[OB-Wan222]

Skallagrim "OB-Wan, if you are going to become a useful poster here on 2+2 you are, as TheEngineer said, going to have to establish credibility first."

I'm not the least bit interested in gaining credibility in your eyes. Especially considering that you take your first three paragraphs to attack me personally (again) before you even begin to posit competing opinions. You and TheEngineer seem more interested in evaluating the person instead of the ideas.

Next time can we get to the debate over ideas first?

BTW, You are not the gatekeeper of ideas. I am free to have my opinions evaluated on their merit as are you. If you disagree with my ideas then fine, but none of you have the right to decide if I'm entitled to have an opinion.

If you don't believe me then ask the mods. I'm guessing you're not one of those, are you? But don't worry, I'm not going to use that as an argument against you. After all, you don't have to be a mod to have an opinion, do you?

Skallagrim "Perhaps you might want to realize that the only reason you are still capable of playing online poker at the moment (if, in fact, you do) is because the FBI and the DOJ recognize the "poker is skill" argument as real challenge to them in court. That is the reason ALL their prosecutions so far have been against sportsbetting sites."

Not at all. After all, people break the law all the time without consequence (or so I'm told). People drive drunk, use drugs, rob banks and, yes, even gamble on-line without being prosecuted. It's not that the authorities don't think people are breaking the law, its just that they don't have the resources to stop everyone breaking the law.

From today's testimony before the House Committee by the DOJ rep: "The Department’s view for some time has been that all forms of Internet gambling, including sports wagering, casino games, and card games, are illegal under federal law... "

And yet, despite that opinion those of us who gamble online are not in jail. So the "you are capable of gambling because poker is skill" argument is not convincing. The DOJ considers online poker illegal despite all your skill vs. luck arguments.

Skallagrim "...you really have no clue that the Skill Games Protection Act is our best hope right now. Its called the SKILL games protection act for a reason."

And the world goes around in a circle. You mean that a legislative act is our best hope? Not the courts? Are you sure? Because that sounds an awful lot like what I have been saying all along.

It matters not rather the pols call it skills or manna from heaven act. As I have said politicians don't care about reality - if it suits them to call it a skill they will, if it doesn't then they will deny its a skill no matter what evidence you present. You can scream until the mountains fall and the rivers rise - nothing but political muscle with change the legal landscape.

If pols will pass a law under the fig leaf of calling it a skill then fine, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking that's why they act. Again (and again) all kinds of games of luck - lottery, bingo, wheels, etc - are legal for some reasons (usually state lotteries or charity games) so it is illogical to think that skill vs. luck is the deciding factor.

Don't forget I am on your side, I just think that political change is more useful than arguing among ourselves (I never spoke against arguing in court in the near term) about skill vs. luck is a a waste of time.