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

[CaptVimes]

Interesting thought regarding this issue. If a SNG is labled a skill game/contest and not gambling, then the amounts you win would still be taxed as income, but you can't then deduct your losses unless you are a professional. This was what Humphrey was trying to do in the case above and the judge disallowed them. Eh, just a thought.

[apefish]

Obviously this court ruling creates even more debate over where the line currently is on this stuff. But I'm not sure it takes it to the point where a raked sng by any other name smells sweeter to people trying to stop online gaming.
Isn't a sticking point that the house will take a percentage of the prize pool, thus fees > prizes negating some of the "reasonable fee" argument?

Edit: I really need to go read the ruling, because if the only requirements are unconditional fee + guaranteed prizes, then I'm not sure rake negates any "reasonableness" arguments.

[1p0kerboy]

Hmmm.....

While this is certainly interesting, I don't think we have to resort to this just yet.

But if the ability to transfer $$$ ever gets stopped, I think it's a very legitimate stance.

Maybe it would be in TruePoker's best interest to jump on the angle now. If word were to get out that TruePoker is now offering legal online poker contests that have been approved by a U.S. court, perhaps they could secure a certain sector of the market. They might even be able to set up payment processors here in the United States. That would certainly be a positive move for everyone.

I hope the SNG structures have changed since I last played there though. Starting with such shallow stacks (800 chips) wasn't very good.

[TruePoker CEO]

"Are these just SNG's that you are giving a different title somehow?"

If a Court wants the event to be called a "Contest", then it will be called a Contest. Actually, we posted our Poker Contests with the rules we did because it was easy to do so with existing software in about 10 minutes time.

To my understanding, the sole defining element of a SitnGo is that it commences when X players are registered. The Poker Contests we posted share that feature, but it is NOT an essential element of a Poker Contest.

There is nothing to gain by labeling Poker Contests as SitNGoes. The current version we offer yields the winners the same prize structure, for the same financial contribution, and the "start" of the tourney is determined by it filling up. The similarity of those charateristics to a traditional S&G do not define a "Poker Contest" however.

There is no reason why a Poker Contest "must" look only like a S&G. In fact there are numerous varieties that occurred to us, but would require additional time to post.However, the "start" time feature is not an essential element. A multi-table guaranteed structure, running at a set hour could also qualify as a Poker Contest. We just didn't do an MTT on the fly.

If this seems acceptable to the market, we will post other versions, which are not tied to the S&G "start when full" model.

(I wanted to post something for public play which meets the apparent parameters of a Poker Contest as soon as possible, to be able prompt the discussion, but also claim a "first use" for legal reasons .... in case some later company tried to claim a patent.)

[TruePoker CEO]

I don't know if Chuck was shooting for a tax angle. More likely, he was testing the limits of "skill games" in the US and trying to get them defined. To that extent, he has apparently succeeded in getting some elements defined in a manner favorable to poker.

We owe him thanks for the effort.

[TruePoker CEO]

"But I'm not sure it takes it to the point where a raked sng by any other name smells sweeter to people trying to stop online gaming."

I am pretty sure that to people trying to stop online gaming, ALL gaming smells .... whether online or in a casino, or at your house, or at a racetrack.

I really need to read the decision also, but thought the discussion could proceed regardless.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
(I wanted to post something for public play which meets the apparent parameters of a Poker Contest as soon as possible, to be able prompt the discussion, but also claim a "first use" for legal reasons .... in case some later company tried to claim a patent.)

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Can something like this really be patented?
2. Is TruePoker likely to claim a patent?

[TruePoker CEO]

1. I have seen patents claimed for casino games before.
2. Our software company is looking at developing the Poker Contests market for US play. A game with no betting or wagering has certain attributes that make it easier to offer than a straight up poker game. We certainly want to be able to defend our right to offer Poker Contests against anyone else.

[Skallagrim]

Of course I love what you are doing here TPCEO, but before we get too happy, can we please see the opinion?

I am very confident that the opinion discusses the "skill" aspect of the contest. A lottery can be called a contest too, but that wont change its legal standing.

Legally, in MOST states, contests of "skill" are not gambling. A poker contest is not gambling if poker is a game of skill, a poker contest is gambling if poker is a game of chance.

And most states determine whether a game is one of chance or skill by asking which is the greater factor in determining the outcome.

I have previously posted a formal legal argument to show poker is a game mostly determined by skill. Few, even here at 2+2, took the argument seriously (TPCEO, to his credit, actually provided us with some numbers from his site to back up the argument). I hope maybe now people will see the importance of separating poker from "gambling" by emphasizing that its results are MOSTLY (of course not always) due to the skills exhibited by the players through their actions, not the cards.

If you cant do that, this case means nothing.

Skallagrim

[1p0kerboy]

Anybody want to have a keno contest?

How about a roulette contest?