Hollaments are you a fraud

Paul Spillane

early price on thread of the year anyone?

smurph

is it not stephen Murphy instead of peter murphy?
Im confused.

Anyway the biggest problem here is that we lost Fran (jackyback), who has some excellent input in the Theory section, particularly the Omaha section.

Handbags at 40 paces....... tbh....

I know who my money would be on.....

Time for another one of those winner takes all grudge matches I think,,,,

Blip

Paul Spillane wrote: »

early price on thread of the year anyone?

A bit premature, Vegas hasn't started yet....R2G the return, "Insearch of Villain"

The C Kid

smurph wrote: »

Anyway the biggest problem here is that we lost Fran (jackyback), who has some excellent input in the Theory section, particularly the Omaha section.

Level?

smurph

The C Kid wrote: »

Level?

eh no, apparently he is not posting on boards again.....

BigCityBanker

smurph wrote: »

eh no, apparently he is not posting on boards again.....

I think you misunderstood Doms inference

5starpool

BigCityBanker wrote: »

I think you misunderstood Doms inference

You'll only confuse people and make them think I had some part in this thing. Yes, I do understand your post in case you are about to point the obvious out to me.

OK. Hollllaments asked me to post this for him.


Ok basically im only going to reply to two posts.
First is the op. Yes Dagunman i accept. I will play you heads up @ nlhe.
These are my terms and are non negotiable.
I want odds my 30k to your 60k.
The structure will be best of 11 500bb freeze outs. 1k starting stack. 1-2 non escalating blinds. If I win you pay me 60k. If you win I pay you 30k.
All matches will be played live in a venue of my choice. It will not be in a casino and will be somewhere close to where I live.
I do not want a huge crowd there. You can bring 5 people to rail you etc. I know Smoothcall(Andrew grimason) is a friend of yours but he can not be one of these people. I will have no more than 5 in attendance.
You seem to want this kind of public or w/e. I don’t but if you want one of your people to do live updates on boards that’s fine.
I will supply poker table/chips/professional dealer.
We will play the challenge asap. I would like to start tonight but understand the fact that’s short notice so will give you a few days to clear your schedule. As soon as you pick a day I will sort out venue, dealer etc.

Basically you called me out 100% here. The terms seemed to be heavily weighted in my favor but I don’t see how you can refuse after calling me out like that. I don’t know what made you post the op(ego, hatred for me from that one incident in killarney*, you actually genuinely thought this was going to be a profitable spot for you) but like I said after posting something like that you cant really back out.

There might be some questions re some of my terms so ill try an answer them now. I feel I should get odds because of the pure brazenness of his op. I don’t think anyone can deny that when you read the op he obviously thinks he’s better at poker than me. Afaik He plays 25/50 as his bread and butter. I haven’t played above 10/20 as my main game in prob a year. I want it played close to where I live for convenience. I don’t want a huge crowd there because I feel it will effect my play. I don’t want smoothcall to be there because I hate him more than ive ever hated anyone in my life before. Im pretty sure the next time I see him im going to pull him through the neck of his shirt and dance on his face so I feel it will be distracting if hes there. I want it played asap because I don’t want it do drag on and eventually fizzle out and not happen.

*This part will have no effect on the challenge but just want to address something. I did ask nicky to post that I accepted but to also apologize on my behalf about killarney. I was really drunk. I don’t think I got in your face really though. I just nudged you shoulder to shoulder when you were talking to champ87. You said whats your problem. Cant remember if I said anything. Champ87 then told me to calm down and I just walked away then. Pretty sure that’s the way it happened. Afair I was pretty out of line to Marc McDonnell AKQJ10 the same night but apologized to him the next day in the smoking area. I also posted in the bbv thread when I came back that I was sorry to anyone I offended down there when I was drunk. Basically I am genuinely sorry if I offended you.


