are so inane and live in such a fantasy world. Honest to God dude - I think the multi-tabling is impacting your nerve snyapses

[Gerrard48LFC]

Never has one thread make me lol so much. This thread is pure gold.

Who restarted this fire anyway?

[hithenose_home]

Listen no offense to anyone on the site but sorry if i do not trust complete strangers on teh internet. There is no chance that I would allow my funds to be held in an escrow account. Also on that note, obviously I do not trust you Bizkit to pay me if I beat you. So that being said I do not want to make a propisition bet. I want to play for the money, and that is it. I am willing to play 10,000 hands even if you want to do it so badly.

But I am only willing to do NL50. Let me know your thoughts.

[craigbor18]

someones afraid of the challenge!

[bizkit]

Listen no offense to anyone on the site but sorry if i do not trust complete strangers on teh internet. There is no chance that I would allow my funds to be held in an escrow account. Also on that note, obviously I do not trust you Bizkit to pay me if I beat you. So that being said I do not want to make a propisition bet. I want to play for the money, and that is it. I am willing to play 10,000 hands even if you want to do it so badly.

So there's no one and no escrow company anywhere in the world that you're willing to trust to get this accomplished? I don't expect you to trust me as I don't trust you at all either which is why we need some third party holding some type of escrow. Agreeing to play 10k hands is a good start.

But I am only willing to do NL50. Let me know your thoughts.

I have said since the beginning of the time we started talking about this I have no intention of playing this low. You're the one with all the supposed tournament winnings. You can go on bragging all day about how much you've won from poker but when it comes to putting up the money you're pretty much silent and can only commit a few hundred dollars? I'm not going to play when the absolute best case scenario is I take a few hundred dollars off you. We can juice the action by prop betting who will win the heads up various amounts or by playing higher. I'm also not going to give either player the conditions to hit and run from this challenge with no penalty.

[GarrethUoL]

Why don't you have two guys keeping the money in Escrow.
Platefish holding Bizkits as he trusts him, and Rockart holding hitthenose's as you two know each other.

[bizkit]

Why don't you have two guys keeping the money in Escrow.
Platefish holding Bizkits as he trusts him, and Rockart holding hitthenose's as you two know each other.

I don't like this at all. ROCKART has continually trashed me at various points in various threads. I'm pretty sure ROCKART is much closer to hithenose_home than I am to Platefish. So the probability of ROCKART saying "hahahaha LOSER" after hithenose_home hits and runs me is a lot higher than Platefish doing it.

[hithenose_home]

http://www.pokerpages.com/players/profiles/72929/michael-silverman.htm

There is my pokerpages just so you can shut up about my tournament winnings. Just because I have a lot of tournament winnings doesn't mean I am willing to risk 5k+ on a HU challenge. NL50 EASILY can get to 1-2k profit or more by 10,000 hands so don't tell me that it can't.

This is the challenge I have put forth. I do not want to make a prop bet, take the bet or leave it it is that simple. I am now willing to play 10,000 hands with you at NL50. If you do not want to play that, then its not worth talking about it anymore. Also come 2 weeks from now I wont even be able to play for a full month as i will be in vegas for wsop.



Talk to u later

[bridgey321]

Lol @ AKA "Micheal"

Not reallyyyyyy a nickname is it :rofl:

Nice tho. :thumbsup: I don't think Bizkit was questionning your winnings tho was he?

[bizkit]

http://www.pokerpages.com/players/profiles/72929/michael-silverman.htm

There is my pokerpages just so you can shut up about my tournament winnings. Just because I have a lot of tournament winnings doesn't mean I am willing to risk 5k+ on a HU challenge. NL50 EASILY can get to 1-2k profit or more by 10,000 hands so don't tell me that it can't.

I'm not saying that it can't. I certainly can't win more than you have in your account though, which you already indicated was a few hundred dollars. So now you're already assuming you're likely to lose a better part of 5k if you accept the challenge under my parameters, I see, glad reality is finally setting in.

This is the challenge I have put forth. I do not want to make a prop bet, take the bet or leave it it is that simple. I am now willing to play 10,000 hands with you at NL50. If you do not want to play that, then its not worth talking about it anymore. Also come 2 weeks from now I wont even be able to play for a full month as i will be in vegas for wsop.



Talk to u later

I'm not playing to win a couple hundred dollars off you. You can get Plates to confirm I have more than you do in poker stars if you'd like. I don't mind waiting on this we can just play after you come back. Maybe you'll have a million dollars in tournament winnings by then and you can afford to play me.

[hithenose_home]

I'm not saying that it can't. I certainly can't win more than you have in your account though, which you already indicated was a few hundred dollars. So now you're already assuming you're likely to lose a better part of 5k if you accept the challenge under my parameters, I see, glad reality is finally setting in.



I'm not playing to win a couple hundred dollars off you. You can get Plates to confirm I have more than you do in poker stars if you'd like. I don't mind waiting on this we can just play after you come back. Maybe you'll have a million dollars in tournament winnings by then and you can afford to play me.


All of this talk makes me want to just kick your ass on the felt and in person. I never said that I would lose the 5k, i just dont want to risk that much in one challenge vs 1 unknown player who could be better than me in HU, who knows? for the record I have never even claimed to be a great HU player, rather a great MTTer. Either way I am still very confident that I will beat you HU. I have close to $600 online now (won last night) and am ready to start this challenge today if you want to. At .25/.50. And you know that the winner of this challenge will most likely walk away with at least a 1k profit (only 20 Buyins)

[Mike]

1k profit isnt exactly much if you're playing >NL200 is it? If you're confident you'll beat him, I don't see the problem of sticking in a couple of $1000. Surely, that way you'll make the most money, right?

[bizkit]

All of this talk makes me want to just kick your ass on the felt and in person.

hahahaha nice. So lets do this man, buy in some more money so you can have your shot at making the first happen.

I never said that I would lose the 5k, i just dont want to risk that much in one challenge vs 1 unknown player who could be better than me in HU, who knows? for the record I have never even claimed to be a great HU player, rather a great MTTer. Either way I am still very confident that I will beat you HU.

So you're very confident you're going to win but scared to risk the money? I don't know man, that seems a bit contradictory to me. I always thought poker was about taking calculated positive expectation risks...but you're probably the better player here...tell me how I'm wrong?

I have close to $600 online now (won last night) and am ready to start this challenge today if you want to. At .25/.50. And you know that the winner of this challenge will most likely walk away with at least a 1k profit (only 20 Buyins)

So, I have over three times that in stars just idling right now. Get Platefish to verify your $600 I'll get Plates to verify my amount. Then you can deposit more. Or you can go back to saying how confident you are that you're going to beat me but afraid to play a little higher even though you supposedly have 60k+ in tournament winnings. Like I said before we can play later too but I'm not budging from my minimum stake requirement.

[hithenose_home]

Then i guess we dont have a challenge. I just dont like playing when i have $5,000+ in my account at a time. I have had bad times tilting

[bizkit]

Then i guess we dont have a challenge. I just dont like playing when i have $5,000+ in my account at a time. I have had bad times tilting

Oh man, I can't stop laughing. A good player that is scared to play a bad player and has bad times tilting....sure.

I'll make a few mini-concessions to try to induce you to play even though you're supposedly the likely better player(just to see what excuse you're going to use next). You don't have to have $5,000+ in your account. We can start playing NL 200 with $2,000 in the account and $3,000 each in escrow somewhere. You can leave the challenge at anytime after you lose $2,000(only ten buy ins), however, if you leave the challenge before that or 10k hands you lose the $3,000 in escrow. If either party loses the initial $2k they have a reasonable grace period to reload before the challenge continues or they can choose to quit and get their 3k back. Additionally, we can throw another thousand or couple thousand to whoever wins that will also be held by an escrow and not in your account. Happy?

[hithenose_home]

Im not scared that I will tilt to you, that would never happen. I am talking about buying into a 1,000 HU sit n go and then a 2,000 etc etc. dont want to do that

[hithenose_home]

And no I am not happy, I want to play the game that I suggested.

[bizkit]

Im not scared that I will tilt to you, that would never happen. I am talking about buying into a 1,000 HU sit n go and then a 2,000 etc etc. dont want to do that

Why would you randomly buy into a 1k or 2k sitngo especially when it would cost you 3k in escrow? In any event, unfortunately, this excuse won't work for you as you can set limits as to the maximum you're allowed to buy into before you even deposit. Please try another one.

Of course you're only content playing lower than I want to play even though you said you'd play up to 200NL before lol

[James]

okay well this does sound like a interesting challenge for the forum to have. We could even make a widget for the front page to keep players updated on it! Platefish or I would be happy to be the middle man in the escrow if you guys decide to go ahead with it ( and wish to use us). However before we accepted we would have to have a list of well thought out rules that both parties agree on so at the end of it we dont end up with the two parties disagreeing on whoes won.

[nickstrick1]

lol dave, funny how stressy we actually get about this guy!

[bridgey321]

Exams + **** like that = :mad:

[Mike]

lol you play the 25 hand bad.

[bizkit]

Just keep ignoring the arguements dudette:

Rather than ignore the argument as the "ZOMG its rigged" posters tend to do I'll break my no responding to eldave1 for this post. Take a deep breath man, it's ok.

A) No one wants to play in a foking tournament that is more complex then buying a house (and would take longer) and everyone knows you just set up the model because you knew that it would be impractical for anyone to play. Yeah - you're going to get someone to accept a 50 day poker challenge - what a fool.

It's not a tournament its a cash game. The model has significantly changed since I set the initial parameters. I've attempted to make it as practical for hithenose_home to play as possible. If you want to address these issues further please see the heads up thread (http://www.pokerisrigged.com/showthread.php?t=2937) and post there about it. I would have played a 50 day challenge without a problem so clearly its not impractical for "anyone".

B) Mr. Hyprocrite rides again - YOU are the one that started the screen name challenge - oh - and as a note - I am still waiting for you to provide the posts where you claimed you asked for my on several occassion and did not receive it. - Where are they junior? oh - Just another lie from Limpy. And despite the fact that you were the one that made the screen name challenge - it took you one post to back down from it with another lame ass excuse. So - the one challenge that you made which was immediately accepted you (1) post a lie, (2) back away from - such an obvious puss.

On many occasions with many different posters I asked them to provide their screen names. As I'm typing this there's 1205 posts in this thread. I feel its impractical to look through every single word of every single page looking for this information. If you want to do that and find no evidence this transpired then I will apologize for saying that remark. I haven't purposefully lied or backed away from most anything I said. Of course, I do admit the possibility that I could have made a mistake at some point in time over the course of this thread. Nobody's perfect.

c) You keep citing your and Plate's emperical evidence but don't ever produce it as you criticize those that do not provide their evidence (of course you do cause you are limpy the hypo-critter).

You are so inane and live in such a fantasy world. Honest to God dude - I think the multi-tabling is impacting your nerve snyapses

Instead of foaming out the mouth you could just do a quick search on the forum. The Rigged Test (http://www.pokerisrigged.com/showthread.php?t=924) This alone by itself isn't enough to discredit all rigged arguments. But post #98 makes me believe its likely there's no juiced preflop action. I'm sure Plates can provide you with a similiar postflop hands hit report to support there's no juiced postflop action. How many of these reports before you start conceding its possible that online poker isn't rigged?

