Ante-Up for Africa Stiffed by 2nd Place Finisher? Hard to say when optional donations in play
Kinda bummed I missed Ante-Up for Africa yesterday … Hollywood A-list celebrity-related traffic aside (and pictures of Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Charles Barkley, Don Cheadle, Jason Alexander, Dean Cain, Brad Garret, Herschel Walker, and Sarah Silverman playing poker) … this is arguably the biggest charity poker tournament of the year (in the world) … and I was curious how the money worked. It was my understanding that originally, 50 percent of the prize pool went to Refugees International a charity* … and the big winners, being already-rich folks moved by the excitement of no-limit hold’em and thoughts of a tax-deductible feel-good gesture, often chose to give their cash prize over to the honorary good cause as well.
But this year people were telling me it was a mere request for generosity — that winners give at least 50 percent of their prize payout to AUFA, which would be shipping the money to the Sudanese cause via the Enough Project (and the IRC?). That seemed a little odd to me, because hey, if the wrong person wins, there could be a problem. Sure enough, an email just came in over the transom — skewering a player named Adam Richardson, who most recently finished in 143rd place in a $1,500 NLH at this year’s WSOP, and 624th in last year’s main event — with the subject line, “What a Prick!”:
Not sure if you got this news. But the prick who won second place in the World Series of Poker charity event which is Ante Up For Africa, completely stiffed the charity.
Players do not have to give any money, according to the rules. But all the players know this is an important event set up to help a very good cause.
Many witnesses said the player was approached afterward by some of the organizers. He was asked politely if he cared to leave a donation, and replied that no one could do anything to stop him and that he was leaving with all the prize money. He walked out the door with like over $100,000.
The player was rude during the tournament and obviously had his own agenda, which was not in the spirit of helping the Ante Up for Africa cause. He likely saw a softer than usual field and took advantage. He had every intention of enriching himself at the expense of the charity.
The player’s name is Adam Richardson, from Poway, California.
He is bad for poker and needs to be called out for taking an angle shot in this event. I hope you will agree this is despicable behavior. The guy is a total prick. Roast his fucking ass.
Hunter
Hmm, if this is true, indeed, arguably poor form. We have not confirmed any of this (and I wasn’t there for the actual event), but the above is the email that’s circulating, and it at least raises the question why a certain chunk of the prize pool isn’t automatically taken out for the charity itself (as it is with most charity poker events).
* Ante Up for Africa “designated charities” have included the Enough Project, Not on Our Watch, and the International Rescue Committee. Refugees International was the recipient of Annie Duke’s Celebrity Apprentice fundraisers.
NOTE: Adam Richardson (unconfirmed) responds to “Hunter’s” accusations in the comments below.
Johnny Hughes says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:49am
Basically, the prop was, “If you win, we will ask you for money.”
He said, “No.”
He is a prick, but they should have planned this better.
Fro says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:57am
Just an educated guess…Nevada probably has laws that limit the vig on any wager. To hold a poker tournament with a 50% vig might be illegal, and making the contribution voluntary would get around this law.
Kevin Mathers says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:19am
Question: If he decides to donate his winnings to another charity, would you still consider him a stiff?
Easycure says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:22am
Info should be confirmed before the skewering begins. Although, in my mind, 50% of $100K is better than 100% of 100K, getting your ass kicked and your reputation tarnished. But that’s just me.
DanM says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:31am
***Question: If he decides to donate his winnings to another charity, would you still consider him a stiff?***
Theoretically … maybe not. If, say, he really believed in the cause but felt the targeted charity had some problems, so he gave it to another related charity … sure, I’d think that’s relatively OK, and maybe even good.
If he kept the whole $109k because his mom needed a life-saving surgery that cost $95k and he lost the first-prize payout to a two-outer on the river … I’m not so sure.
If he owed money to a bookie and needed to save his own legs and felt this tournament provided the best leg-saving EV … um, even less sure.
But at a minimum, grabbing from one charity to give to another is like wearing a Burger King shirt to an event benefitting the Ronald McDonald House.
BTW, it has been confirmed that one winner did keep 100 percent of his payout, and it definitely wasn’t the winner-winner.
Kevin Mathers says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:31am
Just to add from the Media Advisory Seth Palansky sent out:
“Everyone who participates in Ante Up For Africa pays a $5,000 entry fee and is encouraged to donate a portion of any winnings to the event’s cause.”
I believe all three years of AUFA it’s encouraged for people to donate at least half of their winnings. Usually, people decide to donate the entire amount, as noted that of the $670,680 in the prize pool this year, $362,000 was raised.
BJ Nemeth says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:06am
Yes, it sucks, but the guy didn’t break any rules. I’m sure several other people who contributed to the prizepool (ponying up the $5,000 entry fee) would have kept the money too.
For the record, I got the same email, but I would never publish it so prominently without full confirmation. You’ve basically given a random guy with your email address (and who knows what agenda) the full power of Pokerati behind his rant. If it were me, I would have excerpted a quote, summarized the rest with a healthy dose of salt, and say it was signed by someone calling himself “Hunter.”
Again, this guy played by the rules, and didn’t lie or cheat or steal. The entire point of a donation is that it has to be voluntary — or else it becomes extortion, even in the name of a good cause.
