Chase For Glory

How to play Chase For Glory

There have been many uplifting elements to writing about poker through a global pandemic, as odd as those words must feel to read and certainly are to write. From inspirational quotes to motivate players who are just joining or continue to love the game to what could help players turn pro as an alternative to more difficult careers to sustain (they do exist!), it has genuinely been a job I have treasured and I hope you have enjoyed the content that I and the incredible Calvin Ayre content team have been able to bring you during the past 18 months or so.  

Bringing you series of articles such as Poker on Screen and Poker in Print has been a massive source of pride for myself and the team and I even got the chance to discuss poker in the movies and on television on the recent episode of the award-winning podcast, The Chip Race.  

As ever, I am indebted to too many people to mention, but Derek, Bill, Jasmine and every one of the Calvin Ayre team, as well as Calvin himself of course, have all shown a lot of faith in me to carry the torch and I hope I’ve done them all credit.  

What is Chase For Glory?

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”

What is Chase For Glory?

The move came shortly after the Senate declined to advance the Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act. The procedural vote on September 15 rejected it with 49-50, not meeting the 60 votes required to move forward. 

The CFTC’s move gives the agency a chance to pursue parts of a crypto market framework under its existing authority, rather than waiting for Congress to resolve the broader legislative debate. 

CFTC Chairman Michael Selig signaled that possibility back in August. The agency was considering how its existing powers could be used to create a dedicated market structure for digital assets that are standard, he said.