[hithenose_home]

I said it before, and after further thought would enjoy playing NL50 more. Im not going up, you apparently won't play smaller so I guess we have no challenge. If anyone wants to play it will be fun and can track it through the site

[sewhog]

Originally Posted by eldave1
A) No one wants to play in a foking tournament that is more complex then buying a house (and would take longer) and everyone knows you just set up the model because you knew that it would be impractical for anyone to play. Yeah - you're going to get someone to accept a 50 day poker challenge - what a fool.
.
.
I can’t understand why anyone who thinks poker is rigged would risk playing for big money on the internet. I can under stand why anyone who thinks it is not rigged would. There is a solution which would fit into both you’re schedules. Play one of the upcoming live tournament have a side bet whoever lasts the longest wins, you both may end up on the same table that would be interesting
Bizkit if you have 50 days to spare it wouldn’t be a problem for you to play a live game

[Mike]

as far as ideas go sewhog, that's a pretty terrible one.

[eldave1]

There you go again.

Limpy: It's not a tournament its - a cash game.

Eldave - I stand corrected - No one wants to play in a foking CASH GAME that is more complex then buying a house (feel better?)

Limpy: The model has significantly changed since I set the initial parameters. I've attempted to make it as practical for hithenose_home to play as possible.

Eldave: I saw the thread – it’s still ridiculous – the fact that you even started with the DURRR Challenge model is illustrative of your unreasonableness.

Limpy: I would have played a 50 day challenge without a problem so clearly its not impractical for "anyone".

Eldave: I stand corrected; there is A person on the planet that finds a 50-day challenge practical. Congrats.

Limpy: On many occasions with many different posters I asked them to provide their screen names. As I'm typing this there's 1205 posts in this thread. I feel its impractical to look through every single word of every single page looking for this information. If you want to do that and find no evidence this transpired then I will apologize for saying that remark. I haven't purposefully lied or backed away from most anything I said. Of course, I do admit the possibility that I could have made a mistake at some point in time over the course of this thread. Nobody's perfect.

This is the quintessential Limpy.

1)You know as well as I you did not need to look through 1205 posts. You merely needed to look at your own to see if you had made the request. I know you know how to do that.
2)I did – I am awaiting your apology
3)AND – here is the real issue. It is almost irrelevant whether you asked for it or not in prior posts. What the point is – and this is so you – in one moment you call someone out for not providing their screen name to demonstrate their credentials (as if that was something important) and in the very next moment come up with a namby pamby excuse why you could not provide your screen name. i.e., if it was something that you thought was important when you typed the request originally – how is it in the very next post when yours is asked for all of a sudden it is something one would never provide. I’ll tell you why – you don’t have principles – if you did, your response would have been either (a) here it is (b) I’ll give you mine when you provide yours, or (c) You know, I made a mistake – I should have never thrown that screen name challenge thing down – my bust. Any one of those responses would have shown integrity – instead, you call me out (i.e., eldave you never responded to my request) instead of just fessing up. That’s why I always thought you must a kid – maybe 20, cause fully formed adults don’t do that. Even your latest diatribe is so dead bang you – you write as your excuse for confusing me with other posters –“ On many occasions with many different posters I asked them to provide their screen names.” Why the Fok would you ask them for their screen name in the first place Limpy if you thought it was improper for someone to share their screen name????? That’s pretty much why I have had to put you in the trash can of those I would listen to on this issue. I.e., you don’t have integrity – and that my friend is a shame because my read of your other posts lend me to believe that you are a knowledgeable, well read, experienced (at least on-line) player and may have been one of the folks that could have brought me to the non-rigged side (seriously) Sadly – you need to have values as well as knowledge to lead the charge on something like this.

Limpy: Instead of foaming out the mouth you could just do a quick search on the forum. The Rigged Test (http://www.pokerisrigged.com/showthread.php?t=924) This alone by itself isn't enough to discredit all rigged arguments. But post #98 makes me believe its likely there's no juiced preflop action. I'm sure Plates can provide you with a similiar postflop hands hit report to support there's no juiced postflop action. How many of these reports before you start conceding its possible that online poker isn't rigged?[

Eldave: I have read every post on this forum. I already believe it is “possible” that it isn’t rigged. As I have said before, my own personal experience and data leads me the other direction – and as I have said to Plate – if there isn’t an exposure/leak etc. within the next year – I will concede the point.

My final advice to you is to put down the poker books for a month or so and pick up a couple on ethics and principles – it’ll do you a world of good.

[bizkit]

after further thought would enjoy playing NL50 more

hithenose_home summarized:
"I threw out a challenge I knew I couldn't play as high as the limited I specified probably because I figured you wouldn't accept. I talked all this crap about all these winnings and how bad a player you are but can only produce a few hundred dollars to play against you. After I realized you would accept I tried to lower the stakes until I found a point where you would not accept claiming I would 'enjoy' it more."

Is there anybody besides ROCKART that believes your story?

[Mike]

ethics and principles. haha. awesome.

[bizkit]

Eldave - I stand corrected - No one wants to play in a foking CASH GAME that is more complex then buying a house (feel better?)

bizkit: I can write out 12 rules. So, no, I don't think its nearly as complex as buying a house.

Eldave: I saw the thread – it’s still ridiculous – the fact that you even started with the DURRR Challenge model is illustrative of your unreasonableness.

bizkit: So now Durrrrr's model is not a good one for statistical confidence in a heads up match? Sure....what exactly is ridiculous? hithenose_home stating he was willing to play a limit retracting it then only willing to play 2 levels lower is pretty ridiculous you're right.


Eldave: This is the quintessential Limpy.

1)You know as well as I you did not need to look through 1205 posts. You merely needed to look at your own to see if you had made the request. I know you know how to do that.
2)I did – I am awaiting your apology

bizkit: So I decided to take your advice and look up my posts. This is exactly what I said from post #1119:

Most of the empirical hand evidence for why its rigged is over an extremely small sample size mixed with how it makes you "feel". The bottom line is it's likely Plates has played probably at least 10x more online real money hands than any of the "rigged" posters. Now, I can't really say cause even though you guys(the rigged posters) who don't seem to play for any serious money online you still manage to not produce these hand histories or even the screen names. I probably have 10x that sample(Plates) that I have done various statistical things with. Additionally my sample consists of a few winning players playing a very large number of hands at various limits and on various different poker sites. Can we talk this now instead of random pointless insults or how things "feel"?

Check out post #437 ... Pretty clear to me I'm asking for your hand histories there. But way to try and twist my words and pretend like I said I asked for your exact screen name. Additionally, I'm not sure where I claimed I would give you mine.

Eldave: 3)AND – here is the real issue. It is almost irrelevant whether you asked for it or not in prior posts. What the point is – and this is so you – in one moment you call someone out for not providing their screen name to demonstrate their credentials (as if that was something important) and in the very next moment come up with a namby pamby excuse why you could not provide your screen name. i.e., if it was something that you thought was important when you typed the request originally – how is it in the very next post when yours is asked for all of a sudden it is something one would never provide. I’ll tell you why – you don’t have principles – if you did, your response would have been either (a) here it is (b) I’ll give you mine when you provide yours, or (c) You know, I made a mistake – I should have never thrown that screen name challenge thing down – my bust. Any one of those responses would have shown integrity – instead, you call me out (i.e., eldave you never responded to my request) instead of just fessing up. That’s why I always thought you must a kid – maybe 20, cause fully formed adults don’t do that. Even your latest diatribe is so dead bang you – you write as your excuse for confusing me with other posters –“ On many occasions with many different posters I asked them to provide their screen names.” Why the Fok would you ask them for their screen name in the first place Limpy if you thought it was improper for someone to share their screen name????? That’s pretty much why I have had to put you in the trash can of those I would listen to on this issue. I.e., you don’t have integrity – and that my friend is a shame because my read of your other posts lend me to believe that you are a knowledgeable, well read, experienced (at least on-line) player and may have been one of the folks that could have brought me to the non-rigged side (seriously) Sadly – you need to have values as well as knowledge to lead the charge on something like this.

bizkit: I think post #437 speaks for itself. You clearly didn't respond to my request. In any event this argument has nothing to do with integrity. You continually take my statements out of context and paraphrased and draw some moronic absolute conclusion from them. I think most people would agree there's not much integrity in that.

Eldave: I have read every post on this forum. I already believe it is “possible” that it isn’t rigged. As I have said before, my own personal experience and data leads me the other direction – and as I have said to Plate – if there isn’t an exposure/leak etc. within the next year – I will concede the point.

My final advice to you is to put down the poker books for a month or so and pick up a couple on ethics and principles – it’ll do you a world of good.

bizkit: Yes, I've read a great deal of the posts on here as well. It's no different from how its always been. The "rigged" players tend to be crybabies about their losses stating how they "feel" things are over small sample sizes or even one hand. Maybe you and ROCKART do it more passively in different ways than say Common_Terry, but in all seriousness what is the difference?

[eldave1]

Never ceases to amaze me:

bizkit: So now Durrrrr's model is not a good one for statistical confidence in a heads up match? Sure....what exactly is ridiculous? hithenose_home stating he was willing to play a limit retracting it then only willing to play 2 levels lower is pretty ridiculous you're right.

Eldave: - it's a great model for statistical confidence - it foking suks as a model for a heads up tourney amongst two relatively low stakes posters on a "is it rigged" forum. What a wad - I'll try again. The 16 game NFL season is a great model for determining who should go to the playoffs. It would suk as a model to determine who the better player is for two amatuers having a pissing contest on the I love the NFL site. Durrrrs model is a once in a lifetime, several month, multi-million dollar event amongst elite poker pros and you think it is the appropriate one for the challenge of the posters. Good God - what is in your bong pipe???

BizKit psoted.....: who don't seem to play for any serious money online you still manage to not produce these hand histories or even the SCREEN NAMES. I probably have 10x that sample(Plates) that I have done various statistical things with. Additionally my sample consists of a few winning PLAYERS playing a very large number of hands at various limits and on various different poker sites.

Bixkit: Check out post #437 ... Pretty clear to me I'm asking for your hand histories there. But way to try and twist my words and pretend like I said I asked for your exact screen name. Additionally, I'm not sure where I claimed I would give you mine.

A) I NEVER SAID YOU DID - I SAID YOU REFUSED AFTER CHALLENGING US THAT WE DID NOT PROVIDE OURS

B) YOUR FIRST NOTE IS CLEAR TO ME THAT YOU MEANT SCREEN NAMES OF THE PLAYER - IF YOU DID NOT THEN WHY IN THE FOK WOULD YOU:

* RESPOND TO THE POST ABOVE SAYING YOU HAD ASKED FOR MY SCREEN NAME (THAT IS PRETTY EXACT) DOZENS OF TIMES

* IN THIS LATEST RESPONSE - READ THE POST BEFORE - YOU INDICATED YOU HAVE ASKED FOR DOZENS OF THESE AND THEREFORE YOU COULD NOT GO THROUGH THE POSTS

[I]So, I guess I can only conclude that screen name does not equal screen name. AND - if you really meant something else (which I don't believe) why the fok didn't you simply say that about 20 posts ago. Here - since you like screen plays so much I'll give you an example;

ElDave: "I provided you mine, so what is your screen name Biz?
Boz: Oh - Eldave - I didn't mean your "screen name" I meant the name of your screen.
Eldave: wow - okay then. ?