Whether that voluntary donation is made when entering the tournament (if 50% of the prizepool automatically goes to charity), or when cashing out (when they *request* that 50% of the prizepool goes to charity), doesn’t matter.
DanM says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:17am
***but I would never publish it so prominently without full confirmation.***
I’m very cautious with accusations of cheating, scamming, etc. But because this one involved using (abusing?) the rules, AND because it was sent to many people, AND because I did get it confirmed that one money-finisher didn’t donate anything from his winnings … I figured I should publish it. And if it turns out Adam Richardson did NOT do as accused, well then by all means I look forward to being able to squelch the rumors in complete context.
DanM says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:19am
***Whether that voluntary donation is made when entering the tournament (if 50% of the prizepool automatically goes to charity), or when cashing out (when they *request* that 50% of the prizepool goes to charity), doesn’t matter.***
This is a really good point, or at least a good question. How do smaller charity events — like Jen Harman’s SPCA shindig, and the Howard/Susie Lederer one just the other day — handle prizepool vs. donations?
BJ Nemeth says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:22am
I guess the only part of the email I have a problem with is the last paragraph. (But it taints the entire email, in my opinion.)
The first five paragraphs stick to supposed facts. But that last paragraph is rather venomous, don’t you think? Again, it makes me wonder if the emailer has some additional motivation. And I just don’t like the idea of giving an anonymous person with a possible grudge the full force of a site like Pokerati.
If the emailer signed their full, real name (and I knew it wasn’t a fake), I’d give him or her more leeway, because on some level they are standing behind their words. A defendant deserves the right to face their accuser, even if only virtually.
Adam Richardson says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:23am
“He walked out the door with like over $100,000.”
This is false, I haven’t been paid a dime.
“and replied that no one could do anything to stop him and that he was leaving with all the prize money”
Also false. I’ll meet anyone in person today who claims otherwise and we’ll find out who is lying. (One of us should prepare an apology.)
“The player was rude during the tournament”
I will make an additional donation to Ante Up For Africa if *any* player, dealer, floorman, or ESPN production staffer can describe a single incident where I was “rude during the tournament.” ($1,000 donation for each person that steps forward) This is a pretty weird claim; the atmosphere was very friendly and non-confrontational, much more like a party than a tournament. You know the whole thing was filmed, right Hunter?
Pretty disappointed,
Adam RIchardson
ps. Below is the email I sent to [email protected] last night about 30 minutes after the tournament ended:
——————————————————————-
“Ante up for Africa folks,
Hey gang, I just finished 2nd in your event in Vegas.
After the tournament ended I immediately told the payout folks that I needed to call my wife right away because she’s having difficulty with her pregnancy. During that phone call, I was interrupted three separate times by the Ante up people hounding me for a donation even though I told them to hang on a minute. (I’m sympathetic to striking while the iron is hot, but i was more than courteous when I asked them for time)
One Ante up for Africa gentlemen was waiting for me outside the bathroom and interrupted me (again!) while I was speaking with my wife, telling me that he wanted to know how much I was giving because he “wanted to go home”. I was probably a little rude while asking him to *please* let me finish my phone call. After I found out that all was well at home, I was completely annoyed that this guy actually followed me to the bathroom that I decided to cool off and take a walk. I’m back in my room now, and wanted to write this email to you before going to bed.
If possible, I’d like to speak with Annie Duke first before pledging my donation.
I’m playing the Main Event tomorrow so I can connect with her on a break, or we can speak via phone.
My cell is (xxx) xxx-xxxx and though I don’t answer it often I do return phone calls.
I’ll leave my Ante up for Africa cash at the cage until we speak.
Be well,
Adam”
——————————————————————-
BJ Nemeth says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:24am
I’m not certain, but I believe in the Lederer’s tournament, 100% of the entry fees went to charity. The prizepool wasn’t money, but actual prizes like Apple laptop computers, iPods, specially-designed bracelets (with actual gold for the winner), and a you-can’t-buy-this-anywhere $20,000 seat on an episode of “Poker After Dark.”
Adam Richardson says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:27am
pss. In my ESPN interview before the final table began, I told Norman Chad exactly how I planned to handle my donation. (again, this was also filmed) More to come I’m sure, but going to focus on the Main Event today.
Adam “Admo” Richardson
Bryn Kenney says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:06am
This Admo guy is the same two plus two poster who has been extorting people like steven ware and photoshopping phalluses and other offensive images onto peoples faces on numerous poker forums.
frank says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:11am
Good for you Adam for clearing the water on this. Shame on AUFA for 1) hounding you 2) setting up a payout structure that will allow this to potentially happen and 3) having this shill put out an email like that essentially telling the world you are a scumbag.
Maybe they should take a cue from Lederer’s tourney if they want to make more $$ than the vig. Get rid of the ambiguity and then let the folks that want to pony up 5K for the charity do so. Essentially extorting the $$ from the winners by throwing them over the coals on the internet if they have not “gven more back” is plain wrong. In the end..this does more harm than good. I would make a point and give the $$ to another charity.
Johnny Hughes says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:43am
Poor ‘ol Admo. Every time his name comes up, it is because he is dumb, incredibly self-centered, and an all-day sucker.
He is the sucker that “loaned” Cornell Fiji $30,000, and then did all manner of evil things to harass Fiji, even after he knew he would get his money back. He harassed Fiji’s parents. Did he get his money back???