The other post I want to respond to is baz2007s. Just fyi Murphy doesn’t like fran. He never did. When Murphy rang me that morning he asked me about a few hands, what I thought about them then he asked if I thought he was doing anything wrong. I had always told him that he was too tight but because I hadn’t put in any huge volume of hands vs him I used frans comments re him to reinforce my thoughts. It was in no way **** stirring. When Murphy took offence to this and rang me back to post that he would play fran hu and told me the terms I didn’t think he was srs at first but I said I would do it. I rang him back a few minutes later and asked him if he genuinely wanted me to post it. He said he did. I went back to bed but when I woke up later that evening I posted it. I didn’t throw in any 2cents to Murphy. I actually just told him that fran said he was bluffed out of pots too easy. Fran actually said a few more things about him. Id also like to know what other times I have apparently **** stirred involving fran. I cant recall any. I always got on well with fran and genuinely liked him. So many people including you ripped the piss of him everytime I played in the riverside. I never really said anything bad about him until the other night when semibluff rang me and told me he was attacking me on boards. I was kinda shocked when he reacted like that because I was genuinely just posting what I was asked too but when he did I just wasn’t gonna take it. If he thought there was a chance I was just making it up I would have thought he would have rang me. Also its funny your posting now saying Im **** stirring when I told you the exact same thing when in the crown the other night Murphy was standing beside us when I was telling you about it and my version of events didn’t differ at all from the one above. Murphy didn’t once say that the version was wrong and he confirmed he genuinely wanted to play him and never mentioned that I tried to goad him or **** stir him into doing it. Obv if I hadn’t said that to him he woudnt want to play him but it clearly wasn’t my intention when I told him. Also when I told you about it, you were laughing and saying you were gonna text him slagging him about it and telling Murphy u wanted to buy half his action. Just funny now how you changed your tune and are acting all high horsie about it.

BigCityBanker

So basically Hollaments is declining the challenge ^^

Looks like John may have been right

The C Kid

Deleted User wrote: »

OK. Hollllaments asked me to post this for him.


Ok basically im only going to reply to two posts.
First is the op. Yes Dagunman i accept. I will play you heads up @ nlhe.
These are my terms and are non negotiable.
I want odds my 30k to your 60k.
The structure will be best of 11 500bb freeze outs. 1k starting stack. 1-2 non escalating blinds. If I win you pay me 60k. If you win I pay you 30k.
All matches will be played live in a venue of my choice. It will not be in a casino and will be somewhere close to where I live.
I do not want a huge crowd there. You can bring 5 people to rail you etc. I know Smoothcall(Andrew grimason) is a friend of yours but he can not be one of these people. I will have no more than 5 in attendance.
You seem to want this kind of public or w/e. I don’t but if you want one of your people to do live updates on boards that’s fine.
I will supply poker table/chips/professional dealer.
We will play the challenge asap. I would like to start tonight but understand the fact that’s short notice so will give you a few days to clear your schedule. As soon as you pick a day I will sort out venue, dealer etc.

Basically you called me out 100% here. The terms seemed to be heavily weighted in my favor but I don’t see how you can refuse after calling me out like that. I don’t know what made you post the op(ego, hatred for me from that one incident in killarney*, you actually genuinely thought this was going to be a profitable spot for you) but like I said after posting something like that you cant really back out.

There might be some questions re some of my terms so ill try an answer them now. I feel I should get odds because of the pure brazenness of his op. I don’t think anyone can deny that when you read the op he obviously thinks he’s better at poker than me. Afaik He plays 25/50 as his bread and butter. I haven’t played above 10/20 as my main game in prob a year. I want it played close to where I live for convenience. I don’t want a huge crowd there because I feel it will effect my play. I don’t want smoothcall to be there because I hate him more than ive ever hated anyone in my life before. Im pretty sure the next time I see him im going to pull him through the neck of his shirt and dance on his face so I feel it will be distracting if hes there. I want it played asap because I don’t want it do drag on and eventually fizzle out and not happen.

*This part will have no effect on the challenge but just want to address something. I did ask nicky to post that I accepted but to also apologize on my behalf about killarney. I was really drunk. I don’t think I got in your face really though. I just nudged you shoulder to shoulder when you were talking to champ87. You said whats your problem. Cant remember if I said anything. Champ87 then told me to calm down and I just walked away then. Pretty sure that’s the way it happened. Afair I was pretty out of line to Marc McDonnell AKQJ10 the same night but apologized to him the next day in the smoking area. I also posted in the bbv thread when I came back that I was sorry to anyone I offended down there when I was drunk. Basically I am genuinely sorry if I offended you.


