Wednesday, September 29, 2004

David Young is at it Again

In his blog David Young calls me a "mug" for paying 450 Euros for a 220 Euro event seat at the MasterClassicsofPoker a couple of years ago.

David has no idea of the reason why I paid this amount and I don't intend to go into ancient history here.

What really annoys me though is his refusal to allow comments on his blog.

If he wants to insult me publicly, fair enough. But at least give me the right of reply.

Perhaps, like on so many other occasions, he doesn't want anyone to hear explanations in case they pour doubt on his "facts".


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't allow comments for two reasons. One is that I don't know how to do it using the Tripod software (I tried once ages ago, but it never seemed to work) and two, I don't want the sort of childish abuse that I've had on the Gutshot and Hendon Mob forums. Have you seen some of the shit that's been said about me? It's far worse than anything you've had to endure. I created the site partly so that I could write ideas down without getting "you fat big-nosed nazi" * as the next reply.

You are able to rebutt anything I say on this site and I expect you to do so. And there is no shortage of sites where people can attack or abuse me. Furthermore, people can write to me to disagree and I can address what they say. I don't always do it, granted, but I have done it before, notably in the case of something I said about Nicaragua and also about Guy Bowles.

As for the matter in hand, don't you think it's a bit much to complain about the existence of a black market for tickets when you have in the past effectively encouraged scalping by buying a ticket from someone else? If nobody did it then the practice would cease overnight! There is the word 'no' in the English language.

And why didn't you 'fess up' in the article and state that you had used the 'black market'?


* Yes, I've been called all of these things and more besides.

9:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

David Young just lives in a world where he is always correct. A world where he can be a pseud. The number of time I have seen him proved wrong is more than the number of sunglasses Mr Arama owns.

David sees himself as a commentator on life but he has no life experience to look back on and relate to us.

The real worry for him is that at his age he really has nothing to look forward to. While he is not a bad player, he is still playing small stake games both live and on the web. He has burned his bridges with too many of the poker community to ever have a sponsership deal and the real problem is that at his age he is unable to return to a job he would think himself worthy of. Imagine him turning up for an interview and explaining why he had not worked for 3 years.

His poker earnings just about keep his head above water but how is he going to woo a lady into having a relationship with him? use his boyish good looks or sense of fun, I think not.

His bitterness comes from knowing he will still be playing the £100 table at the vic and making 30 bucks an hour on stars for the rest of his life, while gobbing off at the world and all those whose lives are more interesting than his.

P.S. did you know David lives in a council flat

An ex friend of David's

7:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Most of the above is completely true. I am not rich. I have never claimed to be. I am indeed a subsistence player, but I don't think I've ever claimed otherwise! I do live in a council flat. I have lived in it for ten years and even mentioned this on a forum once. I get a great deal from the landlord - my rent hasn't changed in the decade and I get the place to myself most of the time. It's in a great location and if you can get a double bedroom three minutes walk from a zone 2 tube station for under £400 per month, good luck. I'm not in a rush to get away!!

However, I am not sure that any of that is relevant. If I were a millionaire earning £200 grand per annum from poker, people would still find reasons to attack me.

I wasn't aware that I'm bitter. I just think it's amazing that Keith rallies against a black market when he's bought a ticket on it, while I don't disagree with it, but have never used it to buy a ticket because the premium that most sellers expect is too high.

The beauty of the net is that everyone can be a commentator these days. It costs nothing and I often advise people to blog, even those who don't agree with me.


P.S. Not sure what the bit about 'no life experience' to fall back and relate to others means.

7:52 AM  
Blogger The Camel said...

I think bookmakers have too much overround on their markets. Yet I bet with them.

I think QPR charge me too much for my season ticket. Yet I go every week.

Just because I disagree with something doesn't mean I don't participate in it. You have to be pragmatic in the real world.

Obviously I don't approve of abusive posts. But your blog will have the facility to remove anything you find offensive.

I can't see how anyone could think you've got a big nose.

8:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ten year £400 a month = £50,000 spunked up the wall.

What could you have bought 10 years ago for a morgage of £400?

Come on Dave, have replies on your own blog it would be so much fun. You would be in charge and could delete what you want, just what you always wanted!

An ex friend

8:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm glad this topic came up because I think there are a lot of interesting angles to it.

Like DY, I also sold Keith a ticket for €450. I realised that my flight was such that I would miss it in the unlikely event of me making the final. With virtually no chance of expecting 200% return on equity by playing the event myself, why shouldn't I solve both problems by selling the ticket? BTW, I'm not sure anyone playing that event could expect to return 200% so IMHO the market (and it was a buoyant market)was clearly overpriced. There is a line between doing this and buying with the intention of not playing.

Interestingly, what I was actually looking to do was give my ticket to Keith in return for a freeroll percentage of him. Although I'd never played with him at that point, I knew he was an able player and I wanted to be in the action. I was very impressed that he should rate his play that highly that he would prefer to buy me out instead of letting me have a slice. Fair play.

If that had actually happened, would I then have been a "scalper" for getting a free piece of his time rather than the direct overpayment? I don't see the difference, as both ways amount to a mark-up. I see the percentage slice I was after as a fair reward for locking up €220 in advance and being organised, and likewise a fair price for Keith to pay for not locking up the money in advance and being unorganised. Why should a free market not be able to put a monetary value on that?

As I was relatively unknown at festivals at the time, I wasn't going to give money away to an unknown person who would re-sell the ticket for an easy profit. I would have cheerfully given the ticket at face to someone I knew well and would have been happy to re-sell back to the casino if they had that facility available.

9:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

PS - that long-winded comment was me! I never intentionally post anonymously but I can't be arsed to sign up.....

Simon Galloway.

9:16 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from