He is a hater on TwoPlusTwo. I would not believe a word he says. His thinking he is always the center of attention, chronic immaturity, will mean he will want all the lime light possible, but will cough up some bucks for charity.
Kevin Mathers idea to let him pick the charity is an excellent one.
Johnny Hughes says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:44am
Admo’s gonna milk it like a tied goat.
Poker Shrink says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:57am
This is better than another Michael Jackson story but not by much.
Booter Kee says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:14am
So how much did he lose?
H Crane says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:51am
Everyone who is on here telling this guy what he should do with his money is a blood sucking leech who is so dumb and stupid that you could never win a poker tournament like this anyway. It’s a poker tournament. Just because some of the players say they are going to donate money to the charity doesn’t mean everyone has to. If it was going to be a charity event, they should have took a percentage from the prize pool to donate to the charity. That would guarantee that everyone was giving and equal percentage to charity. Why even bother playing and winning the tournament if you were going to be forced to give the money away by a bunch of weasels.
recky says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:57pm
Johnny Hughes, just to clear things up he did not loan Steven Ware/Cornell Fiji 30K. It was a swap, online cash (FTP) for real money
Anonymous says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:55pm
Wow, what a seriously messed up situation.
First of all, how does anyone with an email simply signed “Hunter” get any credibility whatsoever? Why didn’t he include the organization he is affiliated with? Are we supposed to assume it was AUFA?
I’ve never met Adam, but his reputation on the forums is solid. If his side of the story is true, I don’t blame him one bit. Still, the charity should not suffer simply because of one guy “who wanted to go home.”
If I was Adam, I’d give 25% of my winnings to AUFA and the other 25% to the charity of his choice. Then I’d make it very clear that they would have gotten all of it had they not harassed him.
“Hunter” should be fired (from wherever it is that he works) simply for being as unprofessional as humanly possible.
Johnny Hughes says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:56pm
So, I got really slammed on TwoPlusTwo for my comments here. And slammed by some guys I really respect, big time. So, I wrote this:
Some of the people I really respect on here think my comments were out of line. They know Admo, and I do not. So, I will apologize to him, while we wait to see how this develops.
I have always defended the lone individual against the mob, right or wrong.
I defended Dutch Boyd, Joy Miller, Brandi Rose. She wrote me nice letters.
I defended Steven Ware. We exchanged letters.
There is a psychological effect called, in context, scapegoating, in a therapy group or sensitivity group. When everyone gangs up on one person, the leader must pull them off. like a bull fighter in a rodeo. This is to avoid a psychotic episode, or worse.
Our defense systems are geared to argue with one or a few people, however we simply cannot handle a lot of negative feedback at once from many people. I could definately see that situation with Steven, Brandi, Joy, and Dutch. What the **** difference does it make what they have done??? When thousands and thousands of people attack one person, it is my duty, my duty to defend that person, and to reach out for some fun and funny private messages.
I felt Admo’s attacks on Steven, and contacts with Steven’s parents went over the line.
I really worry about the Internet effect of having one person attacked by thousands. Today, that might be Admo. As calmer heads have said, let us hear the whole story and see what he donates.
Early on, Kevin Mathers suggested Admo pick a charity he liked. That is a good idea.
Johnny Hughes, Ph.D.
Jon says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:19pm
Dan Michalski,
did you bother doing any investigating before you publish this crap? Very unprofessional of you to do so.
And to Johnny Hughes…you are a douche and an idiot
DanM says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:17pm
Jon, I did very little investigating. I simply reported the facts that someone was out there making some accusations … and look, now we can see multiple sides of the story all in one place.
Though I do consider myself a “professional blogger”, I think we all know the oxymoronic nature of that phrase.
Kevin Mathers says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:17pm
Jon, if Dan didn’t “publish this crap”, someone else would have, and it’d make its way to 2+2 and the other forums. “Hunter” considered Adam some random nobody, and figured he’d shame him into donating.
Watchmaker says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:31pm
Listen….
Do you hear that?
It’s the ‘Who Cares Hindenberg’ crashing down to earth.
I think I will play Ante Up For Africa next year, just so I can tell them to pound fucking sand in the event I run deep and cash good.
Adam, say the word and we can get working on offensive ‘African themed’ photoshops.
DCJ001 says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:35pm
This “article” slamming someone on the basis of an unconfirmed hearsay is the type of sensationalism that some paparazzi use to create incidents with celebrities to create “the news.”
DanM said, “I figured I should publish it. And if it turns out Adam Richardson did NOT do as accused, well then by all means I look forward to being able to squelch the rumors in complete context.” It sounds, to me, like Adam Richardson is guilty until proven innocent. These days, any doofus wannabe with a webpage can say whatever he’d like, regardless of whether or not it is true.
DanM says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:24pm
***guilty until proven innocent***
please, it’s gonna take much more than that to tilt me. consult amy calistri or bj if you would like some tips.
as far as i know, we are not a court … in fact, we try (but don’t always succeed) to not make judgments. look dude, we’re just an electronic conversation about poker. if this is what people are talking about, it’s what people are talking about. i’ll do my best to keep things informed and semi-intelligent. I’m not looking to slam Adam Richardson any more than I am “Hunter”.