Basically - you continue to be a total joke. PLEASE - keep your earlier promise and stop responding to my posts.

[sewhog]

as far as ideas go sewhog, that's a pretty terrible one.

If both players start with $20,000 and play for 50 days the rake nibbles away at both stacks how much will be left for the eventual winner?
The other alternative is to play an upcoming live tournament like I suggested earlier. This way it doesn’t take time from anyone’s schedule no sitting at a computer for 50 days. The side bet for $20,000 is rake free nice profit for eventual winner. No one can say it is rigged.
The real issue is. Who is the better player those who believe online is rigged or those who believe it are not rigged.

[bridgey321]

And that will be settled by a last longer in 1 tournament? lol

[bizkit]

Seriously back to bizkit skits:

bizkit: So there's a difference between a heads up cash game and a heads up tournament.
eldave1: OK OK I GET THAT. BTW, you're a liar, an unethical person & afraid to play hithenose_home heads up
bizkit: Actually, he's the one cowering from playing even after we agreed to play significantly less hands he won't play the limits outlined from his initial post. See post #1209 for what I have to say about the rest.
eldave1: THAT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING BECAUSE THE INITIAL MODEL WAS HORRIBLE. WHAT A HORRIBLE MODEL TO PLAY A HEADS UP TOURNEY.
[bizkit thought]: How many times does it take to get it through your retarded brain the difference between a cash game and tournament?
eldave1: I'M SO ANGRY RIGHT NOW I HAVE TO TYPE IN CAPS FOR A FEW MORE MINUTES. YOU SAID YOU WOULD GIVE ME YOUR SCREEN NAME AFTER I GAVE YOU MINE. [insert 20 more things that make no logical sense to anyone here] Ok, I feel better now.
bizkit: So when exactly did I promise this?
sewdog: ZOMG guys did someone say heads up tournament?! I've got it! Lets play one single live tourney and make a 20k sidebet(hithenose_home won't even deposit a few thousand dollars on poker stars btw) on who will last longer! This will definitely settle the issue of who the better players are those who believe poker is rigged or those who believe it is not.
[bizkit's only proper response]: lol.

[ROCKART]

hithenose_home summarized:
"I threw out a challenge I knew I couldn't play as high as the limited I specified probably because I figured you wouldn't accept. I talked all this crap about all these winnings and how bad a player you are but can only produce a few hundred dollars to play against you. After I realized you would accept I tried to lower the stakes until I found a point where you would not accept claiming I would 'enjoy' it more."

Is there anybody besides ROCKART that believes your story?

first off bizkit, you come up with this scenario that mirrors a game that two of the top pros in the world played. that, in itself, is ridiculous. i think maybe you watch too much tv.

THEN, you keep wanting to raise and raise and raise the stakes, but the few hands you have posted online have been either at 25-50 or 50-1 games.

you have 5k in your account but you play 50 cent bb cash games?

all leading me back to the original theory - which is that you want to make this so difficult, with so many stipulations, that it is impossible to follow through with. that, in turn, will allow you to not play without losing face.

and wheres your tournament winnings webpage?

hell, when have you even said your online name so that your "extreme profitability" can be verified?

this whole thing is a joke. im guessing that if mike did get that money online, and was willing to play under your guidelines, you would find some other obscure reason why a HU match wouldnt be doable.

[sewhog]

Some post bizkit. Reading between the lines it’s obvious that your post is a lame attempt to divert a real topic to some form of slap stick humour. A sign that you have lost even before the game begins. Afraid to play live I think :fubar:

[craigbor18]

no sewhog, he did it because your idea wos so retarded. U cant say that whoever lasts the longest in one live tornie is the best player. U obviously dont know anything about poker. Its like saying lets me and you play ten hands heads up and huever is up after ten hands is a better player. grrrr people like u annoy me

[craigbor18]

both arguements and the reasoning from both rockart and bizkit is so sound, i really dont know which to believe, but rockart is right, to settle this bizkit, jus give us ur username so thatwe can look u up!

[craigbor18]

btw hitthenose, i am willing to play you heads up but my challenge is simpler... play 750 nlh 5dollar hu turbo sngs, huever wins the most wins the prop bet, you name the price of the prop bet too... if ur interested lemee know.

[Browen]

hithenose_home summarized:
"I threw out a challenge I knew I couldn't play as high as the limited I specified probably because I figured you wouldn't accept. I talked all this crap about all these winnings and how bad a player you are but can only produce a few hundred dollars to play against you. After I realized you would accept I tried to lower the stakes until I found a point where you would not accept claiming I would 'enjoy' it more."

Is there anybody besides ROCKART that believes your story?

bizkit, question: If you were to play this challenge against HTNH at NL50, how much would you want to be at stake for winning the thing? The main point wouldn't be the money won during the challenge, rather the prize at the end. In the durrrr challenge, the $1.5m at stake is likely to be as large/larger than the winnings from the match itself.

To summarise, if you can agree on a substantial enough amount to play for in the match, I think this challenge can still go ahead.

[GarrethUoL]

Yeah good point Browen... you guys could have like a $1.5k wager or something, for NL50 over 10,000 hands...that way even if you only win $200 or something in the event (which someone will win more I would assume), the winner still makes a decent amount.

If at any point someone wants to leave the challenge, they still have to pay the $1.5k

[Pates]

THEN, you keep wanting to raise and raise and raise the stakes, but the few hands you have posted online have been either at 25-50 or 50-1 games.

you have 5k in your account but you play 50 cent bb cash games?

all leading me back to the original theory - which is that you want to make this so difficult, with so many stipulations, that it is impossible to follow through with. that, in turn, will allow you to not play without losing face.

and wheres your tournament winnings webpage?

hell, when have you even said your online name so that your "extreme profitability" can be verified?

this whole thing is a joke. im guessing that if mike did get that money online, and was willing to play under your guidelines, you would find some other obscure reason why a HU match wouldnt be doable.

I have to agree with most of this, Bizkit. I don't see why you don't just play lower stakes and make a compromise rather than making rules that hithenose clearly doesn't want to play.

Do what Browen says - Just play NL50 and then have $250-$500 for the winner. Keep it small, there's no need to play higher stakes to settle a dispute about "who is better"

[hithenose_home]

btw hitthenose, i am willing to play you heads up but my challenge is simpler... play 750 nlh 5dollar hu turbo sngs, huever wins the most wins the prop bet, you name the price of the prop bet too... if ur interested lemee know.

Agreed, but this will be tough to play 750 is a lot to play, and also how would we sign up for that many sit n go's together?? Other people would join too quickly IMO

I have to agree with most of this, Bizkit. I don't see why you don't just play lower stakes and make a compromise rather than making rules that hithenose clearly doesn't want to play.

Do what Browen says - Just play NL50 and then have $250-$500 for the winner. Keep it small, there's no need to play higher stakes to settle a dispute about "who is better"

I would agree to this, but I am afraid that I just do not trust anyone on the site besides Rockart to hold monies till the end of the challenge. And bizkit earlier said he wouldn't want me giving the money to rockart to hold for me because he doesn't trust rock. I agree to play 10,000 hands at NL50 and have a prop bet of say $250 to the winner. Keep it small, and I guarantee the winner still makes $1.5k overall.

[Pates]

I'm happy to hold money during the challenge. A logical choice would be either me or James seeing as we have the most to lose by deviating from the agreement. I really don't think Bizkit would ever accept giving money to a friend you know in real life who has shown hostility to him. Here is what should be done:

- Money is held by one of the PIR admins
- Play low limits but not so low that rake takes a big chunk (you can work out how much rake will be taken) over 15-20k hands
- The winner gets a monetary prize already agreed

If you guys pull out then I'm more than happy to jump in and play ;) I'm busy for quite a while though so wouldn't be able to committ until the mid August.

[craigbor18]

is there any way on stars you can get a restricted table then hitthenose, to make sure other people wudnt join? wot sorta price prop bet wud u wana play 4?

[hithenose_home]

Whatever you want is fine with me. I think 100 games is better than 750. If you avg 50 hands per game tahts 5,000 hands there. I would do any prop bet you want $250 and under. Also no i dont think that we can get restricted tables..... Anybody have an answer to this??

Would you want to play HU cash?

[craigbor18]

i don't play much cash, so wouldn't wanna play against anyone at cash tables. There must be some way we can sort summiink out wiv stars. Bingo! its jus came to me, when you play heads up sng after it asks if u wanna rematch, so we just keep say yes every time a torny ends and it will start us on anuva one!

[craigbor18]

100 aint a big enough sample size for me tbh, n i think hu turbo will only be an average on 30ish hands or so probs, correct me if im wrong. so i mean it would probs ave to be 300 minimum for me really....

[hithenose_home]

Thats fine i will play as many as you want. But the problem will be how do we play together with the tournaments filling up so fast?

[hithenose_home]

i don't play much cash, so wouldn't wanna play against anyone at cash tables. There must be some way we can sort summiink out wiv stars. Bingo! its jus came to me, when you play heads up sng after it asks if u wanna rematch, so we just keep say yes every time a torny ends and it will start us on anuva one!

Yes that is correct, but how do we get the first one!? I guess we will need to talk through AIM?

[hithenose_home]

And also we would need to play at least 2 at a time

[bizkit]

1) I don't really care who anyone thinks is the better player. I don't really care who has more in winnings and frankly it would just complicate matters and divert away from the actual subject. I don't want to play strictly for "fun" for a few hundred dollars. I want to play for somewhere in the 4 figure range(likely to be between $3000-$8000). I have not stipulated playing any limit below 200NL except to try to induce hithenose_home to be more likely to accept the challenge.
2) I don't mind a large sum being paid to whoever wins, however, I think hithenose_home is less likely to accept this type of challenge unless ROCKART is holding his money. Clearly, he's willing to play if he can get out of paying me but any actual intermediary holding the money and he goes back to his shell. Of course, there are many poker players who would hold the money who have much more to lose in credability that we can attempt to use to hold the money for a few percent if somehow hithenose_home feels the "poker is rigged" admin's isn't good enough. Someone asked the minimum amount I'm willing to accept on this. It would really come down to how many hands we played & at what stakes. 10k hands at 50 NL; I think the number should be around 3k although, of course, I would prefer to play more hands and for a greater sidebet. Or 200NL with a simple escrow'd "no hit and run" clause.
3) I have never at any point said I have $5,000 in my poker stars account. In fact, I clearly said I estimated I had an amount a little over 3 times what hithenose_home said he had. This is not really hard to verify(I am willing to verify this through Platefish on my side as long as he is willing to do the same). If he is able to verify the amount with Plates is higher I will go through the trouble of depositing more money for this challenge. I hope we don't have to go through this again because I have said this many times before.

But I'd like to go on record as estimating there's at least an 80% probability one of the following is true:
-hithenose_home may have the money to play the match but is scared or will use some other excuse that basically equates to him being scared to play.
-hithenose_home doesn't even have enough money to deposit an amount equal to the small amount I have in my stars account right now idling.

And this just in:
And also we would need to play at least 2 at a time

LOL why can you play at least 2 at a time with him but at most 2 at a time with me? what a joke.

