Quote Originally Posted by Daly View Post
Quote Originally Posted by chinamaniac View Post

I'm not saying this is a good reason not to pay because had he won he would have been paid regardless of whether hastings played.
Right. Somehow this turned into a big story because someone thinks they shouldn't have to pay and it seems like many people think that should be the case. I still don't see it.

If I go down to the playground and bet a guy there on a free throw contest and I find out after the fact it's Stephen Curry then shame the fuck on me. Cavet Emptor and shit.
People that are shocked about this part of the story are likely the same people that think bluffing and sandbagging are unethical. Most of the people that actually made bets are just trying to freeroll a discount, something that's actually scummy compared to not fully disclosing your recent playing history and future plans of training regimen.

And what comes to actual multi accounting part of this, anyone that played against Hastings without knowing who they were playing against is free to torpedo that account to PS without breaking the international "snitches get stitches"-rule. But dragging anyone else in to that is not kosher (such as the few unnamed stars pro's that might have known the identity of the account).