Chris Moneymaker a scammer? Say it isn't so!

[FreeGucciMane]

I admit I do like Jason's post & he is initially the one who wanted to bring it to light.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...5&postcount=42

[Hockey Guy]

I also assumed he was good for it.

I quit reading right here.

[Steve-O]

I also assumed he was good for it.

I quit reading right here.

Mike O'Malley (Rzitup) is the only sane voice in that thread. Moneymaker is basically saying, "I freerolled you because I think you were freerolling me"

[haleylh]

Not that it's overly relevant to the current squabble, but Chris was a self-admitted sportsbetting degen who was deeply, deeply in debt before and after he binked the satellite that got him into the '03 ME. Chris had planned to sell his $10K entry to help pay off some of those debts but was talked into playing the ME by one of his friends. The win and the subsequent Stars deal got him millions to the plus side for a long time, but who knows... he may have finally given it all back.

[FreeGucciMane]

To both of you: Sob stories about how you've been scammed in the past don't mean squat. Sorry you made bad business and/or life decisions. Don't use them to curry any sort of favor here. Just makes you look weak and desperate.

To CM: Pay your debts, dood. You don't get to claim any moral high ground by speculating about what might have happened had you won. What, now everyone you want action with is going to have to ask himself "Hm, in addition to the game we're betting on, I need to factor in the odds associated with the Chris thinking I'm good for the money if he wins??? That's not how this works, bud.

To JY: Sounds like you owe some money. Pay it. You don't get to concede that you haven't paid your debts, but claim any moral high ground by saying "I’ve made arrangements with the people that are owed, been in constant contact with them the entire time, inviting them to come speak to me personally in NY." You can rationalize it to yourself that way, but you wagered with money you didn't have (or vouched for people with money you didn't have, same thing.) Whatever restaurant you're choosing to flush your money doesn't mean squat in this situation.

Verdict. Sounds like you deserve each other. CM doesn't pay debt / reverse-freerolls based on what he thinks would have happened. JY bets with money (or "vouches" for others, which is the same thing) that he doesn't have. Neither one of you is really winnings any good-guy points here...you probably succeeded in mutual-assured reputation destruction though.

[pavoe]

CM has a point imo if the bets (his and the ones of all the others that won and didnt get paid) were made around the same time.
Of course this would have to be confirmed. In that case CM can assume he was being freerolled.

Because all of that will be very hard to prove I would probably just pay the 20k or whatever if I was in his shoes given his status as a Pokerstars pro, never do buisness with JY again, write a mean review about JYs restaurant on the internet and move on.

And LOL at underground sportsbetting, both CM and JM said they have been scammed/stiffed in the past. Dont think anyone is able to beat sportsbetting under those circumstance unless you are linked to the wormhole 24/7.

Also I assume JYs activities were illegal, operating as an agent for an underground bookie, not sure how smart it is to post this stuff on a public forum.

[FreeGucciMane]

This changes everything!

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...0&postcount=94

[neveragain39]

This changes everything!

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...0&postcount=94

....well, had I won, you MAY NOT have paid me, so no, I owe you nothing. "

This was very similar to Micon logic used when attempting to roll a Euro awhile back on an online poker site.

Fact, greed can screw up one's ability think straight and play fair.

[Dan Druff]

Still digesting the whole thing, but looks like Jason Young was a Peter Falcone victim, as well. Interesting twist.

[sheets]

Still digesting the whole thing, but looks like Jason Young was a Peter Falcone victim, as well. Interesting twist.

You mean Pete Falcone the Mets pitcher from the 70s?

[Dan Druff]

What a mess.

The cliffs of the whole story is:

- Chris claims that Jason set him up with a fake bookmaker, and was actually booking the bets himself. Chris was in debt for 20k to this "bookmaker". Then Chris started hearing that Jason owed a ton of money to people, and realized he would never get paid from this "bookmaker" if he won. Chris refused to pay the bets he lost.

- Jason claims that the bookmaker was real, he paid the guy on behalf of Chris, and Chris never repaid him. He said that the bookmaker himself turned out to be a scammer, but he had nothing to do with that or knowledge of it at the time. Therefore, since he paid real money to that bookmaker on behalf of Chris, he should be paid back.

I am wondering why this "bookmaker" has not been named. And has any proof been offered that Jason actually paid this guy?

This is not about Chris refusing to pay Jason because of the latter's personal debts to others.

This is about Chris strongly suspecting that he was being freerolled, and this "scammer bookie" actually being Jason himself.

The burden of proof is on Jason now to name this bookie and provide proof that he really paid the guy on behalf of Chris.

Simply saying, "I paid this guy $20k for Chris, and now the guy ran off, so Chris owes me" is a bunch of garbage, unless Jason can prove he really paid the money.