[hithenose_home]

But I'd like to go on record as estimating there's at least an 80% probability one of the following is true:
-hithenose_home may have the money to play the match but is scared or will use some other excuse that basically equates to him being scared to play.
-hithenose_home doesn't even have enough money to deposit an amount equal to the small amount I have in my stars account right now idling.

LOL!!!!! Thats like saying.
- Today may be a sunny day
- Today is not a sunny day


LOL why can you play at least 2 at a time with him but at most 2 at a time with me? what a joke.

Yes I am willing to play two HU Sit n gos for $6 at the same time all day. There is great difference in the amount of money on the line in a $6 sit n go and a 50-100$ cash game just 8.5-16x more money on teh table, no big deal.

[GarrethUoL]

Hitthenose and craigbor... maybe an admin on the site can get stars to set you two up a passworded table? although you will have to pay rake I'm sure!

[hithenose_home]

Is this possible to set uP Platefish?

[bizkit]

This is just ridiculous. First of all the arrogance that comes off from you bizkit is repulsive. Much like Plate wants to challenge Rock to play 100,000 hands at NL25, i have a challenge for you. Since you are so confident I would like to challenge you to a heads up challenge. The challenge doesn't need to be long, say 1,000 hands. And we can play NL25/50/100/200. Whatever you want. The challenge can be played live also (I would prefer) but obviously I don't think that is possible.

After reading your threads, I think that you are so defensive about online play because you are just a bad live player. You probably have many nervous tells, and this is why you like to hide behind your monitor.

So basically you tried to call me out but can't even afford to play the limits you stipulated from the original start of the challenge you attempted to make? There's not two possibilities there's four:

1) You don't have the money to play & you're probably scared.
2) You don't have the money to play & you're probably not scared.
3) You have the money to play & you're probably scared.
4) You have the money to play & you're probably not scared.

Let's go over each possibility. #1 or #2 I don't really care that much about because obviously you can't play me unless you get the money. However, you shouldn't have stipulated that you could play certain limits when its quite obvious you couldn't. If it's #3 then you shouldn't have initiated the challenge in the first place and you're a cowardly scumbag low life(pretty likely unless you lied about your cardplayer and in that case you're still a scumbag). If it's #4 why haven't you attempted to buy in more money?

[Litellio]

Why don't you guys just not play each other, because at the end of the day, it's about making monies...right?

[eldave1]

1) I don't really care who anyone thinks is the better player. I don't really care who has more in winnings and frankly it would just complicate matters and divert away from the actual subject. I don't want to play strictly for "fun" for a few hundred dollars. I want to play for somewhere in the 4 figure range(likely to be between $3000-$8000). I have not stipulated playing any limit below 200NL except to try to induce hithenose_home to be more likely to accept the challenge.
2) I don't mind a large sum being paid to whoever wins, however, I think hithenose_home is less likely to accept this type of challenge unless ROCKART is holding his money. Clearly, he's willing to play if he can get out of paying me but any actual intermediary holding the money and he goes back to his shell. Of course, there are many poker players who would hold the money who have much more to lose in credability that we can attempt to use to hold the money for a few percent if somehow hithenose_home feels the "poker is rigged" admin's isn't good enough. Someone asked the minimum amount I'm willing to accept on this. It would really come down to how many hands we played & at what stakes. 10k hands at 50 NL; I think the number should be around 3k although, of course, I would prefer to play more hands and for a greater sidebet. Or 200NL with a simple escrow'd "no hit and run" clause.
3) I have never at any point said I have $5,000 in my poker stars account. In fact, I clearly said I estimated I had an amount a little over 3 times what hithenose_home said he had. This is not really hard to verify(I am willing to verify this through Platefish on my side as long as he is willing to do the same). If he is able to verify the amount with Plates is higher I will go through the trouble of depositing more money for this challenge. I hope we don't have to go through this again because I have said this many times before.

But I'd like to go on record as estimating there's at least an 80% probability one of the following is true:
-hithenose_home may have the money to play the match but is scared or will use some other excuse that basically equates to him being scared to play.
-hithenose_home doesn't even have enough money to deposit an amount equal to the small amount I have in my stars account right now idling.

And this just in:


LOL why can you play at least 2 at a time with him but at most 2 at a time with me? what a joke.


Why don't we just conclude this ain't gonna happen.

Biz wants to play as many hands as possible to reduce variance:

AND

It has to be worth his while - several thousand dollars and much higher then either his or HITS PS balance.

AND

Money to be placed into an escrow account (to an unknown entity to HIT)

Even if one was to assume for the sake of argument that the above is reasonable to any party (I assume BIZ thinks it is) it is certainly just as reasonable to assume it would not be acceptable to the other party. For example, I think it would be insane to send $$ to hold to someone (a stranger) on the internet - my opinion anyway. Verry few people, especially anyone with a job, a wife or a life would have a very hard time committing to the time required to complete the number of hands.

So - HIT made a challenge - it was not accepted
Biz made a counter challenge - it was not accepted
etc
etc

Isn't this one dead? This is no longer about poker - it is about who can out challenge who. Given the extreme differences it what is viewed as a reasonable match - this was never going to happen in the first place.

One aside given the amounts we are talking about, am I the only person on the planet that has deposit limts? Mine our $600 per 24 hours, $2,000 a month (I use insta check as the deposit mechanism). Do you all have something that gives you the flexibilty to put $5K in your account within any reasonable amount of time?

[eldave1]

Seriously back to bizkit skits:

bizkit: So there's a difference between a heads up cash game and a heads up tournament.
eldave1: OK OK I GET THAT. BTW, you're a liar, an unethical person & afraid to play hithenose_home heads up
bizkit: Actually, he's the one cowering from playing even after we agreed to play significantly less hands he won't play the limits outlined from his initial post. See post #1209 for what I have to say about the rest.
eldave1: THAT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING BECAUSE THE INITIAL MODEL WAS HORRIBLE. WHAT A HORRIBLE MODEL TO PLAY A HEADS UP TOURNEY.
[bizkit thought]: How many times does it take to get it through your retarded brain the difference between a cash game and tournament?
eldave1: I'M SO ANGRY RIGHT NOW I HAVE TO TYPE IN CAPS FOR A FEW MORE MINUTES. YOU SAID YOU WOULD GIVE ME YOUR SCREEN NAME AFTER I GAVE YOU MINE. [insert 20 more things that make no logical sense to anyone here] Ok, I feel better now.
bizkit: So when exactly did I promise this?
sewdog: ZOMG guys did someone say heads up tournament?! I've got it! Lets play one single live tourney and make a 20k sidebet(hithenose_home won't even deposit a few thousand dollars on poker stars btw) on who will last longer! This will definitely settle the issue of who the better players are those who believe poker is rigged or those who believe it is not.
[bizkit's only proper response]: lol.


Love the way you go to screen plays each time you lose an arguement.

[bizkit]

Why don't you guys just not play each other, because at the end of the day, it's about making monies...right?

This is what it was all about to me in the first place anyway. Why do you think I try to lock them into playing for an extended period of time?

Biz wants to play as many hands as possible to reduce variance:

Pretty sure we were both fine with 10,000 hands but thanks for more horrible input.

It has to be worth his while - several thousand dollars and much higher then either his or HITS PS balance.

I haven't been playing on stars so naturally I don't have my entire life savings in there. It's a completely moot point though because hithenose_home can't or won't deposit money anyway.

Money to be placed into an escrow account (to an unknown entity to HIT)

It doesn't have to be an unknown, just someone willing to pay me my money when and if I were to win.

Verry few people, especially anyone with a job, a wife or a life would have a very hard time committing to the time required to complete the number of hands.

More awful excuses here...it's like we all play poker here. Some in our spare time; some more so than that. He was perfectly ok with committing the time to play as well.


One aside given the amounts we are talking about, am I the only person on the planet that has deposit limts? Mine our $600 per 24 hours, $2,000 a month (I use insta check as the deposit mechanism). Do you all have something that gives you the flexibilty to put $5K in your account within any reasonable amount of time?

You can ask them to raise your echeck limits and they are other ways of depositing. Additionally, if you happen to know players with a great deal of cash in their Poker Stars accounts its fairly easy to do transfers.

Love the way you go to screen plays each time you lose an arguement.

So when you start foaming at the mouth rambling on typing in caps for a few paragraphs about nonsense that probably doesn't even make sense to you now I'm losing an argument? Hate to see what would happen to you if you actually realized you lost then.


It's amazing the lengths you'll go to try to spin how hithenose_home isn't a cowardly piece of trash. But, you can't really spin this just like you can't spin your winrate. Oh wait, you do try and spin that with whole online poker being rigged thing. Pretty good, but at the end of the day, he's still a coward and you're still a -EV poker player. So, I guess, I'm done with you guys unless one of you grows a pair and steps up and plays. Good luck with that...

[ROCKART]

So, I guess, I'm done with you guys unless one of you grows a pair and steps up and plays. Good luck with that...

ok Bizkit, i challenge you to a $10,000,000.00 US dollar heads-up cash game. this will take place over 88,519 hands. we need to play exactly 1900 hands a day between the hours of 3am EST and 9 am EST.

let me know

[Mike]

ok Bizkit, i challenge you to a $10,000,000.00 US dollar heads-up cash game. this will take place over 88,519 hands. we need to play exactly 1900 hands a day between the hours of 3am EST and 9 am EST.

let me know

oh wow, good strawman :clap:

[Litellio]

oh wow, good strawman :clap:

Had to look up what a strawman argument was. But yes :clap:

[bizkit]

ok Bizkit, i challenge you to a $10,000,000.00 US dollar heads-up cash game. this will take place over 88,519 hands. we need to play exactly 1900 hands a day between the hours of 3am EST and 9 am EST.

let me know

-I was willing to play for an amount approximately around 1/10th what your friend claims he has had in tournament "winnings". A bit more reasonable than 10 million dollars no? This, additionally, was also at a stake that he outlined from the very first post he would be able to play.
-I'm sorry for assuming hithenose_home was a serious player and could play a 50k hand sample in a couple months. However, I was willing to agree to play as few as 10k hands to make this happen which I don't think your friend had a problem with.
-I was also willing to play most any reasonable hours to make this happen.

So don't compare a straw man challenge we both know neither of us can play to mine to cover up for your retarded cowardly friend.

[eldave1]

It's amazing the lengths you'll go to try to spin how hithenose_home isn't a cowardly piece of trash. But, you can't really spin this just like you can't spin your winrate. Oh wait, you do try and spin that with whole online poker being rigged thing. Pretty good, but at the end of the day, he's still a coward and you're still a -EV poker player. So, I guess, I'm done with you guys unless one of you grows a pair and steps up and plays. Good luck with that...[/QUOTE]

Okay - here is my deal:

* Play on Full Tilt
* $1,000 buy in (with my current balance - I can get that amount on there tomorrow). If you want to recommend a lower amount - fine - but I am cool with a $1,000.
* You can recommend a blind structure (I'm open)
* Match to last 8 hours or until a player is busted - whatever comes first. Each player has the option to post up to another $1,000 should they get busted (player option).
* Time - generally I am open any Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday between the hours of 7am and 6pm pacific time
* No escrow account

[bizkit]

Okay - here is my deal:

* Play on Full Tilt
* $1,000 buy in (with my current balance - I can get that amount on there tomorrow). If you want to recommend a lower amount - fine - but I am cool with a $1,000.
* You can recommend a blind structure (I'm open)
* Match to last 8 hours or until a player is busted - whatever comes first. Each player has the option to post up to another $1,000 should they get busted (player option).
* Time - generally I am open any Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday between the hours of 7am and 6pm pacific time
* No escrow account

Issues I have with this:
* I don't have any money on Full Tilt Poker right now so I may need a few days to get that sorted out assuming we can agree on terms.
* NL 200 at preferably a minimum of two tables is what I'd like. Should come up with a minimum stack requirement(80bb's then reload to 100bb's maybe?), obviously I want to play as deep as possible.
* I don't think time will be an issue as I can pretty much play whenever I want. But, since your schedule seems to be fairly flexible, why not being willing to commit to more hours?
* Escrow is the biggest issue for me. I want some accountability to keep either party from doing anything shady. If you don't have a faith in Plates or James holding a little bit of money as the third party this is probably not going to happen.