But this little quabble does touch on plenty of issues that are relevant, such as … “optional” charity donations at the biggest charity tournament in the world — because whether they realize it or not, AUFA serves as a model that so many smaller charity events will try to follow.
Also … Adam’s claims of some strong-arming by AUFA? Though one has to wonder why he was the only winner who ran into any troubles, this is by no means the first time I have heard complaints about what “pricks” the AUFA operators can be. Keep in mind, I’m not calling them pricks … but am letting people know that I have heard that exact term thrown around days and weeks before the event by different people who have tried to deal with them in one way or another. But hey, each one of those incidents comes with their own multisided story, too.
To me the “business” of philanthropy can be pretty fascinating … particularly as it pertains to poker, which as an industry relies on charity endeavors to show its goodness (or at least do good) when our world is one that many find objectionable. It’s very similar to the model Hamas uses, actually.
melissa h says:
July 4th, 2009 at 12:37am
ok johnny hughes is just plain creepy. im too tired right now to outline the obvious but i think u all know what i mean.
im in the “yeah admo” camp, i like him. ive had several email exchanges and i believe him to be one of the good guys.
i love how when a smart guy figures out a prop bet that no one can beat everyone rags on him. admo has done this numerous times.
i know never to bet with him, that he will always have the best of it. i also know that if someone tried to bet me, admos the guy id go to for advice on said bet.
his photoshop work is among the best out there.
as for the charity tournament. he is allowed to enter, win, and not donate a cent.
but he didnt. instead he wins 2nd place goes to converse with his wife. while doing so he is strong armed for a donation?
he was also forced to account to all of us as to the state of his wifes pregnancy which, to me is a private matter.
quite frankly if i were admo i would get a gaurentee from the organizers that no one will ever again be harassed under to give a donation before i gave AUFA one cent!
i also believe that when dan shak and johnny world gave 100% of their winnings a bad precedent was set. if they only allowed you to give up to half i believe many more people will play.
i just dont think theres anything wrong with playing a tourney and keeping half, or the more charitable way to look at it would be to give half.
best, melissa
DanM says:
July 4th, 2009 at 6:29am
***as for the charity tournament. he is allowed to enter, win, and not donate a cent.***
melissa, i’m just playing devil’s advocate here — and have never met either of the parties involved — but really, how difficult does it have to be, when you enter into this event knowing the SUGGESTED donation is 50 percent, no matter who you’re on the phone with, to simply say, “yes, 50 percent, that’s fine” … knowing you can always come back later and give more if you so choose. even if you had to say, hey, look, i’m broke, i can only give 40 … great, but how long does that take to say so the organizers can do what they need to do to account for the money raised?
but if you enter with the intention of giving any less than the default, anything that requires conversation with family or friends or lawyers, well then you’re not really honoring the spirit of the event, are you? and then should you really be playing in it?
that’s the big question i think Richardson still has to answer — not because some unknown started bad-mouthing him (and at least one blog chose to pass on the put the vitriol up for discussion), but because he apparently CHOSE to complicate things. If he had some personal matters to attend to, then why not make it easier on everyone and just say, sure, 50 percent. fine. now if you’ll excuse me, this is an important phone call.
that takes as long as it does to show your ID.
regardless of the circumstances, did he not make things more difficult for himself by not just playing ball?
the fact that he’s the only one who ran into such problems is what makes me want to ask him, yo, dude, you shootin’ angles in a charity event? kinda slow-rolly, no?
i’ll give him the benefit of the doubt for now, but let’s also remember that this tournament is about raising money to SAVE LIVES … again, i’ll withhold judgment ’til it all plays out. but really, imho it’s been made way more difficult than it had to be, particularly now as all eyes will be on Richardson to see what he does.
p.s. i hope his wife and baby-to-be are OK. it is understandable that such an important personal matter could have someone not responding well to a seemingly unrelated situation.
Vika S says:
July 4th, 2009 at 10:42am
Johnny Hughes was exposed as a failed never was conman. He now makes pathetic attempts at attention telling storys of the old days. Of course he never mentions the times he was caught pulling cons.
DanM says:
July 4th, 2009 at 11:17am
OK, kids, this is not 2+2. Take it outside. (You too, Johnny.)
anonymous says:
July 4th, 2009 at 11:42am
the question that crosses my mind is why is some guy playing in a charity poker tournament when his wife is about to deliver his baby and is having complications?
If it’s b/c the charity is important to him then there shouldn’t have been any controversy with regards to the donation.
Otherwise, it’s telling me that it was his original intention to not donate 50% of his winnings.
DockDD says:
July 4th, 2009 at 5:17pm
Why hasn’t this Hunter person been outed? The “facts” espoused in the email either already have or will be proven false, so I believe it is Hunter who needs to have their ass roasted.
melissa h says:
July 4th, 2009 at 7:22pm
melissa, i’m just playing devil’s advocate here — and have never met either of the parties involved — but really, how difficult does it have to be, when you enter into this event knowing the SUGGESTED donation is 50 percent, no matter who you’re on the phone with, to simply say, “yes, 50 percent, that’s fine†… knowing you can always come back later and give more if you so choose. even if you had to say, hey, look, i’m broke, i can only give 40 … great, but how long does that take to say so the organizers can do what they need to do to account for the money raised?