Jason, if this bookie really scammed everyone and disappeared, you should have no problem naming him and providing proof that you paid him. If you can't, Chris has every right in the world to refuse to pay you, because it looks too much like a scam.

If for some reason you are afraid to out this bookie publicly, there are many trustworthy people who you can give the information to privately, and they can post their findings. I will volunteer for this if you want.

If Jason does prove that he paid this bookie at the time he claims (and that the bookie exists), then Chris definitely owes the money, regardless of Jason's other personal problems at the moment.

Right now, Chris should pay nothing and wait for proof.

If Jason can produce proof that the bookmaker exists and that he paid him, then Chris should pay up.

[ShawnFanningsLimpDick]

I read the 2+2 thread and find Moneymaker's arguments pretty weak. It's taken him 18 months of not paying to now decide he was getting freerolled and therefore doesn't have to pay? Jason was obviously playing fast and loose and has a history of stalling people although eventually paying. His behaviour doesn't seem like that of a typical scammer. I think he was genuinely trying to make money as an agent while obviously cutting a lot of corners. Now it's all collapsed and Jason's debts are doubtless more than what he's owed but that still doesn't seem justification for Moneymaker to avoid paying a losing bet incurred 18 months ago.

[Dan Druff]

I read the 2+2 thread and find Moneymaker's arguments pretty weak. It's taken him 18 months of not paying to now decide he was getting freerolled and therefore doesn't have to pay? Jason was obviously playing fast and loose and has a history of stalling people although eventually paying. His behaviour doesn't seem like that of a typical scammer I think he was genuinely trying to make money as an agent while obviously cutting a lot of corners. Now it's all collapsed and Jason's debts are doubtless more than what he's owed but that still doesn't seem justification for Moneymaker to avoid paying a losing bet incurred 18 months ago.

If Moneymaker is wrong, then Jason should be able to easily prove it by giving details about the bookie and supporting evidence that he paid. The fact that this hasn't been provided yet is a big red flag.

[Steve-O]

I read the 2+2 thread and find Moneymaker's arguments pretty weak. It's taken him 18 months of not paying to now decide he was getting freerolled and therefore doesn't have to pay? Jason was obviously playing fast and loose and has a history of stalling people although eventually paying. His behaviour doesn't seem like that of a typical scammer I think he was genuinely trying to make money as an agent while obviously cutting a lot of corners. Now it's all collapsed and Jason's debts are doubtless more than what he's owed but that still doesn't seem justification for Moneymaker to avoid paying a losing bet incurred 18 months ago.

If Moneymaker is wrong, then Jason should be able to easily prove it by giving details about the bookie and supporting evidence that he paid. The fact that this hasn't been provided yet is a big red flag.

You can't think of reasons why a guy in NY/NJ wouldn't want to name his real-world bookie on the Internet, who is apparently booking what seems to be high-five to six-figures week if not more?

Even if Jason is the bookie, there isn't enough evidence he was freerolling Moneymaker at any point to justify Moneymaker freerolling him. generally when people owe you $20k for 18 months your finances get a little fucked up, which I think is what Sheets is alluding to.

[chinamaniac]

What a mess.

The cliffs of the whole story is:

- Chris claims that Jason set him up with a fake bookmaker, and was actually booking the bets himself. Chris was in debt for 20k to this "bookmaker". Then Chris started hearing that Jason owed a ton of money to people, and realized he would never get paid from this "bookmaker" if he won. Chris refused to pay the bets he lost.

- Jason claims that the bookmaker was real, he paid the guy on behalf of Chris, and Chris never repaid him. He said that the bookmaker himself turned out to be a scammer, but he had nothing to do with that or knowledge of it at the time. Therefore, since he paid real money to that bookmaker on behalf of Chris, he should be paid back.

I am wondering why this "bookmaker" has not been named. And has any proof been offered that Jason actually paid this guy?

This is not about Chris refusing to pay Jason because of the latter's personal debts to others.

This is about Chris strongly suspecting that he was being freerolled, and this "scammer bookie" actually being Jason himself.

The burden of proof is on Jason now to name this bookie and provide proof that he really paid the guy on behalf of Chris.

Simply saying, "I paid this guy $20k for Chris, and now the guy ran off, so Chris owes me" is a bunch of garbage, unless Jason can prove he really paid the money.

Jason, if this bookie really scammed everyone and disappeared, you should have no problem naming him and providing proof that you paid him. If you can't, Chris has every right in the world to refuse to pay you, because it looks too much like a scam.

If for some reason you are afraid to out this bookie publicly, there are many trustworthy people who you can give the information to privately, and they can post their findings. I will volunteer for this if you want.

If Jason does prove that he paid this bookie at the time he claims (and that the bookie exists), then Chris definitely owes the money, regardless of Jason's other personal problems at the moment.

