Harrah's "Intranet" Poker

[malo]

Have no idea where to post this---here, the ZOO, B&M? I did search to see if it had been posted, but didn't see anything.
Apologies if it has already been posted or is in the wrong forum:

http://cf.us.biz.yahoo.com/bw/061023/20061023005483.html?.v=1

[Python49]

Wow, this didn't take long.

[DrewOnTilt]

Very interesting, though I don't think that this is the first time that a U.S.-based gambling company attempted something such as this. IIRC ShuffleMaster attempted something similar at Foxwoods a year ago or so.

[Shoe]

That would be sweet if it catches on and is popular, I'd much rather play while laying out by the pool than trying to squeeze into an overcrowded poker table.

[TomVeil]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, this didn't take long.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was in the works long before this bill. My guess is getting the software down before a nation wide release. We all know it's coming.

[autobet]

It will be officially released in 270 days! /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Harrah's would like to give great thanks to their close personal friends Jim Leach and Bill Frist.

[Megenoita]

Interesting. It's only in-house, though. However, if they allowed you to multi-table, it'd be worth it.

[ericicecream]

[ QUOTE ]
That would be sweet if it catches on and is popular, I'd much rather play while laying out by the pool than trying to squeeze into an overcrowded poker table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Beware of the pool spies. You'll spot them easily, they're under 25 and wearing sunglasses.

[xorpheous]

Ok, but this is still for on-site gaming, right? Its just that you can play from anywhere on the gournds? Am I reading the story correctly?

I'm actually suprised that casinos like Harrahs haven't looked into having online offerings for in-state residents. That would seem like a logical step for me. Since its all intrastate, you wouldn't run afoul of the federal laws.

[oober]

Now all we have to do is combine all state into 1 giant state and we are good to go.

[CaseS87]

In my opinion this will fail miserably.

[Megenoita]

[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion this will fail miserably.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think so, too. Especially since online poker is still alive and kicking.

[Jan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion this will fail miserably.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think so, too. Especially since online poker is still alive and kicking.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I love playing poker live, so if I'm at a casino, I'm sitting at a poker table. I play online because I don't live near a casino, and even if I did playing online from home is more convenient. But if I'm going to make a trip to the casino, why wouldn't I want to play live?

[Richas]

This sounds more like an extension of the electronic roulette terminals that are used to appeal to slot fans and others who don't like the bustle of the live roulette wheel. In the UK these are linked to real wheels but let people bet at a terminal. It appeals to a slightly different punter and saves them croupier wages. They are surprisingly popular.

I can see why a casual punter might opt for this rather than worry that every breath was a tell. The other issue might be smokers, by keeping the punter and dealer apart they can probably let the punter smoke without getting sued by their staff. Me - I'd never use one.

[Little_Luck]

Can I sell one room of my house to the Harrah's?

[Brice]

I would imagine that Harrah's is using this to test and fix the software before going to the internet with it. If they can get all the bugs fixed in-house, then it will be ready for the Internet. Do you really think they paid First $28k for nothing?

Also, get use to see pots raked $6 with no chance of RB.

[kidpokeher]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm actually suprised that casinos like Harrahs haven't looked into having online offerings for in-state residents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocritically speaking, there seems to be a state law against online gambling in Nevada. Maybe it can get repealed on this technicality. I'm sure Harrah's just needs to say "jump" and the governor will say "how high?"

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Can I rent two square feet of my house to Harrah's?

[/ QUOTE ]

[BGnight]

Playing online poker in a casino = GAY
Yes, this should fail miserably. However, this makes sense if it's gonna be a "dry" run for future Internet poker as previously mentioned.

[Shoe]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing online poker in a casino = GAY
Yes, this should fail miserably. However, this makes sense if it's gonna be a "dry" run for future Internet poker as previously mentioned.

[/ QUOTE ]

However, I could see fish / slots players trying this that would otherwise be too intimiated to sit down at table full of what they consider to be sharks.

[grapabo]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing online poker in a casino = GAY
Yes, this should fail miserably. However, this makes sense if it's gonna be a "dry" run for future Internet poker as previously mentioned.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can see it now: Harrah's rooms filled with rows and rows of cubicles, each with a computer screen, a mouse, and access to the local intranet with likeminded players who had to get up, get dressed, and leave the house in a timely manner, each one trying to make their day's pay.

It'd almost be like, well...

http://www.ubi.ac.uk/oldtech/images/class/typists.jpg
Going to work.

[malo]

My first thought when I read this article was that Harrah's might use this to gain increased control over the WSOP ME qualifying process.

They currently have their land-based circuit, but they could use this intranet to offer more qualifiers (at very little cost to themselves--no dealers, no tied up tables, very few personnel needed.) They could do single property qualifiers, and perhaps play it down to the final table, which could then be live if they chose. They could do qualifiers involving a few properties, or every property.