>> i think the 50% was what the organizers wanted in the beginning. its a suggested amount. for someone to give less than suggested and be criticized seems to me like the bad form here. if i play in this event and win, i would give what i could afford. if im required to give more than that then i believe the organizers should state, pls dont play unless youre planning on giving the set percentage or more.
in admos case he had to make a private phone call. we now know that it was a call to his wife who is having a difficult pregnancy.
he has a right when interrupted to ignore or say just a min. to that dont you think? hes already stated he understands striking while the irons hot but that this guy bothered him 3 times?
and i dont agree you should answer yes 50% or answer anyone whos being rude like that.
the organizers can wait however long the person donating needs to take care of personal biz.
but if you enter with the intention of giving any less than the default, anything that requires conversation with family or friends or lawyers, well then you’re not really honoring the spirit of the event, are you? and then should you really be playing in it?
>>now you calling the suggested amount the default. next it will be the required amount…you see how these things go?
as for the spirit of the event personally i agree, but im not sure a “spirit” has been defined. its seems to me that because all this grief is being caused perhaps the organizers need to spell out what they want and make it clear that if one isnt willing to participate in a certian manner they shouldnt play.
that’s the big question i think Richardson still has to answer — not because some unknown started bad-mouthing him (and at least one blog chose to pass on the put the vitriol up for discussion), but because he apparently CHOSE to complicate things. If he had some personal matters to attend to, then why not make it easier on everyone and just say, sure, 50 percent. fine. now if you’ll excuse me, this is an important phone call.
that takes as long as it does to show your ID.
>>see above, from what i know of admo, he would never be dictated by rudeness. besides which he had already said he was donating.
i find it incredible that it the op posted that w/o the awareness that the funds were left at the cage.
regardless of the circumstances, did he not make things more difficult for himself by not just playing ball?
>>i too read that he wanted to donate 50% and talk to annie, and that he was to offer 100% if she gave the list of ub superusers.
THAT if true i think is wrong, but more on that later.
also i never read admo saying any of that (couldnt find it) only someone saying that he said it, which im sooo sick of!
the fact that he’s the only one who ran into such problems is what makes me want to ask him, yo, dude, you shootin’ angles in a charity event? kinda slow-rolly, no?
>>>oh thats just plain silly because someone has a prob, in no way even suggests so roll or any scam in anyway. maybe he just didnt want to deal with the guys who were acting like goons while he was on the phone? IDK but! neither do you. and to me thats the most important part, we simply dont know all of it.
i’ll give him the benefit of the doubt for now, but let’s also remember that this tournament is about raising money to SAVE LIVES … again, i’ll withhold judgment ’til it all plays out. but really, imho it’s been made way more difficult than it had to be, particularly now as all eyes will be on Richardson to see what he does.
>>this seems very squewed to me. its not up to you or i to give him the benifit of the doubt, its up to us to look at and discuss the bigger picture and present the info as we get it.
as for those people on the other (not so nice ) forum. imo,
youre all insane to treat annie like shit for not answering to you or anyone for UB.
shes the hired top pro there. just like phil.
there are minor children in china work long hours in unhealthy conditions making shoes for nike. i dont see any movement by you all to take down tiger woods, or kobe bryant.
its no different. big co’s hire people who are hi profile and incorporate them into the brand.
i believe most of you know this but cant resist getting on an old bandwagon attacking her because someone you admire has attacked her in the past.
how so incredibly sad for you.
annie has worked very hard for AUFA and her charity has a sterling reputation. AUFA has nothing to do with UB or FTP or PS other site other than maybe (and i dont know this) giving money.
bringing UB into this (to me) is no different that bush making online gaming illegal via the port security act at the midnight hr.
or another way to put it its very chicken shit to attack annie for UB via AUFA the charity she is involved with.
it makes me so crazy when i see people work so hard take so much shit being attack by people who basically do nothing but waiting for them to make a mistake.
why? is there an intelligent answer to that?
my very best, melissa
p.s. i hope his wife and baby-to-be are OK. it is understandable that such an important personal matter could have someone not responding well to a seemingly unrelated situation.
>>well LDO
DanM says:
July 4th, 2009 at 9:24pm
Adam Richardson (who has not replied to my email) said:
***I’m playing the Main Event tomorrow so I can connect with her on a break, or we can speak via phone.***
This is not true — as Richardson did not play in Day 1a nor Day 1b. We’ll still give him some brief benefit of the doubt, in case family matters became suddenly more important. That may not be my place, as Melissa points out … but I’ve grown very curious about this one winner who stands out as different from the rest — and I’d really like to know why Ante Up for Africa hasn’t received any money from him.
DanM says:
July 4th, 2009 at 9:34pm
MELISSA SAYS:
>>i think the 50% was what the organizers wanted in the beginning. its a suggested amount. for someone to give less than suggested and be criticized seems to me like the bad form here. if i play in this event and win, i would give what i could afford. if im required to give more than that then i believe the organizers should state, pls dont play unless youre planning on giving the set percentage or more.<< We're just going to disagree here, I think, Melissa. Nevada law prevents them from "requiring" a donation or taking out the donation money from the prize pool up front (like we did in Texas) ... so the only way to have charity tournaments here that still have real cash payouts is with a SUGGESTED donation. It's perhaps a soft word in place of EXPECTED, but regardless, you really probably shouldn't be playing in it if you don't think you can give the suggested amount ... kinda like going to a museum, i suppose. And even if you couldn't "afford" it ... even though you are paying $5k up front with no guarantee of finishing in the top 10 percent ... a simple "40 percent" or "30 percent" or whatever is all it woulda taken. though even organizers might dislike this, the public would be none the wiser and the charity would be in better shape.
