Are Poker Contests going to be popular in the US ? Recent Court ruling

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
If you read the whole opinion, RIIT, you will see that the fantasy sports leagues also required a minimum number of participants before the games went forward and the prizes were guaranteed.


[/ QUOTE ]

This was my next point but you beat me to it.

Fantasy sports leagues most definitely have a set number of players that can compete in each division.

[RoundTower]

If I announce a chess tournament, I mean contest, and say "entry fee $30, prizepool dependent on entrants but first prize minimum $500", would this not be legal? This is how chess tournaments are run over here and I'd be surprised to find that the US law for chess contests makes them any different.

[RIIT]

Skallagrim,

Yes I need to read the opinion.

Also, after re-reading my own post it is clear that I actually meant to address the idea of "guaranteed prize pool" moreso than "unconditional" entry fees.

If what your saying is accurate then I'm not understanding how the judges ruling describes anything different than any existing SNG available online right now.

What am I missing here?

RIIT

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
If what your saying is accurate then I'm not understanding how the judges ruling describes anything different than any existing SNG available online right now.

What am I missing here?

RIIT

[/ QUOTE ]

You aren't missing anything.

You nailed it.

[Skallagrim]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If what your saying is accurate then I'm not understanding how the judges ruling describes anything different than any existing SNG available online right now.

What am I missing here?

RIIT

[/ QUOTE ]

You aren't missing anything.

You nailed it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. MTTs as usually currently done dont quite fit, but SnGs fit 100%.

Skallagrim

[RIIT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If what your saying is accurate then I'm not understanding how the judges ruling describes anything different than any existing SNG available online right now.

What am I missing here?

RIIT

[/ QUOTE ]

You aren't missing anything.

You nailed it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. MTTs as usually currently done dont quite fit, but SnGs fit 100%.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok. Why then do MTT's miss the mark?

RIIT

[YoureToast]

Heres the key thing TruePoker (and you can read my post in the same thread in Legislation).

Go for it...Do the marketing, but be direct. Say something like this:

"We believe existing federal law does not prohibit internet poker. Specifically, Federal courts have determined that poker contests involving [x y and z] are legal. Please join us at TruePoker for some legal poker contests and win prizes for money.....blah blah blah"

Key point here is that in your marketing, please DO NOT imply that "other" forms of poker are NOT legal.

[Skallagrim]

RIIT, MTTs miss the mark because the prizes vary depending on the number of participants. Some of the points you made in your original post go to this. To make a MTT a "contest" the amount of the prize(s) has to be fixed before the entry fees are paid. There are some pretty obvious ways to change MTTs to make them fit (guaranteed prize pool for example), but the way they are right now just doesnt quite do it.

Skallagrim

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
Heres the key thing TruePoker (and you can read my post in the same thread in Legislation).

Go for it...Do the marketing, but be direct. Say something like this:

"We believe existing federal law does not prohibit internet poker. Specifically, Federal courts have determined that poker contests involving [x y and z] are legal. Please join us at TruePoker for some legal poker contests and win prizes for money.....blah blah blah"

Key point here is that in your marketing, please DO NOT imply that "other" forms of poker are NOT legal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with all this, especially the last sentence.

I think TruePoker should jump on this angle as soon as they can; I'm sure if they don't then someone else will. I mean heck, we're already seeing duplicate poker sites and other variations of 'different' poker that is likely to fit more within the legal scope of online poker.

[1p0kerboy]

I've been thinking about how this could apply to cash games, and I think I came up with something that might work. Maybe you guys can expand on it a bit.

It is a poker contest with guaranteed prizes.

Basically, instead of paying a rake, the participants would pay a time charge.

Say you have a $50 buy-in. The contest could start at time X and run for 30 minutes. With 9 players, you could guarantee a prize of $441, keeping $9 in fees. These could run everytime a table fills up.

I think this meets the criteria. It would be a little bit different than your standard cash game as you would have to wait for the table to fill for the contest to start. And then the contest could run until time was up; at which point the contestants could just join another contest. Perhaps there could even be a 'play again' option and a 'waiting list' for players who choose to not play again.

Let this post cover me in case someone tries to claim a patent before I do.