The other post I want to respond to is baz2007s. Just fyi Murphy doesn’t like fran. He never did. When Murphy rang me that morning he asked me about a few hands, what I thought about them then he asked if I thought he was doing anything wrong. I had always told him that he was too tight but because I hadn’t put in any huge volume of hands vs him I used frans comments re him to reinforce my thoughts. It was in no way **** stirring. When Murphy took offence to this and rang me back to post that he would play fran hu and told me the terms I didn’t think he was srs at first but I said I would do it. I rang him back a few minutes later and asked him if he genuinely wanted me to post it. He said he did. I went back to bed but when I woke up later that evening I posted it. I didn’t throw in any 2cents to Murphy. I actually just told him that fran said he was bluffed out of pots too easy. Fran actually said a few more things about him. Id also like to know what other times I have apparently **** stirred involving fran. I cant recall any. I always got on well with fran and genuinely liked him. So many people including you ripped the piss of him everytime I played in the riverside. I never really said anything bad about him until the other night when semibluff rang me and told me he was attacking me on boards. I was kinda shocked when he reacted like that because I was genuinely just posting what I was asked too but when he did I just wasn’t gonna take it. If he thought there was a chance I was just making it up I would have thought he would have rang me. Also its funny your posting now saying Im **** stirring when I told you the exact same thing when in the crown the other night Murphy was standing beside us when I was telling you about it and my version of events didn’t differ at all from the one above. Murphy didn’t once say that the version was wrong and he confirmed he genuinely wanted to play him and never mentioned that I tried to goad him or **** stir him into doing it. Obv if I hadn’t said that to him he woudnt want to play him but it clearly wasn’t my intention when I told him. Also when I told you about it, you were laughing and saying you were gonna text him slagging him about it and telling Murphy u wanted to buy half his action. Just funny now how you changed your tune and are acting all high horsie about it.

Ghey.

strewelpeter

Deleted User wrote: »

OK. Hollllaments asked me to post this for him.

These are my terms and are non negotiable.
I want odds my 30k to your 60k.

Ah well it was fun while it lasted.

ionapaul

We inch closer to the grudge match - usually people get along much better in real life, they'll prob end up being friends at the end of it all!

P.S. Why the smoothcall hatred?!

AdMMM

We don't really inch any closer. Those terms are pretty damn ludicrous.

roryc

thenutpeddler

Chubbs is like raymond, everybody loves him.

2/1 odds is ridiculous, just decline the thing already.

BigCityBanker

thenutpeddler wrote: »

Chubbs is like raymond, everybody loves him.

2/1 odds is ridiculous, just decline the thing already.

well he more or less has declined it

lol at 2/1 - you are already getting the best of it by having the matches in NLH rather than PLO or indeed a mix.

shoutman

Also going on to say that he pretty much can't decline because he called you out is ridiculous.

5starpool

I'll do it for 5/1 if there are negotiations. I can generate suitable dislike for most people if the money is right.

gazman59

roryc wrote: »

this guys a woman!!

Ste05

maybe Dagunman will still accept, his whole thing was that Holllla was a fraud and wasn't a Balla at all.

dagunman wrote: »

You like to portray yourself as a balla with a massive roll, but 2bh I reckon your a fraud and its about time someone exposed you.

So if he accepts this and gets someone to escrow before hand, it'll be a way to prove that Holllla is in fact a fraud when he obviously then declines to escrow.

/clutching at straws

ionapaul

Ste05 wrote: »

maybe Dagunman will still accept, his whole thing was that Holllla was a fraud and wasn't a Balla at all.
So if he accepts this and gets someone to escrow before hand, it'll be a way to prove that Holllla is in fact a fraud when he obviously then declines to escrow.

/clutching at straws

No, you could be right, escrow itself would prove something here IMHO.

thenutpeddler

Ste05 wrote: »

So if he accepts this and gets someone to escrow before hand, it'll be a way to prove that Holllla is in fact a fraud when he obviously then declines to escrow.

