It’s On! Mark Seif v. Dan Druff, Round 1

by , Oct 31, 2007 | 10:41 am

In one corner, we have Mark Seif. He is an attorney and poker pro sponsored by Absolute Poker. His silence at the beginning of the recent AP scandal was viewed as suspicious by many online players, though he did speak with Pokerati nearly two weeks ago to express his concern over the situation. He then sat down with the Raw Vegas crew and made a statement, including some harsh words about Dan Druff, one of the players who has been investigating the cheating allegations.

In the other corner, we have Dan Druff, who is really Todd Witteles, an online poker pro who is part of the NeverWin Poker team. He met with Raw Vegas to record his rebuttal, saying that he has never accused Seif of anything, only presented the facts and asked that Seif come clean about his involvement or lack thereof.

So, who is the winner in this round? Could it be that this is only the beginning and the gloves haven’t come off yet?

8 Comments to “It’s On! Mark Seif v. Dan Druff, Round 1”

  1. DanM

    I think both guys know a thing or two about whom you associate with and what that can mean to your own credibility. In the end, I suspect they’ll both check it down, because neither would really want to unearth any and all dirty laundry that could theoretically be attached to their names by a single degree of separation. Then again, the Neverwin guys have never exactly been afraid of the aforementioned soiled linens.

    Full Disclosure: Pokerati should probably declare neutrality and recuse itself from taking sides, as we are listed as a “Friend of NeverwinPoker” and Mark Seif is one of our MySpace friends. Obvious conflict of interest.

  2. Ben Matlock

    Mark Seif is unreal. In typical asshole fashion, he never addresses the direct issues. He should be in politics. I’d love to write out about 5 questions I’m wondering and then have him respond directly to the question. And, the fact that he laughed about this issue shows what a true pos he is.

  3. DanM

    You really think so, Ben? When I interviewed him, I didn’t think he dodged much at all. He just responded cautiously, like a typical attorney. And he brought up the accusations of his own alleged cheating on his own. I didn’t even have to press him on the issue. He stared me so seriously in the eye with that one … he really wanted to get across that he had nothing to due with the regular operations of Absolute — you know, in case it turned out that his business friends were indeed scumbags. That seemed plausible enough to me … though it did leave just a tinge of speculation in the back of my mind about whether or not this was a case of “strong means weak.”

  4. California Jen

    I’ve tended to believe Mark until recently. I now think, at the very least, that Mark may be lying by omission. If he doesn’t have anything to hide about his relationship with AP, why can’t he simply disclose the nature of it? Does he own a percentage of the company? And what else does he need to hear about the findings of the Kahnawake Gaming Commission before severing ties with AP?

    If he’s so concerned with the law, maybe he should provide full disclosure to the poker public and remove himself from a bad situation. His reputation is tanking quickly…

  5. Kevin Mathers

    You would’ve thought Seif’s reputation was hurt by his actions in the Crispin Leyser v Jamie Gold saga.

  6. California Jen

    Ehhh, he was doing his job as an attorney and represented his friend (Crispin), and they got a nice settlement from what I hear. I didn’t see anything wrong with that…

  7. DanM

    ***Does he own a percentage of the company?***

    I think that has long been acknowledged. I don’t know the exact percentage … but maybe like 10? There is nothing wrong with Seif working on his own timeline, here. If I were one who had to potentially say goodbye to millions of dollars for fear it would cost me more in the long run, I might go through a LOT of due diligence first.

    And if we are talking about reputations tanking … the forum communities who broke this wide open acquired a lot of chips for their efforts … but I now see them donking them off by just jumping on bandwagons and reverting to their old conspiracy theorist ways.

  8. Ben Matlock


    I’ll have to listen to your interview of MS again. I don’t recall him being direct, but maybe my questions weren’t the ones that were answered. I guess I’m just still pissed at the fact that he “wasn’t convinced” that cheating was going on regarding the hand history of douche bag #1. That’s basic lawyer speak for prove it. My opinion is that in MS’s mind, he’s guilty as hell, but the burden of proof lies with the public. Good luck proving it.

    This was AP’s stance as well, until enough evidence was given/accidentally obtained. He “categorically” denies, libel, slander, blah blah blah. It’s all lawyer speak for “I’m guilty. I’m going to cast suspicion/throw allegations at someone else in the process. Good lucky finding any evidence to prove that I cheated.”

    I sure as hell hope that someone can get access to those HH’s. Then, I bet it’ll be a different story. I have never met or spoken with MS directly. I’m only going by the evidence brought forth so far and my read of him and his answers given in the interviews. Of course, I could be wrong. I’ve certainly reraised all in against the nuts on the river because my read was that my opponent was bluffing.