CA Online Poker Initiative!!

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
So you want legal online gaming, BUT:

Since you can't multi-table well (lack of attention/perception skills / quick thinking / hand-eye coordination), no one can.

Since you can't take the information provided by PT & HUDs and use it effectively, no one can.

Since you can't fathom playing for higher stakes than those you listed, no one can.

So online poker is great, as long as no one is even given the opportunity to make more money than you (by multi-tabling, playing stakes you can't afford, or using information you don't understand).

I can forsee an amendment you'll propose to this initiative: checkraising is now illegal, raising and folding more often than calling is cheating, and discussing or thinking about hands after they end is also banned.

Congrats on turning a perfectly good idea into a list of your own (ridiculous) special interest technicalities that the average joe won't understand and won't care about, just because you're not good enough to beat online poker as it currently exists (even pre-Frist when it was super easy!).

Your justification is that the fish pool will be gone in 2-3 years if the good players are allowed to use advantages currently inherent to online play. But, there's still fish online now, despite the games being tougher than ever and depositing becoming very difficult (although, they're likely not fish to you). The reality is that if online poker was 100% legit and legal (rngs regulated by the gov't, funds fairly safe, American companies running the show, super easy to get money on and offline) - there would be an absolutely ridiculous amount of players, the vast majority of them fish, for a very long time. The average Joe now does NOT trust online poker because of rumors of cheating, bots, people seeing your hole cards, afraid to trust their money to offshore companies, the cards are rigged for big pots, etc. If these fears could be at least somewhat removed by gov't regulation and/or clear legalization - the games would be very healthy for decades to come, regardless of what the players who study poker and are profitable are allowed to do.

[/ QUOTE ]


Total blather except for this part.



[ QUOTE ]
The reality is that if online poker was 100% legit and legal (rngs regulated by the gov't, funds fairly safe, American companies running the show, super easy to get money on and offline) - there would be an absolutely ridiculous amount of players, the vast majority of them fish, for a very long time. The average Joe now does NOT trust online poker because of rumors of cheating, bots, people seeing your hole cards, afraid to trust their money to offshore companies, the cards are rigged for big pots, etc. If these fears could be at least somewhat removed by gov't regulation and/or clear legalization - the games would be very healthy for decades to come, Bingo

[/ QUOTE ]

Keep the sharks somewhat in control and the games will be better, last even longer, and generate even more money for the beneficiaries.

I have absolutely no problem with good players doing well.

I don't see any good coming from allowing 60 hour a week pro players using software aids to have free reign.

But that is just me.

Tuff
.

[tizlinda]

again, any progress towards legalizing online poker is a good thing. Everyone should be supporting your effort. Doing nothing, and saying nothing is better than all the restrictions, will get you just that.......nothing. Perhaps his scenario wouldn't be perfect for professional poker players or even myself (I probably wouldn't play), but were talking about a bigger picture here. And don't forget, as goes California goes the rest of the country.

All that being said, I still don't want the government running it and I still don't believe it stands a chance.......but don't give up.....spread the word.

[tagtastic]

[ QUOTE ]
Total blather except for this part.



[ QUOTE ]
The reality is that if online poker was 100% legit and legal (rngs regulated by the gov't, funds fairly safe, American companies running the show, super easy to get money on and offline) - there would be an absolutely ridiculous amount of players, the vast majority of them fish, for a very long time. The average Joe now does NOT trust online poker because of rumors of cheating, bots, people seeing your hole cards, afraid to trust their money to offshore companies, the cards are rigged for big pots, etc. If these fears could be at least somewhat removed by gov't regulation and/or clear legalization - the games would be very healthy for decades to come, Bingo

[/ QUOTE ]

Keep the sharks somewhat in control and the games will be better, last even longer, and generate even more money for the beneficiaries.

I have absolutely no problem with good players doing well.

I don't see any good coming from allowing 60 hour a week pro players using software aids to have free reign.

But that is just me.

Tuff
.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the second part you quoted is far more important than the rest of my post. However, you're fooling yourself if you don't think the "blather" section has influence how you wrote this a LOT.

Online poker would benefit immensely by some government regulation (just stuff like verifying rngs, and making the companies running this sites accountable for customer funds (ie: sue-able), and taxing the sites directly). An online-casino-tax-supported agency (like the Nevada gaming commission) that checked rngs and investigated actual cheating (collusion, account hacking, etc) would be excellent. I think the vast majority of us agree on this completely.

