TruePoker will continue to welcome U.S players

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
Utah,

I haven't checked out their software yet but plan to. I suspect however it is a small site without much game selection as they are not listed by pokersitescout.com. Do you find that to be true? Of course in the new landscape they have much more room to grow when the market leader bails.

[/ QUOTE ]It is a smaller site but I was playing at 2:00a.m. central so it is not a good read.. But, as long as the tables are full that I am sitting at them I am happy as can be [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I truly like the site. However, I really like the fact that their CEO spent the day here when everyone was freakin out and the big sites were worried about bullshitpress releases. I like the hussle and I prefer to do business with companies like TruePoker and that is where I will vote my gambling dollars for now. These things are oddly self generating and once they hit a threshold they can explode.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Utah,

I haven't checked out their software yet but plan to. I suspect however it is a small site without much game selection as they are not listed by pokersitescout.com. Do you find that to be true? Of course in the new landscape they have much more room to grow when the market leader bails.



[/ QUOTE ]
Bluff,
I signed up tonight as well, pretty late. It is a small sight. They have a couple NL 2-4's going and a NL 1-2. They actually seem to have more NL than limit holdem. No PL omaha, at least at this late hour.
Also, I do not believe PT or pokerace hud supports this site.
For me, the games were right up my alley, but I believe you are a higher stakes player than I am.

[BluffTHIS!]

yukon,

I do player higher (now), but am very disciplined about game selection. I will drop down in a heart beat rather than play in bad games. Also I sometimes play 2 sites at once, so if I get a couple good tables on one site and another one somewhere else, that's fine.

I agree with Utah, that the more traffic a site gets, then the faster it's pace of growth. I do however think it behooves TP to get listed and covered by pokersitescout.com.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
yukon,

I do player higher (now), but am very disciplined about game selection. I will drop down in a heart beat rather than play in bad games. Also I sometimes play 2 sites at once, so if I get a couple good tables on one site and another one somewhere else, that's fine.

I agree with Utah, that the more traffic a site gets, then the faster it's pace of growth. I do however think it behooves TP to get listed and covered by pokersitescout.com.



[/ QUOTE ]
Bluff,
I had never seen the site pokersitescout before, thanks for the heads up. True poker is listed on bonuswhores.com as a medium sized cardroom. The games in the one day I played were soft. I can tell you that the site is indeed smaller than absolute, but hopefully this will all change.
I very much appreciate Truepokerceo's attitude and I hope he becomes the new market leader.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I very much appreciate Truepokerceo's attitude and I hope he becomes the new market leader.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this 100%. If not them, and Absolute or UB doesn't take off (assuming stars bails - if they don't they're on top), then most likely a CR based sportsbook w/poker like BoDog is going to shoot up fast.

[TruePoker CEO]

We appreciate the business and will work to keep it.

(A 100% First Time Deposit bonus is automatic for new players, look under My Promotions in the drop down menu in ther Lobby to check your status.)

[TruePoker CEO]

Apparently, there is some shifting in the interpetation of the Act by one expert.

In today's LA Times, Nelson Rose is quoted as follows:

That's a major weakness" of the new measure, said I. Nelson Rose, an expert in gambling law at Whittier Law School.

"It left out expanding the reach of the Wire Act, so poker sites can say, 'We're not covered by that.' "

This failure to amend the Wire Act to include poker is the first step of two positive analytic threads:

First thread: Playing online poker is itself not "unlawful Internet Gambling" under Federal Law (leaving aside State law for now), so deposits for online poker are not in connection with "unlawful Internet gambling".

1. The UIGE Act only related to deposits in connection with "unlawful Internet gambling".

2. Poker is not unlawful Internet gambling (under the Wire Act, leaving aside State laws for this discussion.)

3. Therefore, deposits in connection with online poker are not retricted by the UIGE Act.

The second thread, which was my initial thought,:

1. Even assuming that online poker were construed to be "unlawful Internet gambling", the UIGE Act only applies to acceptance of deposits by persons "engaged in the business of betting or wagering".

2. Poker site business models do not involve any risk of the site dependent upon the outcome of play; poker sites do not "bet or wager".

3. The poker-only business model is not a person covered by the restrictions of the UIGE Act.

4. (Where poker is regulated as "gambling" in State laws, it is specifically named ???)

TruePoker CEO

[mikever]

I'm going to be pulling my money out of stars and looking for a new primary home, and the first place i will look into is Truepoker, because I have come to respect truepokerceo. I don't know if that's ultimately where i will play, but you deserve a look. Thank you.

[TruePoker CEO]

Thank you.

We are looking to upgrade our 3D software and add the 2D option that people have requested.

[New001]

2D software would likely make me a customer as well.

Good luck and thank you.