[eldave1]

Issues I have with this:
* I don't have any money on Full Tilt Poker right now so I may need a few days to get that sorted out assuming we can agree on terms.
* NL 200 at preferably a minimum of two tables is what I'd like. Should come up with a minimum stack requirement(80bb's then reload to 100bb's maybe?), obviously I want to play as deep as possible.
* I don't think time will be an issue as I can pretty much play whenever I want. But, since your schedule seems to be fairly flexible, why not being willing to commit to more hours?
* Escrow is the biggest issue for me. I want some accountability to keep either party from doing anything shady. If you don't have a faith in Plates or James holding a little bit of money as the third party this is probably not going to happen.

* Needing some days to get money on FT - yep - I can see that

* I never would play two tables - just not my style (remember my forte is live play where you never do this). I can understand if this is important to you - I just wouldn't do it because it would probably be a disadvantage to me.

* More hours - I would consider that - nowhere near a month - but 3 days or so.

* Would never do escrow - so if that is a deal breaker for me as much as it is for you. So - guess this isn't going to happen

I'll Let you get back to HIT

[bizkit]

* I never would play two tables - just not my style (remember my forte is live play where you never do this). I can understand if this is important to you - I just wouldn't do it because it would probably be a disadvantage to me.

ROFL, I've probably played more hands live than anyone on this forum. It's not that important to me it just means I'd have to set the stakes higher to get more money in play at once. Obviously, I'd prefer to play more hands than less though.

* Would never do escrow - so if that is a deal breaker for me as much as it is for you. So - guess this isn't going to happen

I'll Let you get back to HIT

W/e I'm not letting you hit and run if somehow you manage to win a stack off me or using a challenge to scrape my fullt tilt sn. Well, not for free anyway :)

[Mike]

lol @ the idea of not being able to play a couple of tables against the SAME opponent.

[eldave1]

lol @ the idea of not being able to play a couple of tables against the SAME opponent.


Mike: not sure why you feel it is "LOL". I am physically able to play two tables at once - I am not sure why you think it would be strategic for anyone to do this at anytime - HU's or not. As I have said before, I am predominately a live player - I would never consider playing more then one table at once. If you read poker - there are many pros who play multible tables online (Madasow for example) - However, there are many who recommend against it as they believe for each table you are playing you diminish your ability. Anyway, you will find that totally rational people can have polar opposite views on the wisdom of playing multiple tables. I just happen to be on the single table side.

[eldave1]

ROFL, I've probably played more hands live than anyone on this forum. It's not that important to me it just means I'd have to set the stakes higher to get more money in play at once. Obviously, I'd prefer to play more hands than less though.


W/e I'm not letting you hit and run if somehow you manage to win a stack off me or using a challenge to scrape my fullt tilt sn. Well, not for free anyway :)

For on-line, If $1,000 isn't high enough stakes for you on a single table -
okay - then it won't happen.

Not sure what the relevance is - but I doubt that you have played more hands live then anyone on this forum. I have been playing live for 30 years off and on. I am retired now and I play normally at least 5 live tourneys a week. You play live games more than that? The tourneys range from 20 dollar multiple re-buys to straight $300 buy ins. Not sure what stakes you normally play - but that is typically my range. I prefer tourneys to cash - but when I play straight cash, it is almost always $2/$3 blinds, $100 NL. Anyway - if you have more years/hands of playing then that - kudos I guess.

I won't do escrow - show stopper for me. I have burned on the internet too many times.

I am also confused about what stakes you play (i.e., you keep citing it is not worth it to you) In your blog of May 2009 you reference .50/$1.00 blinds (I am assuming either at $100 or $200NL). Even at 6 tables, that is small. Has your pace increased significantly since then? Just curious.

[Mike]

*yawn* yes, lets pretend all the pros were talking about multitabling in the context of playing HU against the same villain...:rofl:

[bizkit]

For on-line, If $1,000 isn't high enough stakes for you on a single table -
okay - then it won't happen.

Obviously, I had stipulated these stakes were ok. I really can't tell if you're purposefully being annoying or you're just that dumb.

Not sure what the relevance is - but I doubt that you have played more hands live then anyone on this forum. I have been playing live for 30 years off and on. I am retired now and I play normally at least 5 live tourneys a week. You play live games more than that? The tourneys range from 20 dollar multiple re-buys to straight $300 buy ins. Not sure what stakes you normally play - but that is typically my range. I prefer tourneys to cash - but when I play straight cash, it is almost always $2/$3 blinds, $100 NL. Anyway - if you have more years/hands of playing then that - kudos I guess.

If you count the number of hands you played which obviously you haven't or can't even give a rough estimate I would still have probably likely played more. I am not 100% sure either way. BTW, any hand from a $20 rebuy just doesn't even count as a hand. Neither should 100 NL really.

I won't do escrow - show stopper for me. I have burned on the internet too many times.

Of course you don't want an escrow. It keeps you from doing all the shady things you probably intended to do. I would throw in its likely that you strawman'd this from the beginning knowing I wouldn't accept because of this term. But, I just don't think you're intelligent enough to plan that out.

I am also confused about what stakes you play (i.e., you keep citing it is not worth it to you) In your blog of May 2009 you reference .50/$1.00 blinds (I am assuming either at $100 or $200NL). Even at 6 tables, that is small. Has your pace increased significantly since then? Just curious.

Of course you're confused because you can't read or maybe its comprehension that's the problem. You see what you want to see or read what you want to read to support your foolish negative disbeliefs. It's the same with online poker being rigged. It's pretty clear in the blog I would be playing higher but I've had issues depositing as they aren't accepting my check card like they did with the initial deposit.

[eldave1]

Obviously, I had stipulated these stakes were ok. I really can't tell if you're purposefully being annoying or you're just that dumb.

If you count the number of hands you played which obviously you haven't or can't even give a rough estimate I would still have probably likely played more. I am not 100% sure either way. BTW, any hand from a $20 rebuy just doesn't even count as a hand. Neither should 100 NL really.

Of course you don't want an escrow. It keeps you from doing all the shady things you probably intended to do. I would throw in its likely that you strawman'd this from the beginning knowing I wouldn't accept because of this term. But, I just don't think you're intelligent enough to plan that out.

Of course you're confused because you can't read or maybe its comprehension that's the problem. You see what you want to see or read what you want to read to support your foolish negative disbeliefs. It's the same with online poker being rigged. It's pretty clear in the blog I would be playing higher but I've had issues depositing as they aren't accepting my check card like they did with the initial deposit.

Limpy - you just continue to be a total WAD - you cannot even carry on a decent conversation without your typical BS. If I misunderstood that you were okay with the $1,000 - WTF - then $1,000 it is.

All you have said in that you played more live hands then anyone here - you didn't provide a count. At least I foking described what my background and playing frequency is. Limpy you suk for so many reasons - but they certainly include these:

* You sell yourself as a big time poker player but for some reason you have difficulty depositing the smallest amount funds of (hmm - I have been playing on-line so long now I get the courtesy of insta checks straight into my account).

* You berate others as losers but have never provided any verifiable info on yourself.

* You say you have more expereince live - but again - nada in the data department.

* This escrow thing of yours is just a foking sham and most posters on this site know that. At the end of the day - you have been the person throwing out the strawmans. (I love the fact you want folks to go throuhg the ass ache of escrow when you don't even have any substantial funds on the site in the first foking place.)

This is who you are:

* High school grad - barely.
* I'm guessing you live in some dank basement in London
* You deal poker (only job you could get) and watch the real players play and somehow think that makes you a player.
* You've probably never made more then $30K a year in your life and are living on in the delusion that you will make your riches in Poker - probably got a poster of Phil H on your wall somewhere.
* You support your frail ego by attacking others on the internet. You love it because in hyperspace, no one can see the pimply face teenager for who he is.

Stop pretending that you are something you are not. You live in a fantasty world and need help.

[bizkit]

Limpy - you just continue to be a total WAD - you cannot even carry on a decent conversation without your typical BS. If I misunderstood that you were okay with the $1,000 - WTF - then $1,000 it is.

I'm supposedly the one who can't carry on a decent conversation but look at the bolded reply. Does this really even make any sense to you?

All you have said in that you played more live hands then anyone here - you didn't provide a count. At least I foking described what my background and playing frequency is. Limpy you suk for so many reasons - but they certainly include these:

I said "probably" you're the one that went on and on with your nonsense abouot how much you've supposedly played. If I explained my play history you'd just attack and attempt to discredit it. So what's the point really? Oh yes, its to get out of putting out a number so I can tell you who has likely played more.

* You sell yourself as a big time poker player but for some reason you have difficulty depositing the smallest amount funds of (hmm - I have been playing on-line so long now I get the courtesy of insta checks straight into my account).

I know you're an expert with depositing money and all but I just haven't had to do it all that much.

* You berate others as losers but have never provided any verifiable info on yourself.

I just don't have a screen name or graph I can show you that is anywhere close to as far as in the negative as you are. I could find someone else's and paste it here to make you feel better about playing if that will do the trick. It's not really berating it's the truth (http://i42.tinypic.com/13zdbaa.jpg).

* You say you have more expereince live - but again - nada in the data department.

There's no data sir. Just like you don't have any data. It's me listing out all the places I've played and at what hours. Then, we go through the whole "well I don't believe you" run around. I just don't care that much. If you want to believe in your own little world you've played more live poker that's fine.

* This escrow thing of yours is just a foking sham and most posters on this site know that. At the end of the day - you have been the person throwing out the strawmans. (I love the fact you want folks to go throuhg the ass ache of escrow when you don't even have any substantial funds on the site in the first foking place.)

You're the one that selected Full Tilt Poker which I haven't really ever played on so I obviously have $0 is funds there. However, I do have substantially more funds than you on two different other sites one that I haven't even been actively playing on. But I do have the funds to play $1,000 heads up cash plus an escrow to play outside of this money...do you?


This is who you are:

* High school grad - barely.
* I'm guessing you live in some dank basement in London
* You deal poker (only job you could get) and watch the real players play and somehow think that makes you a player.
* You've probably never made more then $30K a year in your life and are living on in the delusion that you will make your riches in Poker - probably got a poster of Phil H on your wall somewhere.
* You support your frail ego by attacking others on the internet. You love it because in hyperspace, no one can see the pimply face teenager for who he is.