Vinny B. says:
July 4th, 2009 at 10:13pm
I don’t really care if this guy kept the money or not. I wouldn’t play in the tourney because I think sending any money to Africa is a complete waste. How many billions upon billions have we sent them over the years for nothing?
Adam, obviously someone leaked that they didn’t get any money from you. As a result, stiff them and don’t give them a dime. It doesn’t matter now because they will always treat you like some kind of deadbeat. You might as well not give them anything, because they have killed your rep, at least among the self-congratulating liberal idiots who play poker. So what if Annie Duke and Phil Gordon don’t like you anymore? Boo hoo. Enjoy the $100K. There are many people like me who think you should keep it. They just don’t have the guts to say it.
DanM says:
July 4th, 2009 at 10:32pm
Vinny, though I think George Bush would disagree with you about money sent to Africa being “for nothing” — he did more for that continent than any president prior — you’re kinda making the point … just as you wouldn’t play in the event because you don’t believe in the cause, neither should anyone else who doesn’t have intentions of donating.
(We’ll have to save your defense of genocide for a different time and place/never.)
If there were a tournament to raise money to help, say, put an end to gay marriage, I likewise would not play in it, because I do not believe in that cause. And if I did enter it, hoping to take money away from that cause, well, frankly, I’d have to look at myself in the mirror and justify my stealing from one charity to give to myself (or another “better” charity of my choosing.
Adam, if you are looking for a defender while you go the Jamie Gold-ish route, I would recommend hiring Melissa before Vinny, as I think he is hurting your cause.
donkey bomber says:
July 4th, 2009 at 11:59pm
What a great issue.
I would bet that there is a way for the charity to take out the money prior to the event beginning even if it would be harrahs taking 50% vig up front then donating it.
I hate when charities don’t have a fixed amount. I think they get greedy thinking they will get more than their requested amount and know that most people wouldn’t play if they stated that they want it all.
Charities do strongarm people and I don’t like it. Next time the girl scouts have a car wash in my neighborhood that says free car wash “donations only” I’ll have 3 clean cars and a fat wallet.
donkey bomber says:
July 5th, 2009 at 12:08am
I also think that anyone who thinks he entered a 1day charity event to make a good investment doesn’t understand tournament poker. The structure for that event is a total crapshoot.
melissa h says:
July 5th, 2009 at 12:30am
rather than point you to another forum where admo posted his statement im copying it here. im interested in what everyone thinks…
Mrs. Admo is ok. For reasons I won’t go in to, we are genuinely terrified that this baby might miscarry.
I might not be around much for a bit but can promise that I’ll eventually answer any legitimate questions that come up.
My latest email to Ante Up For Africa:
—–
Mr. Epstein,
My apologies for not getting in touch yesterday. I traveled back home to take care of a personal matter.
I have limited time today so please let me know if there’s anything you’d like me to elaborate on.
Let me be perfectly clear: when I collect the tournament payout check I am going to donate (a still to be determined amount) between 50%-100% of the winnings to Darfur-based charities. To be candid, it seems likely at this point that some portion of those winnings may go to charities other than Ante Up for Africa. In that event I’ll forward donor statements and cancelled checks as well as 1098-C’s from the IRS so that Ante Up for Africa can verify that the prize pool from the players in the tournament went to relief efforts in the Sudan.
Over the past 17 years I’ve been a monthly donor to World Vision so that organization seems like a natural fit. Though our previous donations targeted the needs of children living in abject poverty, World Vision also has a specific fund earmarked for aiding the refugees in Darfur. Their administrative costs are lower than Ante Up for Africa, and they don’t run smear campaigns or extort their donors.
Ante Up for Africa claimed that I never intended to donate. Consider that I emailed you less than 30 minutes after the tournament to discuss the donation. When the tournament ended I intended to ask Annie Duke if we could connect at the PURE after party or meet for breakfast before playing the Main Event to talk about a few things. When she and Don Cheadle went to the stage to take pictures with the winner I checked messages and returned an important call from my wife. My encounter with your staffer that followed me to the bathroom who wouldn’t allow me to finish my call (because he ‘wanted to go home’) was so unpleasant that I blew off the after party, went up to my room at the Rio and emailed you directly. When the next morning’s ‘news’ story broke it brought the integrity of your organization in question. However I can promise you if anything changes as a result of this incident, it will be the vehicle of the donation, not the amount.
Once things settle down for us here at home can you arrange a face-to-face meeting with “Hunter”? If I’m unable return to Las Vegas before the Main Event, I’ll fly out to meet with her at your offices.
Based solely on that the attached email, poker news outlets and WSOP press releases have reported that I ‘took the money and ran’. Since you folks haven’t taken me at my word or corrected the error, I’ll arrange (at my expense) for a poker journalist to visit the cage with me when I collect the winnings to verify that I haven’t taken anything. You can choose the journalist, provided it is someone that received the initial email. BJ Nemeth seems like the obvious choice if he’s willing.