If this is successful for them, would not be surprised if they start looking at shutting out other casinos (online or B&M) from qualifying people for the WSOP.

They could also use this to offer a lot more tournaments, both multi-table and SNG's in general. Might be a good deal if they imposed the "normal" online fee of roughly 10%. But since this is Harrah's, would expect tourney fees to be higher. And the higher they are, the less of a good deal it would be for the players.

[lfairban]

I think everyone is forgetting something here.

Oneline poker which is to say poker by computer is ineherently more efficient than table poker. When dealers do not need to physically shuffel and deal the cards and players do not need to move chips, everything costs less and works better. That is why the rake is less than half of what I understand it is in casinos.

There are also few if any table disputes online. Your cards can't accidently flip over and you can't bet out of turn.

I know the "tells" are missing, but that and a somewhat increased possibility of collusion are the only downsides.

If they can pull it off, I think it will be a win-win.

[dashman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion this will fail miserably.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think so, too. Especially since online poker is still alive and kicking.

[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed, until online poker is really no more, this will be a horrible alternative.

[rageotones]

like one poster mentioned, i can see this being a GREAT thing for things like the WSOP. imagine having satellites running constantly that you could play in any harrah's property throughout vegas. after trying a couple of live STT at the WSOP last year, this would be great, and not take any tables away from the tourney/cash games.

[LuckyTxGuy]

Actually this is simply brilliant and I've been asking for several years why casinos where not already doing this with house games and slots. Poker didn't really cross my mind but playing slots, video poker, craps etc on the computer over the "intranet" while sitting in the room is simply brilliant.

Now let me say, I have no desire to do this. It doesn't sound fun to me at all. I love live B&M poker and would probably rarely play online if I lived next door to a poker room. BUT, Harrah's doesn't care if everyone thinks it's a hit, just as long as some people like it. The cost is relatively small considering the money they can make. Think about it, some guys wife gets tired and is bothered by all the smoke around the slots, she goes back up to the room and can watch tv and play some blackjack on the laptop at the same time! Brilliant.

A casino's main objective is to get you to give them your money in any way they can and intranet gambling is brilliant. As for poker...I can't imagine the sharks sitting in the room playing but alot of the more timid or first timers might give it a whirl? Who knows. I'm just saying I think Harrah's is on to something with the whole idea.

[emptyshell]

[ QUOTE ]

If this is successful for them, would not be surprised if they start looking at shutting out other casinos (online or B&M) from qualifying people for the WSOP.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Avoiding online or B&M casinos from paying people's way into the WSOP would cut down on the number of entries and money involved. That means less need for so many dealers, cocktail wattresses, and accountants. Expenses would go way down.

[grapabo]

If this still involves regulation of the equipment used in the gambling machinery, would this mean that the hard equipment creating the intranet poker would have to be housed in-state or in-casino? And if so, does this create cost-prohibitive problems for setting this up as long-term business plan?

Technologically speaking, I'm a chimp with fat fingers typing this, so maybe I'm thinking of a problem that doesn't exist. But the state regulations over the gambling machinery may be an impediment to this being a profitable avenue with or without other legal online gambing options.

[coachkf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If this is successful for them, would not be surprised if they start looking at shutting out other casinos (online or B&M) from qualifying people for the WSOP.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Avoiding online or B&M casinos from paying people's way into the WSOP would cut down on the number of entries and money involved. That means less need for so many dealers, cocktail wattresses, and accountants. Expenses would go way down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yessah. Smaller fields has gotta be the ultimate goal here. Reason? Lack of dumpster space after cleaning up post WSOP. Who cares if thousands of players are heading to your casino to plunk down 10k each? When you're out back, thigh deep in a dumpster, trying to pack the trash down enough to cram in one more bag, you start to rethink things like "the more people that come, the more money we make"...

/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Koss]

Wow, they've removed everything that's convenient about online poker, then removed everything fun about playing in a casino, and combined them together. Awesome.

Actually I hope it catches on, because anything that makes poker more popular is a good thing, but I don't see it happening.

[malo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If this is successful for them, would not be surprised if they start looking at shutting out other casinos (online or B&M) from qualifying people for the WSOP.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Avoiding online or B&M casinos from paying people's way into the WSOP would cut down on the number of entries and money involved. That means less need for so many dealers, cocktail wattresses, and accountants. Expenses would go way down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, my thought was that when 8000+ people come herding in for the ME, Harrah's execs think, "I really wish we had gotten all the qualifying tourney fees involved in getting them here." Every hundred bucks spent on qualifiers represents ten dollars in fees (possibly more for a B&M qualifier) so there is more money to be made, if Harrah's can control more of the qualifiers.