Stop pretending that you are something you are not. You live in a fantasty world and need help.

You're so off base this deserves a "LOL". Why is throwing a $600 or so escrow out of the question? I wouldn't put it past you to luckbox your way into winning a stack on the first hand then clicking sit out for 7 hours and 59 minutes. There's so many shady things you can do I don't want to build up terms with 84 stipulations when we can just put a few dollars aside to a fairly trustworthy party to keep anyone from doing anything overly shady. The fact that you don't want to do that leads me to believe you are more likely to do some of these things. In fact, I probably gave you an additional idea you'll attempt to use were I to play you without this.

You're the one living in the "fantasy" world. One where online poker is rigged is the reason you haven't won money and you're a decent poker player.

[thefairy]

Originally Posted by eldave1 View Post
This is who you are:

* High school grad - barely. (indeed)
* I'm guessing you live in some dank basement in London nope in leicester)
* You deal poker (only job you could get) and watch the real players play and somehow think that makes you a player. (true , gala is such a high standard)
* You've probably never made more then $30K a year in your life and are living on in the delusion that you will make your riches in Poker - probably got a poster of Phil H on your wall somewhere. (no i got a poster of dwan naked however)
* You support your frail ego by attacking others on the internet. (george) You love it because in hyperspace, no one can see the pimply face teenager for who he is. (im 2o , but yeah)


THIS IS ME.

MAY I ALSO ADD.

bizkit hit the nose and eldave1, i laugh at your posturing, desperatly trying to get the other one (or two) to admit they do not want to do this challenge simply because you do not, all three of you clearly have a problem with it, i mean come on not being able to deposit w...t.....f, guys just lock this thread up it is rather embarassing and save playing poker at premium hours for hunting fish and playing your game.

[hithenose_home]

bizkit hit the nose and eldave1, i laugh at your posturing, desperatly trying to get the other one (or two) to admit they do not want to do this challenge simply because you do not, all three of you clearly have a problem with it, i mean come on not being able to deposit w...t.....f, guys just lock this thread up it is rather embarassing and save playing poker at premium hours for hunting fish and playing your game.[/QUOTE]



I laugh at you, I dont want to play NL200 for 50,000 hands sorry. Do you even have $200? Loser

[thefairy]

This is my point though isn't it? you all go issuing challeneges and beating your chests and baulk at any and every stipulation. yes i do have 200 dollars. and no i am not a loser. If you however wish to play me online you may only come and find me, ye that isnt particularly the point, do you not agree that this all a bit childish, tryiny to do some kind of durrrr challenge and then not actually being able to do it because you dont agree with stipulations put in front of you, you are not stupid people, you know you require trust, or a hlding 3rd party to hold monies, so why do it? simply to belittle people, like you've just done to me for pointing that out, congratulations. x

[Gerrard48LFC]

this all a bit childish

this whole thread and the last week of the poker rigged thread have been o so childish. i find it incredible the amount of childish insults and name calling going on.

[SirJonnyP]

and no i am not a loser.

:paranoid:



Seriously though, if eldave wasn't such a prick this thread wouldn't be as funny. As much as I like what HTNH and Bizkit have to say outside of this thread, it's a bit beyond a joke now.

[Browen]

This thread has become a bit school playground-y, all mouth and no trousers.

The three of you supposedly interested in playing the HU matches, you can't shift the blame entirely onto the other ones for it falling apart. It's just as much your fault. If you wanted to play that badly, you'd find a compromise.

Let's just agree that nobody has to back down first, we'll let the thread die and nobody has to lose face. Alright?

[bizkit]

I laugh at you, I dont want to play NL200 for 50,000 hands sorry. Do you even have $200? Loser

Nobody said you had to play 50,000 hands. In fact, we both were willing to do a 10k hand challenge.


The name calling on my end was mainly an attempt to attack their pride to induce them to try to play the challenge more. Didn't really work instead they just throw insults back or come up with lame corny strawmen challenges. So, I guess, just to show how unwilling they are to play, I'll make a few more concessions on the format.

vs hithenose_home:
-2tabling 200 NL 10k or so hands(all things you agreed to play at various time in the thread)
-to be played on stars
-minimal $600 escrow(just so you pay $400 essentially if you would attempt a hit and run for a stack; once you lose your $2k or play 10k hands you can get your $600 back)
-verified account amounts before we start(in other words we both need $2600 to start)

vs eldave1(I just can't find anything I can change.):
-1table 400 NL for a period of 8 hours or a loss of 1k(although I would of course prefer to play a bit longer). Loser of the 1k has the option to continue playing for another 1k.
-to be played on full tilt poker(so i may need a couple days to obtain the necessary funds)
-minimal $600 escrow
-verified account amounts before we start($1600)

Anybody with any ideas let me know.

:idea: How about I agree to play both of you guys at once under these conditions(maybe up the number of hands on the eldave1 challenge to 1/2 the hithenose_home so I can play both simultaneously)? I can even drop down to 200NL for the game vs eldave1. Plus, they should have an edge as I'm playing two guys at once and they are only playing one.

[eldave1]

Nobody said you had to play 50,000 hands. In fact, we both were willing to do a 10k hand challenge.


The name calling on my end was mainly an attempt to attack their pride to induce them to try to play the challenge more. Didn't really work instead they just throw insults back or come up with lame corny strawmen challenges. So, I guess, just to show how unwilling they are to play, I'll make a few more concessions on the format.

vs hithenose_home:
-2tabling 200 NL 10k or so hands(all things you agreed to play at various time in the thread)
-to be played on stars
-minimal $600 escrow(just so you pay $400 essentially if you would attempt a hit and run for a stack; once you lose your $2k or play 10k hands you can get your $600 back)
-verified account amounts before we start(in other words we both need $2600 to start)

vs eldave1(I just can't find anything I can change.):
-1table 400 NL for a period of 8 hours or a loss of 1k(although I would of course prefer to play a bit longer). Loser of the 1k has the option to continue playing for another 1k.
-to be played on full tilt poker(so i may need a couple days to obtain the necessary funds)
-minimal $600 escrow
-verified account amounts before we start($1600)

Anybody with any ideas let me know.

:idea: How about I agree to play both of you guys at once under these conditions(maybe up the number of hands on the eldave1 challenge to 1/2 the hithenose_home so I can play both simultaneously)? I can even drop down to 200NL for the game vs eldave1. Plus, they should have an edge as I'm playing two guys at once and they are only playing one.


I am fine with your proposal except for the escrow - which you already knew was a non-starter for me. So, unless you are willing to waive that it was not a proposal.

[Gerrard48LFC]

yes, the obvious dealbreaker for both HU matchups is the escrow.

Bizkit wants escrow, eldave and hithenose are not happy to escrow.

Find a way around that and we have ourselves some very interesting matches.

[aamir6433]

Bizkit, you know his face and where he plays and that he's AKA as "Michael" =P just doooo it. To hit and run he'd be risking $1000 of his money too

[bizkit]

Bizkit, you know his face and where he plays and that he's AKA as "Michael" =P just doooo it. To hit and run he'd be risking $1000 of his money too

He doesn't have to risk $1000 to hit and run. He can simply play a couple hands and spike a big hand over hand and the next thing you know he's gone. For all I know that might not even been the same guy. hithenose_home could have found some random cardplayer and pretended to be him. This guy can only manage to put about $600 towards this challenge yet supposedly has 60k something in profit. Doesn't that sound fishy to you?

Escrow gives me peace of mind and forces them to play up to the ethical standards that I intend to play at. Why should I take another disadvantage to make this happen?

[James]

Guys lets drop it. If this thread continues to become just an excuse to insult each other im going to close it.

[Mike]

IDK if Plates or James would be willing to do this but... what about, instead of using an escrow, if anyone leaves a match early, he gets banned permanently from the forum? That's GOT to be worth it.

[ccottis]

I Challenge anyone heads up for play-money rolls, bring it bitches

[ROCKART]

This guy can only manage to put about $600 towards this challenge yet supposedly has 60k something in profit. Doesn't that sound fishy to you?

so youre calling him a liar?

you think his winnings are fabricated?

why dont you agree to meet him sometime during the WSOP? i know for a fact he will be there.

then you two can play heads up with no bull**** about bankrolls or escrow or whatever other absurd conditions you have set.

[ROCKART]

I Challenge anyone heads up for play-money rolls, bring it bitches

i accept your challenge, sir.

stakes? site?

[thefairy]

now this is more like it. play money rolls for ftw.

[ccottis]

i accept your challenge, sir.

stakes? site?

Cool wasn't expecting that! I play as chriscottis on FullTilt stars and bwin so any of them.
Saturday evening (UK time) would be good for me. I guess I probably have $1000 in play money so how low can they go?
It's much easier to organise challenges by removing ego and playing the lowest play money stakes around!

[thefairy]

Cool wasn't expecting that! I play as chriscottis on FullTilt stars and bwin so any of them.
Saturday evening (UK time) would be good for me. I guess I probably have $1000 in play money so how low can they go?
It's much easier to organise challenges by removing ego and playing the lowest play money stakes around!

ok i will play if we escrew funds, into a 3rd playmoney account that can only be open with by platefish, he opens the account and we both transfer 500 into this account, whoever wins the challenge, shall recieve the password from platefish and can transfer the funds into his account.:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[ccottis]

ok i will play if we escrew funds, into a 3rd playmoney account that can only be open with by platefish, he opens the account and we both transfer 500 into this account, whoever wins the challenge, shall recieve the password from platefish and can transfer the funds into his account.:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Ok Minimum 500k hands on 12 tables?

[thefairy]

Ok Minimum 500k hands on 12 tables?

not man enough for 13 are you. girl! your a big girl!

[eldave1]

ok i will play if we escrew funds, into a 3rd playmoney account that can only be open with by platefish, he opens the account and we both transfer 500 into this account, whoever wins the challenge, shall recieve the password from platefish and can transfer the funds into his account.:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:


This is very funny stuff (LMAO)- thanks :) - makes us look pretty silly.

Maybe we can have a new thread open dedicated to creating some kind of reasonable tourney for the community of posters to play just for ****s, giggles and bragging rights. Logistics would have to be worked out given that some of us our in far different time zones - but it may be fun. I think it honor of us who started this insanity - we could call it the "the El HitBiz Memorial Tourney."

[Browen]

This is very funny stuff (LMAO)- thanks :) - makes us look pretty silly.

Maybe we can have a new thread open dedicated to creating some kind of reasonable tourney for the community of posters to play just for ****s, giggles and bragging rights. Logistics would have to be worked out given that some of us our in far different time zones - but it may be fun. I think it honor of us who started this insanity - we could call it the "the El HitBiz Memorial Tourney."

Already being set up...see thread in General Discussion. Will probably be starting Sunday evening!

[thefairy]

This is very funny stuff (LMAO)- thanks :) - makes us look pretty silly.

Maybe we can have a new thread open dedicated to creating some kind of reasonable tourney for the community of posters to play just for ****s, giggles and bragging rights. Logistics would have to be worked out given that some of us our in far different time zones - but it may be fun. I think it honor of us who started this insanity - we could call it the "the El HitBiz Memorial Tourney."

someone once said a person is inteligent, people are stupid. when you get a few inteligent people together with insightful opinions, it turns into a mess of insults, known as the is poker rigged thread lol. sounds good, wel have a little league going soon anyway for bragging rights.

