workarounds to the bill..

[greg nice]

if neteller is prevented from transferring money to our banks, what stops us from having neteller or the pokersite issue us a check and we just cash the check?

[Gregg777]

none

[jwlam]

There's obviously tons of work arounds to the bill. The hardcore players will always find a way to play. That's not the problem.

The problem is the fish may be discouraged from actually wanting to go through the effort of getting around those loopholes too, which obviously dries up the games.

[Gregg777]

[ QUOTE ]
There's obviously tons of work arounds to the bill. The hardcore players will always find a way to play. That's not the problem.

The problem is the fish may be discouraged from actually wanting to go through the effort of getting around those loopholes too, which obviously dries up the games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you played at non US sites? Fish galore...

[antneye]

[ QUOTE ]
if neteller is prevented from transferring money to our banks, what stops us from having neteller or the pokersite issue us a check and we just cash the check?

[/ QUOTE ]

And if the banks refuse netteller checks......transfer the funds from netteller to pay pal or some other merchant......this is all nonsense.....deal the cards.

[swarm]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's obviously tons of work arounds to the bill. The hardcore players will always find a way to play. That's not the problem.

The problem is the fish may be discouraged from actually wanting to go through the effort of getting around those loopholes too, which obviously dries up the games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you played at non US sites? Fish galore...

[/ QUOTE ]

And when all the partypoker sharks go looking for bloodier water in overseas dominated poker rooms you don't think that has an impact on how many fish you will be able to find there?

Fact is that more and more competent hardcore poker players are being created everyday. They are able to cast wider and wider nets as sites increase their multi-table / resizing option. Many players are 8-12 tabeling nl200 - nk 1k and earning a respectable take.

You then throw in a bill that decreases the amount of new money coming into the game and you have a real problem. The waters are already on the verge of being overfished. Now you take away the ability for the fish to repopulate their bankrolls and it all starts caving in on itself.

[dustyn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if neteller is prevented from transferring money to our banks, what stops us from having neteller or the pokersite issue us a check and we just cash the check?

[/ QUOTE ]

And if the banks refuse netteller checks......transfer the funds from netteller to pay pal or some other merchant......this is all nonsense.....deal the cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also keep in mind that the sites WANT you to gamble there and will try to create their own means of circumventing the law. It's not like they will sit idle while they lose potentially billions of dollars of annual revenue to American gamblers who can't deposit funds. I don't know what they will come up with, but I think it's safe to say it will be something. And I think they aren't any more likely to run off with Americans' money than they are now because of fear of alienating European or Asian customers. It's not like the enforcement of this legislation will be ironclad or something.

[mattnxtc]

Does everybody realize what this will do to the size of the wsop?

All those players that got in through sites like party and stars wont be playin the tournies anymore

[DING-DONG YO]

No doubt this bill would kill the poker craze in a heartbeat. But don't freak out yet all. Contact your senators.

Also, look on the bright side. If this bill gets defeated and someday online poker becomes legal and regulated in the US, then we will see a poker boom resuragance the likes of which no one has ever seen. I'm talking 70% VPIP tables like in the Excalibur's 2/4 LHE game.

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's obviously tons of work arounds to the bill. The hardcore players will always find a way to play. That's not the problem.

The problem is the fish may be discouraged from actually wanting to go through the effort of getting around those loopholes too, which obviously dries up the games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you played at non US sites? Fish galore...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah but poker is an economy of sorts. The less fish there are on the whole the less money everyone makes. If the games on party are suddenly awful, I'll go else where, and so will many others. There aren't enough non-US fish to support all the US and non-US sharks. Of course, in the long run, many sharks will quit and balance will be restored. Could be years before that happens however.

[greg nice]

also the neteller ATM card as another workaround

thoughts?

[Steel Aces]

Do banks track cashed checks the same as they do deposited checks? That is, if someone were to review your bank records, would they be able to see all checks that you cashed out?

I believe they are responsible for reporting large cash transactions (close to $10K) or multiple cash transactions that add up to $10K in a short period of time, but do they record all smaller transactions in your records? Anybody know for sure?

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
Do banks track cashed checks the same as they do deposited checks? That is, if someone were to review your bank records, would they be able to see all checks that you cashed out?

I believe they are responsible for reporting large cash transactions (close to $10K) or multiple cash transactions that add up to $10K in a short period of time, but do they record all smaller transactions in your records? Anybody know for sure?

[/ QUOTE ]

Banks want nothing to do with this, the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) is already a huge pain in the ass of financial institutions. This has to do with "cutting of funding of terrorists".

Banks have to review activity that is unusual for your account. This is not really intended to snitch on you, but check for fraud or what not.

We'll see if any responsibilities get added for their already overloaded plate.

Currently they don't care about gambling, no need to rattle their customers unless it is 100% necessary. They would rather not have anything to do with these laws.

[Gregg777]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does everybody realize what this will do to the size of the wsop?

[/ QUOTE ]

No doubt this bill would kill the poker craze in a heartbeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doubt it. I would actually like the WSOP more without an extra couple of thousand online donkeys busting out pros with idiotic plays in the early rounds.

I think it will pizz off a lot of people who realize it's not about legality or morality, but only about the money (straight from Goodlatte's mouth BTW).

People have made comparisons with online gambling to prohibiton, which was repealed. But it is actually stronger than prohibition because many forms of gambling will remain legal.

It just won't fly long term...

[ragecg]

Good post Gregg777!
Perfect example of this, even though he wasn't an online player, was the 2005 WSOP ME donk who called Chris Fergeson's pocket aces all-in with K9s, and his excuse was, per the televised bit:
"I don't even care, this is a freeroll for me".
...thankfully, Chris' pocket Aces held up, but the point is, no self-respecting player would've called Chris had they not already been dangerously short-stacked and next to be blinded-out, or drunk.

As an addition to this, if you watch the whole 2005 wsop main event, it was EXTREMELY rare that a pro was all-in without Aces or Kings, or postflop on a nut draw with a truckload of outs, ultimately meaning that they have noticed that is is not like the old days where you had a great chance of getting a read on your opponent.

Now it's just a donkfest minefield..... at best.

...kinda like any Stars freeroll, or .10-cent tourney, lol.