Right now, Chris should pay nothing and wait for proof.

If Jason can produce proof that the bookmaker exists and that he paid him, then Chris should pay up.

The problem with all of this is Jason owes other players big sums as well at least 3 or 4 that are known and prob more. It seems pretty clear he was freerolling unless this guy that was supposedly "booking the bets" just turned and walked away on him

[BeerAndPoker]

Can we get Erick Lindgren's thought on this?

[Steve-O]

What a mess.

The cliffs of the whole story is:

- Chris claims that Jason set him up with a fake bookmaker, and was actually booking the bets himself. Chris was in debt for 20k to this "bookmaker". Then Chris started hearing that Jason owed a ton of money to people, and realized he would never get paid from this "bookmaker" if he won. Chris refused to pay the bets he lost.

- Jason claims that the bookmaker was real, he paid the guy on behalf of Chris, and Chris never repaid him. He said that the bookmaker himself turned out to be a scammer, but he had nothing to do with that or knowledge of it at the time. Therefore, since he paid real money to that bookmaker on behalf of Chris, he should be paid back.

I am wondering why this "bookmaker" has not been named. And has any proof been offered that Jason actually paid this guy?

This is not about Chris refusing to pay Jason because of the latter's personal debts to others.

This is about Chris strongly suspecting that he was being freerolled, and this "scammer bookie" actually being Jason himself.

The burden of proof is on Jason now to name this bookie and provide proof that he really paid the guy on behalf of Chris.

Simply saying, "I paid this guy $20k for Chris, and now the guy ran off, so Chris owes me" is a bunch of garbage, unless Jason can prove he really paid the money.

Jason, if this bookie really scammed everyone and disappeared, you should have no problem naming him and providing proof that you paid him. If you can't, Chris has every right in the world to refuse to pay you, because it looks too much like a scam.

If for some reason you are afraid to out this bookie publicly, there are many trustworthy people who you can give the information to privately, and they can post their findings. I will volunteer for this if you want.

If Jason does prove that he paid this bookie at the time he claims (and that the bookie exists), then Chris definitely owes the money, regardless of Jason's other personal problems at the moment.

Right now, Chris should pay nothing and wait for proof.

If Jason can produce proof that the bookmaker exists and that he paid him, then Chris should pay up.

The problem with all of this is Jason owes other players big sums as well at least 3 or 4 that are known and prob more. It seems pretty clear he was freerolling unless this guy that was supposedly "booking the bets" just turned and walked away on him

According to JY, this is what happened. He assumed the debts even though he doesn't have the money to pay out (and most people in that situation would just say "sorry guys we all got fucked"), so he is paying what he can, and it seems the debtors all agreed to this. So while he is trying to pay debts he assumed there is this $20k debt that is owed to him that could speed up the whole repayment process. too many people are saying "it looks like a freeroll"; the only thing that I KNOW is a freeroll is what Moneymaker is doing. the debts are from a year and half ago and he brushed him off for months before these other debts (the ones JY assumed) were even on his radar.

Even if he is insolvent now, it's impossible to prove that he was at the time. In that interim JY has opened a restaurant (and probably sunk all of his money plus taken on debt to open it) and had a kid, I'm pretty sure his financials are a lot different than they used to be in early to mid 2012 when moneymaker lost $20k betting through him.

[pavoe]

Chris said he was contacted by someone in april when he lost himslef that he was owed 18K by JY. If that is true it looks like a freeroll.

[Steve-O]

Chris said he was contacted by someone in april when he lost himslef that he was owed 18K by JY. If that is true it looks like a freeroll.

The timeline is confusing because its been 18 months, and there have been two Aprils. CM is saying someone in April of 2013 contacted him (that's my reading of it), which would be a year after the debt was accrued

[pavoe]

Chris said he was contacted by someone in april when he lost himslef that he was owed 18K by JY. If that is true it looks like a freeroll.

The timeline is confusing because its been 18 months, and there have been two Aprils. CM is saying someone in April of 2013 contacted him (that's my reading of it), which would be a year after the debt was accrued

Dont know how to copy/paste on an ipad but in the very first post of the thread CM says in the third paragraph that he got the skype message about the 18k shortly after he talked with JY to settle the dept. All a bit confusing, maybe i am wrong.


edit copy/paste:
The next week and a half went south for me and I lost back my 5 plus my credit limit of 15k. (He stated in his tweet that I owed 25 which is inaccurate)
I told him I was on the road and would take care of it when I got home. No problem he said. As I am sitting in airport headed home I get a Skype message from another guy that used to bet in the forum. He asked if Jason owed me money and I responded that I owed him. He told me Jason has owed him 18k for a few weeks and hadn't paid and asked I pay him instead of Jason.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...88&postcount=1