/clutching at straws

He'll easily get staked with those odds

shoutman

ionapaul wrote: »

No, you could be right, escrow itself would prove something here IMHO.

I don't mind being the escrow.

€90k South America here I come.

ionapaul

ionapaul wrote: »

No, you could be right, escrow itself would prove something here IMHO.

I was thinking the same. Otherwise I don't get this "call out". John's already admitted Danny is probably a better HU NLHE player than he is (might be misconstruing that point, he says "you'll be getting the best of it") so surely then it just comes down to how much money he actually has.

Which in and of itself is a pretty daft thing to challenge someone imo.

thechamp87

lol @ the idea of someone not actually liking chub.

and im not even going to bother commenting on the terms and conditions. this is clearly a cop out based on these conditions and danny knows this.

robinblinds

How about a 50k/40k?

eagle eye

BigCityBanker wrote: »

So basically Hollaments is declining the challenge ^^

Looks like John may have been right

I read that post and he did not say anywhere that he declined.

He did not infer that he declined either.

White Knight

eagle eye wrote: »

I read that post and he did not say anywhere that he declined.

He did not infer that he declined either.

A challenge was set and holla decided to respond with non-negotiable terms - indicates his decline to the inital challenge imo

adzer86

ridiculous terms>>> Kop out imo

roryc

adzer86 wrote: »

ridiculous terms>>> Kop out imo

this

eagle eye

White Knight wrote: »

A challenge was set and holla decided to respond with non-negotiable terms - indicates his decline to the inital challenge imo

He was challenged to wager 30k, he is willing to wager 30k. Thats what is said in the op.

White Knight

White Knight wrote: »

A challenge was set and holla decided to respond with non-negotiable terms - indicates his decline to the inital challenge imo

I don't get this. There was no specific challenge. I'm really not acting as an advocate for Danny here but John threw a general challenge at Danny's feet: "I think you are all talk, lets play a 30k series of HU matches". Danny comes back with his set of criteria for them. The 2/1 thing I don't get tbh but it's up to him and John. Let John come back with a counter offer and see where it goes from there surely?

Requiem4adream

eagle eye wrote: »

I read that post and he did not say anywhere that he declined.

He did not infer that he declined either.

I think the point being inferred is that if you challenge me to a boxing match and i accept, stipulation being you wear flippers and have 1 arm tied behind your back, my 'acceptance' would probably be viewed as the exact opposite!

2/1 is a big price to offer anyone. He'd have to have a big hatred for money to offer a good player 2/1. Pretty sure he doesnt hate money!

White Knight

Deleted User wrote: »

Let John come back with a counter offer and see where it goes from there surely?

Totally agree but holla said it was non-negotiable.

5starpool

eagle eye wrote: »

I read that post and he did not say anywhere that he declined.

He did not infer that he declined either.

It's hardly an acceptance either. Silly terms are the same as declining really.

thenutpeddler

You'd swear he was on dragons den

eagle eye

5starpool wrote: »

It's hardly an acceptance either. Silly terms are the same as declining really.

Its silly terms in your opinion. Either way he was challenged to wager 30k and he has offered to wager 30k regardless of the terms. If Dagunman is so sure he doesn't have that dosh, then he should accept the challenge, otherwise he should apologise for the accusations he made in the op. Imo of course.

White Knight

White Knight wrote: »

Totally agree but holla said it was non-negotiable.

It's really between him and John though, if they agree to alter those terms then that's that. Surely nothing is really non-negotiable.

RoundTower

Deleted User wrote: »

It's really between him and John though, if they agree to alter those terms then that's that. Surely nothing is really non-negotiable.

what? he obviously posted it because he doesn't want to play, but doesn't want to say so in as many words.

ocallagh

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't get this. There was no specific challenge. I'm really not acting as an advocate for Danny here but John threw a general challenge at Danny's feet: "I think you are all talk, lets play a 30k series of HU matches". Danny comes back with his set of criteria for them. The 2/1 thing I don't get tbh but it's up to him and John. Let John come back with a counter offer and see where it goes from there surely?

I don't agree. Holla's challenge is fundamentally different to the one dagunman posted. For that reason we have to treat them both as entirely separate challenges. Therefore as it stands dagunman has yet to accept Holla's offer and Holla has declined Dagunmans offer.

