Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
Quote Originally Posted by BeerAndPoker View Post
All I'm saying is he can't really answer in a public forum the bookie's name if their actually is one. It's true he could share with a trusted third party but that can be difficult to do as even the most trusted can turn at some point either posting the name anyway or even blackmailing him to keep quiet.

The whole situation is one big cluster fuck.

You have Chris Moneymaker who has publically admitted to stiffing bookies in the past who appears to be desperate dodging Jason from those texts to a guy who has lied/changed his story several times. I just can't read that thread you have too many idiots who are fantards and haters for both individuals posting a bunch of nonsense.

I just think their may be much more to come from this that hasn't been presented yet and if it comes to a point of where Jason's reputation is beyond repair then will he pull the famous disappearing act?
He hasn't even stated that he's afraid to post the bookie's name because of repercussions/fear.

Others in his corner are using that as a possible excuse, but even Jason himself won't say that.

And again, even if it's true, it's still not an excuse. If he was dealing with such a fearsome "boss" that he couldn't even name the guy in the event of a scam, then he has to eat the consequences of his own bad judgment. Otherwise it's just a stock excuse that can allow him to blame an imaginary person for his own failings/scams.
I'm trying to look at it from both sides. What we know is Jason "allegedly" knew a guy that ran a book and he was being the middle man placing/relaying bets for Chris.

Now if the bookies name was irrelevant to Chris Moneymaker at the time he got involved with this in the first place then Chris was being too trustworthy and naive about it all. Chris was willing to place bets through Jason to this bookie without the bookies name so he's putting his faith in a guy on the internet kind of like other people have in the past including here on PFA (tough but fair regarding Jasep).

I'm not saying any of this stuff is right or justifies a reasoning to do something a certain way but Moneymaker has shown tendencies to be very naive in this situation not caring enough to demand that name himself even if it's just a nickname when starting out so he's guilty to a fault especially when Chris has been betting for years.

Chris states he's been stiffed multiple times (he rolled some himself too) so whenever that happens to you in life shouldn't you be more protective of yourself not to get rolled again by getting as much information as possible? Well, he didn't because Chris was more desperate to place some bets then care about that at the time.