Until this all gets sorted and I return to Las Vegas, I’ll send a partial donation today to Ante Up for Africa via personal check. Can you confirm this address?
Ante Up For Africa
1112 Montana Ave.
Suite 59
Santa Monica, CA 90403
I attempted this donation yesterday morning, but there were no Ante Up for Africa personnel on site and the supervisors at the cage wouldn’t accept it.
Adam Richardson
—–
Not sure if you got this news. But the prick who won second place in the World Series of Poker charity event which is Ante Up For Africa, completely stiffed the charity.
Players do not have to give any money, according to the rules. But all the players know this is an important event set up to help a very good cause.
Many witnesses said the player was approached afterward by some of the organizers. He was asked politely if he cared to leave a donation, and replied that no one could do anything to stop him and that he was leaving with all the prize money. He walked out the door with like over $100,000.
The player was rude during the tournament and obviously had his own agenda, which was not in the spirit of helping the Ante Up for Africa cause. He likely saw a softer than usual field and took advantage. He had every intention of enriching himself at the expense of the charity.
The player’s name is Adam Richardson, from Poway, California.
He is bad for poker and needs to be called out for taking an angle shot in this event. I hope you will agree this is despicable behavior. The guy is a total prick. Roast his ****ing ass.
Hunter
melissa h says:
July 5th, 2009 at 12:52am
does it seem odd to everyone that he would play in an AUFA tournament and then (possibly)give his winnings to another charity that supports relief efforts in sudan as does AUFA? because he doesnt like the operating costs of AUFA?
i dont really get all that but im guessing more will be revealed?
ok on to this,
Dan said: “Adam, if you are looking for a defender while you go the Jamie Gold-ish route, I would recommend hiring Melissa before Vinny, as I think he is hurting your cause.”
im not defending admo as much as im defending ones rights playing in a charity tournament.
i think the jamie gold-ish route is a bit of a cheapshot, but then dan maybe you have different/more info than i.
the man is saying he has a child whos life is in danger and we’re arguing about a tournament result.
if you had a frightened partner on the end of the (phone) line and someone was standing there trying to interrupt you might get alittle hot.
im only responding to what ive read on various forums. most of what i/we read is gossip. gossip that we then turn into fact, with ease! i think that the ease is whats disturbing to me.
its like- i heard you might of done such and such, now prove you didnt or im going to ruin you.
DanM says:
July 5th, 2009 at 2:52am
that’s a pretty good letter adam wrote (thanks for posting it) … and he’s holding himself to a high standard of accountability, so to that, all i can say is, “good luck, all-in.”
what i am referring to when i say “jamie gold-ish” is someone who creates a mountain out of his own molehill when few other people run into the same problems.
BJ Nemeth says:
July 5th, 2009 at 9:39am
Admo said in his letter (quoted by Melissa) – “Since you folks haven’t taken me at my word or corrected the error, I’ll arrange (at my expense) for a poker journalist to visit the cage with me when I collect the winnings to verify that I haven’t taken anything. You can choose the journalist, provided it is someone that received the initial email. BJ Nemeth seems like the obvious choice if he’s willing.”
BJ Nemeth is willing. And there won’t be any expense, as long as it happens while I’m still in Las Vegas. (Until July 22nd or so.)
Adam Richardson says:
July 5th, 2009 at 10:09am
>> someone who creates a mountain out of his own molehill
Ante Up For Africa manufactured defamatory claims.
Pokerati published an anonymous email with little to no fact-checking.
With respect… I created this mountain? Feels more like damage control.
Adam Richardson
ps. thanks for offering, BJ. Gary Wise also volunteered and I’ve invited Pokerati to tag along if they’re interested. Full disclosure: I once met BJ Nemeth at the World Series and told him that he was the best tournament reporter working, though I doubt he would remember the meeting. I’ve never met Gary Wise or anyone from Pokerati.
BJ Nemeth says:
July 5th, 2009 at 10:14am
No, unfortunately I don’t remember that specific meeting. Anytime someone tells me that, I’m shocked that (a) someone knows who I am, (b) someone follows the poker media enough to have an opinion on the issue, and (c) someone knows who I am.
melissa h says:
July 5th, 2009 at 10:14am
oh i see what dan meant when he said jamie gold-ish.
even so i think since that story was so tainted i have problem using that as an analogy.
so many people skim read and would read that as admo = jamie =scum.
ducy?
and bj if you do act as proff, ill make photo as long as were still here.
melissa h says:
July 5th, 2009 at 10:52am
heres a question? why is everyone trashing AUFA?
which is also Refugees International. this is such a good charity!
Annie Duke, Don Cheadle and Norman Epstein have raised over 2 million dollars so far.
i believe trashing them is really wrong and well, mean spirited.
pls. take a min. and look at this site and decide for yourself.
http://www.refintl.org/blog/ante-africa-does-it-again
personally im proud of my friends in poker who do so much for those who have nothing. instead of being so critical perhaps we should
take a long hard look at the work these people have done and
thank them.
and of course contribute what you can!
josh says:
July 5th, 2009 at 11:14am
Fire hunter
sadpanda says:
July 5th, 2009 at 7:56pm
I don’t really feel that bad for Richardson getting hated on. So he admits he was actually rude to the guy who asked on him on 3 separate occasions about a donation while just walking around on the phone. If the pregnancy was that difficult, maybe he should have skipped playing poker, and been in the hospital with his wife. I feel sorry for the guy whose job it was to follow this asshole around until he finally would give an answer. How long does it take to say “Hey man, I’m gonna email them later, I won’t have an answer for you tonight, go home.”? Only marginally longer than it takes to say “Wait another (however many) minutes, I’m on the phone, you worthless $7/h peon” 3 times. Who cares if that guy is tired and wants to go home..