However much of your initiative is filled with details on exactly which games can be offered, for how much money, and how the players can play them (no multi-tabling, no table stats, no huds, etc). This mass of details can do nothing but detract from the chances of this initiative getting passed and implemented imo, and it's totally unecessary.

Ideally there would be a VARIETY of private companies (online casinos basically) that would act under the regulation of a government gaming commission. If there was a market for a site that restricted tables to 1, and didn't allow you to save hand histories (and enforced policies against hh grabbers), one would appear. You could found it and be richer than all of us combined if these things mattered to the public as much as you think they do.

[dlk9s]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
casual players can't win on the internet, the players are too good and the long run comes too quickly for them. There's no way to protect casual players from going bust online. They need to be naturally gifted or they are done.



[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a casual player and I haven't gone bust yet.

Thanks for your concern, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps you have the natural talent I mentioned in my post.

Maybe you can use that talent to learn to be a more comprehensive reader...

KK

[/ QUOTE ]

See, that's the thing. I'm not naturally gifted at poker. I just practice good bankroll management.

It doesn't take much to be a "casual" player and not go broke. Just play smart and you can come out ahead.

[ekdikeo]

I think trying to tackle a bunch of things that you see as being the evils of the medium is a really bad thing to do.

[jason75]

I can't believe I just read this whole thread . . . mostly filled with troll-like posts.

The guy put something forward . . . Maybe instead of acting like complete jerks falling over each other to criticize the loudest, you could find a way to be supportive of him doing something.

Besides, most people commenting in this topic have about zero understanding of what it takes to get an intiative on the ballot in CA, yet everyone's a friggin' expert.

Tuff - I appreciate you're trying to do something here. I have a lot of experience with ballot measures in California. If you're truly interested in pushing an initiative, here's what I recommend:

1. Find a consituency. It will cost about $1-$2 million to get this on the ballot as a statute (more as a constitutional amendment). The wording of the intiative isn't important right now, it's figuring out where you're going to get the money from to put it on the ballot.

2. Stick with the broad brushstrokes plan of legalizing poker. There's a couple possible models for this, including the one you put forward (run by the State). It's also possible for CA to liscense online poker houses and have them pay an "online operator" fee. Try to be open to all of them.


3. Hire an attorney to help write this thing. Much of what you've written is better suited to a regulatory body as opposed to creating it in statutory law. There's a lot of existing law you'll have to review and revise for this initiative as well. Also, this isn't written in legal language. No one will support this initiative as written because it will crushed in a lawsuit.

Basically, figure out #1 and the rest will follow. This won't be easy, but a discussion could be had with the PPA around such an initiative (perhaps a smaller state to reduce the initial cost).

Good luck,

Jason

[TheMetetron]

Tuff_fish,

Meh, I wrote out a detailed serious response with suggestions, but it was a waste of time as this will never happen. You seriously have no idea what you are getting into. Three main groups opposing this:

1) Indian tribes and California card rooms.
2) Politicians.
3) Poker players

Very odd alliance of those three, but without the support of at least 2 and 3 you are going to be screwed. I've got personal access to a lot of Northern California mayors, DAs, and county supervisors and I wouldn't hesitate to come back to California and lobby against this and get them all to publicly come out against this for a variety of reasons. I'm fairly confident this would happen without me doing anything, but I have no problem helping to push people against this.

It's a moot point though, because the way this currently is written it has no chance of getting on the ballot. You are also missing a ton of funds that you will need. The only hope you have is the California's teacher's union coming out in support of this and trying to push for it. But that's fairly unlikely.

[pipedreamz]

tuff,

can you make a flyer,

i will spam that [censored] on all the windshields at the village club poker room in chula vista.

[jason75]

[ QUOTE ]
I've got personal access to a lot of Northern California mayors, DAs, and county supervisors and I wouldn't hesitate to come back to California and lobby against this and get them all to publicly come out against this for a variety of reasons. I'm fairly confident this would happen without me doing anything, but I have no problem helping to push people against this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone serious with these kinds of connections wouldn't issue such ridiculous threats against someone who is about $2 mil away from seriously doing this.

I don't care what your post count is, go act like a know-it-all tough guy somewhere else.

[Eaglesfan1]

Yeah, this would be great. Legalize online poker using one man's personal wants/diswants as rules. Great.