[Mike]

TBF, I've seen very little insight here.

[bizkit]

IDK if Plates or James would be willing to do this but... what about, instead of using an escrow, if anyone leaves a match early, he gets banned permanently from the forum? That's GOT to be worth it.

This is pretty insightful though. It was never really about pride for me only money. If they became that annoying I would simply ignore them(which I probably will do soon) or stop posting on the forum altogether. Also, its not that hard to get a new email, new id, change your ip and clear your browser history...hell you'd be rewarding them another $5 if they could get another poker stars account.

so youre calling him a liar?

you think his winnings are fabricated?

why dont you agree to meet him sometime during the WSOP? i know for a fact he will be there.

then you two can play heads up with no bull**** about bankrolls or escrow or whatever other absurd conditions you have set.

No, I'm just saying that its possible. You can speculate that online poker is rigged OR I'm not a winning online player. These in my opinion are much less likely to be true. Here's a few things of note:

-There's nothing stopping him from using someone else's cardplayer. It's not like we can say "SHOW US YOUR LICENSE".
-The timeframe from many of the posts he's made is congruent and it's quite possible its accurate. So I think it could definitely go either way.
-I have almost $2,000,000 in winnings on my cardplayer where my cashes go. Of course, before you go nuts about how big a liar I am I fully admit a substantial portion of the winnings aren't mine.
-Let's say he chopped up 60k in winnings from the staking deal. Throw in like 2 or 3 g's for expenses for WSOP(any time I was backed these were paid for but w/e). Minus another 10k for investing, savings and maybe some luxury purchases. Where's the other 17k? Or you just can't use a minimal piece of that to play? Just really doesn't make sense to me.

I already said its very unlikely I'm going to go out to the wsop. It's not so easy to setup a live heads up there as you think anyway. If both party's were credible to each other they probably wouldn't want to play in the first place. A non-credible party to either person its like sure its profitable to play them in a fair game. Ensuring this happens is a completely different story and usually a deal breaker. I've had much more success inducing "bad" players to play online heads up especially in the rare cases I deliver a beat on them and they begin talking crap to me.

[eldave1]

Already being set up...see thread in General Discussion. Will probably be starting Sunday evening!

What is the name of the thread - I didn't see it - thanks

[thefairy]

pir poker league.

[bizkit]

Same contorted and misleading quotes - it wouldn't have mattered - and you know this - what the stakes were - it was me not willing to send some stranger on the internet $$$ whether is was $10 or $10,000. Name you stakes without an escrow and we can play - otherwise shut up. PS - of you want to continiue this - it s hould be on the non-Bizkit fake challenge thread.

But you'll send a whole great deal more than that to a poker site you believe is juiced. Sure, makes perfect sense to me.

In any event, I may play an unescrow'd challenge with you. Name your terms. BTW I'm not committing to any time frame if we do things this way as there's no money element keeping you in line with them.

[thefairy]

yo bizkit did you not see that i killed this thread with a weapon of mass lols?

[bizkit]

yer, there should probs be a thread devoted to challenges, cos itd be so much easier and wudnt clog up this thread with stuff irrelevant to the title. IMO Bizkit wont ever play you, the escrow thing is just an excuse. Theres no reason he can't play you without the sidebet, hes just using it as a get out. Okay, so you could do a hit and run on him if your up x amount of dollars, but this could happen to Bizkit with any player, its the same as normal poker, theres variance. So this aint a valid excuse for me because playing poker means u accept variance. Also if either of you did a hit and run, think of how much reputation you would lose, by hit and running your almost conceding that you are the weaker player. And Bizkit, you seem to think you could wipe the floor with eldave or hitthenose and probs me infact, so play eldave, and if he does a hit and run, then because u say your so much better, it would just be a downswing. It gotta be plus ev playing any number of hands against a player you believe is weaker, even if its only 100, because if you are the better player, the odds are in your favour. And if he does the hit n run, you just say it was bad variance like you would if you were at fr and lost a buy in and you move on.

It's not about a variance issue. Just because it's likely my expectancy is much higher than his doesn't mean I should instantly do it. I'm playing on a site that is basically foreign to me that I don't use which means I have to alter my financials. To play at a level that's profitable enough to make the challenge worth doing I have to put a significant figure in that account.

Here's the other liabilities:
-It keeps me from locking in what I perceive to be a weaker player for a large number of hands.
-It allows him to hit and run talk **** about how he "outplayed" me afterwards.
-It opens the door for so many shady things when if it was regulated a little by the site admins here we wouldn't have any trouble with: time frame commitments, playing hours, hands, hit n runs, other unethical behavior(what if starts playing one or two hands very slowly then sits out every 20 minutes afterwards), etc.

So yes, obviously I'd rather have an escrow.

yo bizkit did you not see that i killed this thread with a weapon of mass lols?

I decided to revive it today(based upon rigged thread comments) and attempt to get Eldave1 to play.

[craigbor18]

Here's the other liabilities:
-It keeps me from locking in what I perceive to be a weaker player for a large number of hands.
-It allows him to hit and run talk **** about how he "outplayed" me afterwards.
-It opens the door for so many shady things when if it was regulated a little by the site admins here we wouldn't have any trouble with: time frame commitments, playing hours, hands, hit n runs, other unethical behavior(what if starts playing one or two hands very slowly then sits out every 20 minutes afterwards), etc.

So yes, obviously I'd rather have an escrow.
.

ok, first point response: it doesn't matter if you are locking him in or not, when are you ever locking in a player at fr or 6 max cash? they are free to leave whenever they want.

second: no, if he hits and runs, and says he outplayed you, nobody will give him credibility here, the opposite, becasue if he thought he was the better player he would stay to prove it and make more dollars

thirdly: even if you just set up two 3 hr sesh's a week, im sure you could both find two slots where ull both be free, n u can do this weekly. Theres no rush to bang out the hands. And as for unethical behaviour, im sure there will be railers, so if either of you is being like that, im sure it will be reported back to the forum, yet again losing that player credibility.

[Browen]

-It allows him to hit and run talk **** about how he "outplayed" me afterwards.
-It opens the door for so many shady things when if it was regulated a little by the site admins here we wouldn't have any trouble with: time frame commitments, playing hours, hands, hit n runs, other unethical behavior(what if starts playing one or two hands very slowly then sits out every 20 minutes afterwards), etc.


Hit and run wouldn't happen. Record all the sessions you play using Pokertracker (60 day free trial, if you don't already own the program) and post the results graphs and session details in that format. If he does that then it'll be posted up here for all to see.

If he loses and decides to stop playing then you'll have proved your point anyway. Any talk of escrow conditions is starting to seem like you're putting up roadblocks.

[thefairy]

and so it goes round and round round round...

[ROCKART]

Any talk of escrow conditions is starting to seem like you're putting up roadblocks.

thats exactly what it is - and what it has been from the beginning. its bizkits way of backing down without losing face.....

im sure that if hithenose or eldave actually went through with bizkits absurd structure, and i hope one of them does, there would surely be some other random excuse that may include, but is not limited to:

* his computer crashed

* hes "having trouble" getting the money into escrow

* his mom took away his keyboard

* he broke his mouse-clicking finger playing Wii

or

* he decided online poker is rigged


or maybe someone else, has the time, energy and patience to call his bluff. pun intended.

[thefairy]

yo wii injuries arent to be joked about son.

[eldave1]

But you'll send a whole great deal more than that to a poker site you believe is juiced. Sure, makes perfect sense to me.

In any event, I may play an unescrow'd challenge with you. Name your terms. BTW I'm not committing to any time frame if we do things this way as there's no money element keeping you in line with them.

According to Full Tilt deposit rules I can deposit up to $ 600 any one day and $2,000 within any 30 day period (US Player). Anything in that range is fine with me.

I don't care what the blind structures are as long as they are reasonable (3/6 is okay, whatever - tell me what you want). I want to play one table.

I don't understand what you mean by :"BTW I'm not committing to any time frame if we do things this way as there's no money element keeping you in line with them." Please explain. If it helps - I am willing to go a full day or until the $$ runs out. I would like to play Mon, Tues, Wed or Thursday anytime between 7:00 am to 6:oo pm Pacific Coast time. I am leaving for the WSOP tonight and will be gone for the week. So - that'lll give you the time to figure out from your side what you need.

[bizkit]

ok, first point response: it doesn't matter if you are locking him in or not, when are you ever locking in a player at fr or 6 max cash? they are free to leave whenever they want.

So my equity is the same if I lock a bad player into playing 10k hands with an escrow of about 8 buy ins AS if i just start playing the bad player he gets upset and leavevs after losing a couple buy ins. You're just retarded and I'm through talking to you after this post.

second: no, if he hits and runs, and says he outplayed you, nobody will give him credibility here, the opposite, becasue if he thought he was the better player he would stay to prove it and make more dollars

thirdly: even if you just set up two 3 hr sesh's a week, im sure you could both find two slots where ull both be free, n u can do this weekly. Theres no rush to bang out the hands. And as for unethical behaviour, im sure there will be railers, so if either of you is being like that, im sure it will be reported back to the forum, yet again losing that player credibility.

Hit and run wouldn't happen. Record all the sessions you play using Pokertracker (60 day free trial, if you don't already own the program) and post the results graphs and session details in that format. If he does that then it'll be posted up here for all to see.

If he loses and decides to stop playing then you'll have proved your point anyway. Any talk of escrow conditions is starting to seem like you're putting up roadblocks.

I don't care if he loses credibility with you two. He already has little to no credibility with me anyway. It's not about proving a point, I couldn't care less about this either.

thats exactly what it is - and what it has been from the beginning. its bizkits way of backing down without losing face.....

im sure that if hithenose or eldave actually went through with bizkits absurd structure, and i hope one of them does, there would surely be some other random excuse that may include, but is not limited to:

* his computer crashed

* hes "having trouble" getting the money into escrow

* his mom took away his keyboard

* he broke his mouse-clicking finger playing Wii

or

* he decided online poker is rigged


or maybe someone else, has the time, energy and patience to call his bluff. pun intended.

How about we sidebet this then? Once me and Eldave1 come up with finalized terms you can escrow some money($500 or so) to Plates or James and if Eldave1 does anything overly shady you lose your escrow. If I do, then you get mine. I'm pretty sure you won't put your money where you mouth is when it comes to the credibility of your rigged posting buddy so how about you just sit this one out and shut up.

According to Full Tilt deposit rules I can deposit up to $ 600 any one day and $2,000 within any 30 day period (US Player). Anything in that range is fine with me.

I don't care what the blind structures are as long as they are reasonable (3/6 is okay, whatever - tell me what you want). I want to play one table.

I don't understand what you mean by :"BTW I'm not committing to any time frame if we do things this way as there's no money element keeping you in line with them." Please explain. If it helps - I am willing to go a full day or until the $$ runs out. I would like to play Mon, Tues, Wed or Thursday anytime between 7:00 am to 6:oo pm Pacific Coast time. I am leaving for the WSOP tonight and will be gone for the week. So - that'lll give you the time to figure out from your side what you need.