Couldn’t get anymore self-righteous in here, so I thought I’d add some. Enjoy.
sadpanda says:
July 5th, 2009 at 7:57pm
and Hunter is the worst of them. Shouldn’t have given him such a voice…
Enrique Rios(PrimogenitoX) says:
July 7th, 2009 at 2:05am
I personally vouch for Adam Richardson’s integrity. I have had multiple five figure dealings with him and found him to be above reproach. All of you in Dallas know who I am and all of you online know me as PrimogenitoX. I would feel comfortable loaning him a quartermillion no questions asked.
Truong Nguyen says:
July 7th, 2009 at 1:13pm
I like Pokerati but publishing an anonymous email is in very poor form.
The WSOP issued a press release stating this never happened and the guy pledged btween 50-100% of his winnings to charity. Most people take him at his word. Why hasnt this been changed?
DanM says:
July 7th, 2009 at 1:18pm
follow-up coming … but i can say here that my research has backed up most of what adam richardson is contending.
Zero says:
July 7th, 2009 at 7:19pm
For those of you wondering why he would choose another organization to donate to, many of these “charities” take a LARGE percentage of all donations out for so called “administrative costs”, sometimes up to 90% in some extreme cases.
Does anyone know what $ of each donation for AUFA goes toward these “admistrative” costs?
DanM says:
July 8th, 2009 at 1:41am
AUFA isn’t even a charity, technically, it’s an organization that raises money for charity and then gives the money to other charities to distribute. just a point of order …
sadderpander says:
July 8th, 2009 at 3:35am
Does A.R. donate money to charity from his other poker wins or is he just donating to his charity now on aufa’s time? Sort of an interesting question, No?
DanM says:
July 8th, 2009 at 3:48am
you’re right, sadderpander! Though I don’t have proof of it, I think AR played in this event because he actually cares about the issue … and it seems like he can show he’s put his money where his mouth is. But I’m not hearing that he has a specific problem with the AUFA charities, just that he knows a better one. And if that’s the case … well then you do have to wonder if the ends justify the means.
At the same time, regardless of the charity itself, he apparently has an issue with the organizer — Annie Duke — and some of her past associations. While it may be bad form to tarnish someone’s good work by questioning them about their bad … hey, if he’s willing to pony up $5k for the chance to address an issue, it’s hard to not let him speak his peace.
I swear we have a new post coming addressing this stuff with more facts than speculation.
anonymous says:
July 17th, 2009 at 9:01pm
So where is the promised new post addressing all of this????
DanM says:
July 17th, 2009 at 9:06pm
sorry “anonymous” … i had a medical situation pop up demanding my time, and then you know, that whole WSOP thing.
fortunately there is nothing technically inaccurate in the original post, and there is plenty of discussion around any possible misinterpretations.
but by all means, i look forward to discussing charity tournaments further — this one specifically. and i think there’s an interesting timing issue with jeff shulman’s similar approach to the main event final table.
lots to think about.
DeadDraw says:
August 15th, 2009 at 11:06am
New post link? Been over a month.
Kevin Mathers says:
August 15th, 2009 at 11:25am
Interest in the thread on 2+2 has been revived since the ESPN episode aired. Apparently, Annie still says that Adam has still stiffed AUFA. Adam then produced a copy of the check he made out for 10% of his winnings to AUFA, and apparently will donate another percentage to any charity in Darfur that isn’t AUFA (apparently leaning towards World Vision).
DanM says:
August 15th, 2009 at 11:52am
I am aware. Just haven’t seen the episode yet. I have spoken to Adam, Annie, Norman Chad, and an independent charity tourney operator (who happens to be the only one licensed by the Nevada Gaming Commission to host charity events) …
– Annie is NOT saying Adam stiffed her. That much I know.
– Adam did NOT stiff the charity, and he had a point to make — it wasn’t a greedy money grab.
– AUFA is probably not a dirty charity. Though other charities may give a higher percentage of their take, AUFA takes a bigger multimedia, multi-charity approach to the cause … and ultimately have raised (and delivered) more money to Darfur than any other.
– People connected to Hollywood can be assholes.
– People connected to 2+2 can be _________ (you fill in the blank).
– As far as charity events go, this one could’ve been set up better to stay in step with regularly changing NGC rules/laws, and avoid this sort of problem. Money CAN be withheld from a charity prize pool, but it would take some set-up to run it through a Nevada based charity that would then send it to others.
WelshFish says:
September 30th, 2009 at 5:36pm
i’ve read this and all i can deduce is that DanM is a s-hitstirring Twa-t..
wow, you seem to me as a dangerous gossiping wan-ker, the kind i used to bar out of my pubs in the uk for causing trouble by sh-itstirring.
i’d def knock u str8 out if i was Richardson.