To say it's now on dagunman to come back with a counter offer based on Holla's reply is not right. Dagunman should simply refuse Holla's offer (and would be correct to do so) and would be perfectly acceptable for him to say Holla did not accept his challenge

RasTa

RoundTower wrote: »

what? he obviously posted it because he doesn't want to play, but doesn't want to say so in as many words.

This.

5starpool

eagle eye wrote: »

Its silly terms in your opinion. Either way he was challenged to wager 30k and he has offered to wager 30k regardless of the terms. If Dagunman is so sure he doesn't have that dosh, then he should accept the challenge, otherwise he should apologise for the accusations he made in the op. Imo of course.

From someone whose posts frequently fail to make sense, this is perhaps one of the most senseless of the lot.

Mr. Incognito

You all so really pissed me off in the multipliers challenge, feeling the need to hi-jack it sayen you'd take a $30k side bet on you doing it. Then the second theres interest you make up all these conditions and say you wont be doing it for a few months.

Interesting................

eagle eye

5starpool wrote: »

From someone whose posts frequently fail to make sense, this is perhaps one of the most senseless of the lot.

Its not senseless, its fact based. There is no need for your derogatory comments just because you don't like the fact that Holla has met the terms of the op's challenge by offering to wager 30k.

ocallagh

eagle eye wrote: »

Its not senseless, its fact based. There is no need for your derogatory comments just because you don't like the fact that Holla has met the terms of the op's challenge by offering to wager 30k.

seriously?

dagunman

all I can do is lol and these t&c. 2/1 is absolute madness.
I said it before, but if you are legit I am agreeing to play you at your game so how could this be profitable for me. For sure I can play nlh but havnt played it cash in over a year.
When I posted the initial post, ppl said I was mad not making him play any plo or roe but I wanted to give him no excuses. I stacked a clear edge in his favour all he do was come up with $30k that he claimed he had.
At 2/1 I'd be looking to stake him myself.
I didnt want to get personel but when someone tells you there going to dance on your best friends face it becomes v personel.
I'll agree to all ur conditions bar your 2/1. 30k to 30k

jimbling

I don't know any of the people involved in this at all, but it's pretty obvious the reply he has given is exactly the type of thing dagunman was getting at.

dagunman wrote: »

Then the second theres interest you make up all these conditions and say you wont be doing it for a few months.

i.e. Oh, I'll accept the challenge no problem, but *enter ridiculous set of stipulations here* have to be met first.

eagle eye wrote: »

Its silly terms in your opinion. Either way he was challenged to wager 30k and he has offered to wager 30k regardless of the terms. If Dagunman is so sure he doesn't have that dosh, then he should accept the challenge, otherwise he should apologise for the accusations he made in the op. Imo of course.

eagle eye wrote: »

Its not senseless, its fact based. There is no need for your derogatory comments just because you don't like the fact that Holla has met the terms of the op's challenge by offering to wager 30k.

This is just nuts. So, if Holla stated that he would put up the 30k against 500k of duganmans it would still be accepting the challange?? utter tripe.

Are you saying the OP had to make it clear that a challange to play heads up for 30k actually means that both players have to put up exactly 30k??
The OP was not a written contract... it's generally assumed on forums, and especially on a poker forum, that the readers will have a bit of common sense. :rolleyes:

adzer86

Eagleeye you get an F in business in school?

rules of offer and accpetance:
An offer can be made by party A, once a counter offer is made by party B, the original offer made by A is therefore deemed to be rejected and it is now up to party A to accept the counter offer or issure another counter offer

thedini

Hollaments and Eagleeye just LOL!!!!

eagle eye

adzer86 wrote: »

Eagleeye you get an F in business in school?

rules of offer and accpetance:
An offer can be made by party A, once a counter offer is made by party B, the original offer made by A is therefore deemed to be rejected and it is now up to party A to accept the counter offer or issure another counter offer

dagunman wrote: »

You like to portray yourself as a balla with a massive roll, but 2bh I reckon your a fraud and its about time someone exposed you.

This was said in the op. He has offered to wager 30k, so either he proves the above is true or he should apologise imo.