I'd rather two table 2/4 and we play on a set agreed upon schedule until either one of us loses it all. Of course, since there is no penalty technically you could quit at any time. I'd like to play for at least an amount of $2000 but obviously not in play all at once. Also I'd like to play with 100 BB implied stacks or higher as much as possible. I'm not sure if Full Tilt has auto reload. It doesn't have to happen overnight as I couldn't get funds into Full Tilt immediately anyway either.

[Browen]

So my equity is the same if I lock a bad player into playing 10k hands with an escrow of about 8 buy ins AS if i just start playing the bad player he gets upset and leavevs after losing a couple buy ins. You're just retarded and I'm through talking to you after this post.


So you're not willing to play anyone you feel is below you unless you lock them in for an extended period of time, with severe penalties if they walk away? FFS just find each other and play, forget about the whole challenge aspect. Otherwise the whole trash talking thing gets old very fast.

By the way, any particular reason why you choose not to play the forum league? After all it's the one proper opportunity for banter with the forum members at the tables...

[bizkit]

So you're not willing to play anyone you feel is below you unless you lock them in for an extended period of time, with severe penalties if they walk away? FFS just find each other and play, forget about the whole challenge aspect. Otherwise the whole trash talking thing gets old very fast.

Obviously this is not the case but I'd rather lock them in than not? There's many potential penalties I incur for playing them heads up. Attempting to get some security on some issues doesn't hurt either party and insures a more "fair" playing environment.


By the way, any particular reason why you choose not to play the forum league? After all it's the one proper opportunity for banter with the forum members at the tables...

I'm not really into the banter. It's just a cover to get the matches to go.

[Browen]

Obviously this is not the case but I'd rather lock them in than not? There's many potential penalties I incur for playing them heads up. Attempting to get some security on some issues doesn't hurt either party and insures a more "fair" playing environment.


Would you please detail the "penalties" you'd incur? Is it purely time away from playing your regular games? How much do you think you'd be losing by substituting one of your regular FR tables for HU against eldave, don't you believe your win rate would be comparable?


I'm not really into the banter. It's just a cover to get the matches to go.

OK...I just guessed that since you were talking up a storm with a lot of people on the forum, you might be interested in showing us a thing or two...

[craigbor18]

bizkit maybe ur the retard here. Obviously i wasn't saying you get the same equity either way, if you lock him in or not. My point was if you werent playing poker against eldave it would be against fish at nl100,and you can't lock these fish in, they can get up and walk from the table whenever they want. My point was it isn't necessary to lock eldave in, okay it would be better for you but this shouldn't be a reason not to play the challenge, just cos you can't lock him in, cos when in normal cash game poker can you lock players in for a set amount of hands.... never.
So why should you get this luxury against eldave.
Not saying u r a fish btw eldave, im guessin your pretty knowledgeable about poker.

[GarrethUoL]

Bizkit, I was on your side to begin with but now you seem to be making this get out of hand.
Ok, so far you have agreed on $2000, eldave will happily play 2/4. When you're playing for $2k, you don't need a sidebet...so no money is needed in escrow.
Now, you want to play 2 tables, he wants to play 1. Get this sorted and surely we're ready to go?

And Bizkit play the league, its 1 game a week which like 60-90minutes, not exactly gonna take a long time out your "busy" schedule, and we can actually see you in action, rather than just listen to you say how good you are. You refusing to play in the league suggests to us all you're scared, and are just putting on an act.

[ROCKART]

You refusing to play in the league suggests to us all you're scared, and are just putting on an act.

BOOM


notice we still dont even know his username on stars......

[Gerrard48LFC]

Now, you want to play 2 tables, he wants to play 1.

Compromise people, 1.5 tables?

[Litellio]

You refusing to play in the league suggests to us all you're scared, and are just putting on an act.

I don't think he's ever refused, and I don't for a moment think he's scared.


notice we still dont even know his username on stars......

Is he obliged to tell you? Just from general strategy threads he's posted in he seems quite knowledgable, as well as being the only guy on the forum with 3 bars of rep. So I don't think he's a bad player, agreed?

[craigbor18]

what do the rep bars mean and how do you get them?

[bizkit]

Would you please detail the "penalties" you'd incur? Is it purely time away from playing your regular games? How much do you think you'd be losing by substituting one of your regular FR tables for HU against eldave, don't you believe your win rate would be comparable?

I could give you a list but I really don't want to give the masses any extra ideas to annoy me. I'm not going to speculate on what I anticipate my winrate might be...it tends to offend ppl for some reason.

OK...I just guessed that since you were talking up a storm with a lot of people on the forum, you might be interested in showing us a thing or two...

Just read some of the threads outside the pointless bickering if you want to learn things. I probably wouldn't be showing you much playing in the PIR league where I'd probably be more focused on playing my cash tables.

And Bizkit play the league, its 1 game a week which like 60-90minutes, not exactly gonna take a long time out your "busy" schedule, and we can actually see you in action, rather than just listen to you say how good you are. You refusing to play in the league suggests to us all you're scared, and are just putting on an act.

It's really not worth it to me. I can sit in a tournament with maybe a few dollars extra in equity. But this also opens the door to giving ROCKART or whoever else the opportunity to annoy me anytime I happen to use pokerstars and not block my screen name. Even if I do block my screen name its not hard to find the tables I'd be playing at. I don't want to deal with railbird play money lunatics while I'm trying to make money.

[craigbor18]

the pir league aint about equity, its just a bit of fun. Like Garreth said it only runs for 60-90 minutes, ok it is time that you won't be playing as many cash tables as you would be if you weren't playing the league torney, but not everything in life is about money.

Also i don't see why you won't release your username. If your sole worry is that you'll get us guys railing and pissing you off then the answer is simple... block your chat!

[eldave1]

I'd rather two table 2/4 and we play on a set agreed upon schedule until either one of us loses it all. Of course, since there is no penalty technically you could quit at any time. I'd like to play for at least an amount of $2000 but obviously not in play all at once. Also I'd like to play with 100 BB implied stacks or higher as much as possible. I'm not sure if Full Tilt has auto reload. It doesn't have to happen overnight as I couldn't get funds into Full Tilt immediately anyway either.

$2,000 is fine

I will not multi-table, All of my HU experience is live and is single table.

You can define what ever blind or re-load amounts you want. Just let me know. It doesn't really matter to me as I normally play $500 NL, when I play cash - so - pick a structure and we'll go with it.

[bizkit]

$2,000 is fine

I will not multi-table, All of my HU experience is live and is single table.

You can define what ever blind or re-load amounts you want. Just let me know. It doesn't really matter to me as I normally play $500 NL, when I play cash - so - pick a structure and we'll go with it.

Timeframe?
Is it possible to play 200 BB's deep starting stacks on FTP? Maybe $1/$2 with $400 starting stacks.

[GarrethUoL]

Ooo we're actually getting somewhere now!
There will be a lot of railers is this goes ahead!

[eldave1]

Timeframe?
Is it possible to play 200 BB's deep starting stacks on FTP? Maybe $1/$2 with $400 starting stacks.


Probably: this is what the site says about private tournaments:

We are excited to offer our players the chance to hold private tournaments. Please note that we can only host real money private tournaments. To submit a private tournament request, please email privatetournaments@fulltiltpoker.com the following information:

Name/Title: [must not exceed 26 characters including spaces]
Buy-in: [e.g. $5 + $.50 or $10 + $1]
Game: [usually Hold'em]
Limit: [usually No Limit, but can be Fixed or Pot Limit]
Password: [up to 15 characters]
Date: [It can take up to 4 business days to set up, so please submit your request well in advance of your desired start date]
Time: [in Eastern Time]
Minimum number of players expected:
Still Need Help? Contact our 24/7 Customer Support TeamBack to top

Your request for $1/$2 with $400 starting stacks is fine by me. In terms of timeframe I have previously posted the days and hours that are good for me. The first two weeks of July are no good (family committments) but after - okay dokay. I need to know from you how long you think it'll take for you to set up your account, deposits, etc. As I previously posted - as a long time player there - I can put in $2K in any 30 day period - so, I probably won't face the same logistical issues you might - so I will defer to you on a good general time frame to set this up. Once you get me the dates, I'll send the request to FT.

[bizkit]

Probably: this is what the site says about private tournaments:

We are excited to offer our players the chance to hold private tournaments. Please note that we can only host real money private tournaments. To submit a private tournament request, please email privatetournaments@fulltiltpoker.com the following information:

Name/Title: [must not exceed 26 characters including spaces]
Buy-in: [e.g. $5 + $.50 or $10 + $1]
Game: [usually Hold'em]
Limit: [usually No Limit, but can be Fixed or Pot Limit]
Password: [up to 15 characters]
Date: [It can take up to 4 business days to set up, so please submit your request well in advance of your desired start date]
Time: [in Eastern Time]
Minimum number of players expected:
Still Need Help? Contact our 24/7 Customer Support TeamBack to top

Your request for $1/$2 with $400 starting stacks is fine by me. In terms of timeframe I have previously posted the days and hours that are good for me. The first two weeks of July are no good (family committments) but after - okay dokay. I need to know from you how long you think it'll take for you to set up your account, deposits, etc. As I previously posted - as a long time player there - I can put in $2K in any 30 day period - so, I probably won't face the same logistical issues you might - so I will defer to you on a good general time frame to set this up. Once you get me the dates, I'll send the request to FT.

I guess we should shoot for sometime in the second half of July then.

I don't really want to play private tournaments. The blind structure typically goes up when I'd rather keep it the same and play fairly deep stacked poker. Even in a game where there's no blind increase, eventually someone gets short and its push bot poker. I will look into private cash tables when I have money in my FTP account, although I could find no information on this when I put the search into google. I'll also see what the big blind stack limits are for cash tables. Maybe someone else can post these as well.

[Gerrard48LFC]

i am sure if you started at 100BB you would get deep pretty fast. actually i am not sure, would you?

[Litellio]

i am sure if you started at 100BB you would get deep pretty fast. actually i am not sure, would you?

Yes, they would. Deeper favours the more skilled player (whoever that may be), which would be better to rail too.

[eldave1]

I guess we should shoot for sometime in the second half of July then.

I don't really want to play private tournaments. The blind structure typically goes up when I'd rather keep it the same and play fairly deep stacked poker. Even in a game where there's no blind increase, eventually someone gets short and its push bot poker. I will look into private cash tables when I have money in my FTP account, although I could find no information on this when I put the search into google. I'll also see what the big blind stack limits are for cash tables. Maybe someone else can post these as well.

If I am understanding you - you prefer to play a heads up straight cash (ring game) format (i.e., the 1/2 stays constant throughout the duration). I am okay with this. Let me know what you find out

[Gerrard48LFC]

Get Pokerstars tv to sponsor you and do a feature on this challenge.......

[thefairy]

me and tommyk already way ahead of you bozos, doing 100 10 buck sit and gos , coz we be balla.

[bizkit]

If I am understanding you - you prefer to play a heads up straight cash (ring game) format (i.e., the 1/2 stays constant throughout the duration). I am okay with this. Let me know what you find out

Yes, cash ring game.

I'll look into it when I deposit.

[ccottis]

FullTilt have deep stack tables 50BB min, I guess you can buy in for 200BB on these?

[bizkit]

FullTilt have deep stack tables 50BB min, I guess you can buy in for 200BB on these?

Yes, Do they have deepstacked heads up tables(1/2 blinds)?