florida has done it
 

both houses have passed the new bill letting limit games be upto 5 5 which is a lot better then 2 2. also i went to the florida house website and read the exact bill. it states something like this: the card rooms can have no limits on betting IF THE REQUIRED BUY-IN IS LESS THEN 100. that leaves a loop hole that should allow the cardrooms to have something like 1-2 with a 80 minimum 200 maximum or even a 2 5 with a 80 minimum and a 300-500 maximum. it does not say 100 maximum buy-in anywhere in the bill.

Re: florida has done it
 

There has already been some talk of this issue and as an attorney who has extensively covered and counseled clients on the Florida State laws in this area, I have to say that this interpretation is a perversion of the intended meaning and spirit of the legislation.

Lets face it, this legislation is a long awaited step in the right direction for poker players and I think everyone would agree that there is still alot more room for improvement.

Having said that I dont think it wise to jeopardize future legislative concessions by pushing the envelope too far too soon. The ink isnt even dry on this bill (let alone signed by the governor).

I know that the problems already experienced by the pari-mutuals and indeed the center of their previous litigation centered on the interpretation of tournament buyins.

The State took the position that the maximum bet being $2 with a maximum amount of 3 raises per betting round would add up to a possible total amount a person could possibly lose on one hand as $32. This is why the maximum tournament buyins was $45......$32 being the total amount possible to lose on the very first hand of the tournament plus $13 fee for the poker room to cover overhead.

This new legislation sets a maximum required buyin of $100 meaning that the most a person could possibly lose on the very first hand after buying in would be $100. To allow a person to buy in for more (lets say $500) would in theory mean that they could lose more than $100 on the very first hand which I dont think complies with the "spirit" of the statute.

I'm not saying its right or wrong, I'm just saying how the State has interpreted its own laws in the past as a guide for how they will interprete this law in the future.

I know alot of folks are looking at this new law and reading it in light of how internet poker was traditionally set up where a site would post a required buyin while allowing the person to actually buyin for more up to and including their entire account balance if they so wanted giving them a huge deep stack advantage.

As poker players we all know the advantages and disadvantages of this strategy but I remind you that the folks in Tallahassee are just getting up to speed on this "new" poker craze centered on Texas Hold'em (they even call it that the law itself), and I assure you they are not that poker savy to know the dichotomy between a buyin and a required buyin.

Believe me they are looking at this and saying the most we want a person to lose at one time is 100 bucks up from the original $32 we allowed under the previous legislation.

Besides I dont think the cardrooms would push this the envelope that far without at least a written attorney general's opinion on how the State would view this.

These folks are none too happy about the expansion of slot machines and the impending release they have to give the Seminoles by taking their handcuffs off now that slots are legal and the federal laws that help the indian tribes when it comes to gaming, so I dont suggest we pissed in their ears too much too soon.

Also, this is of course just my opinion.

Re: florida has done it
 

[ QUOTE ]
These folks are none too happy about the expansion of slot machines and the impending release they have to give the Seminoles by taking their handcuffs off now that slots are legal and the federal laws that help the indian tribes when it comes to gaming

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what you mean by this. Who does "these folks" refer to?

Re: florida has done it
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
These folks are none too happy about the expansion of slot machines and the impending release they have to give the Seminoles by taking their handcuffs off now that slots are legal and the federal laws that help the indian tribes when it comes to gaming

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what you mean by this. Who does "these folks" refer to?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, I should have been more specific, I was talking about the conservative base which holds a significant voice in State wide politics especially outside of south florida.

Re: florida has done it
 

the word maximum is not used in the bill. also considering how my expierience in florida card rooms shows some people are gonna lose 2k playing this 100nl in one sitting.

Re: florida has done it
 

I'm from Tallahasse and it's anything but a conservative town. Anyway looks like the legislators f-ed up, because as far as can I see, poker rooms should be able to hold 100 min/1 billion$ max buy-in games if they want. I'm moving back just in time [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: florida has done it
 

SO when you say 2/2, you mean to say the bet sizes don't increase on the turn and river?

Re: florida has done it
 

[ QUOTE ]
SO when you say 2/2, you mean to say the bet sizes don't increase on the turn and river?

[/ QUOTE ]

nope

Re: florida has done it
 

[ QUOTE ]
the word maximum is not used in the bill. also considering how my expierience in florida card rooms shows some people are gonna lose 2k playing this 100nl in one sitting.

[/ QUOTE ]

amen

Re: florida has done it
 

I checked it out -- it's legit!

HOORAY!

P.S. Bye bye trips to Vegas.