Cliffs:
- Landon Tice and Bill Perkins have a 200-400 NL heads up match coming up, with 20k hands, and where
Perkins gets spotted 720k (9BB/100)
- Terrence Chan attempted to bet on this match on Mike McDonald's "Pokershares" site, regarding "who will win the heads up challenge". The bet does not mention the 720k Perkins gets back, as part of the terms of the match. The bet is ambiguous, and Chan takes it to mean that it's simply a -109 bet that Tice wins more money than Perkins.
- Pokershares support sends a quick e-mail to Chan indicating clarification, that Tice needs to win by more than 720k for Terrence's bet to win. Terrence cries foul and claims that wasn't stated.
- McDonald contacts Chan directly, without prompting, and starts off with, "are you dumb?", insisting that Chan should have known when he placed the bet that the 720k was part of it.
- The two argue back and forth. Chan accuses McDonald of not honoring his site's bets, even when the amount (780 euro) is relatively small. McDonald is insistent that the bet is about winning the match, not who finishes ahead in heads-up money, and that the 720k is part of the match. McDonald is also angry that Chan is trying to angle him, given that they've been friends for a long time.
So who is right?
This one isn't easy, but I'm actually more on McDonald's side here. The HU challenge between Perkins and Tice clearly states that 9BB/100 is part of it, even if the language on Pokershares is part of it. Clearly the winner of that challenge is the one who is ahead AFTER the 720k is deducted.
Furthermore, even if Chan believes he's right, it's still kinda shitty to take advantage of what he believes was a line-setting mistake by his friend's company. I didn't like how Terrence seemed to be saying that he would "play the fuck out of a +EV blackjack game" at a Steve Wynn owned property, even if Wynn were his personal friend.