Rep. Berkley introduces gambling study bill

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
isn't proving poker a game of skill bad for fish?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all, IMHO. It may help. They think they're skilled! That's why they keep coming back for more. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This is debatable. At the extreme end of the skill/luck spectrum is chess, and you don't see many fish playing chess. Also, things like Pokernomics and some of the ideas talked about at that Harvard seminar are somewhat concerning if they find a way to dumb down the essence of the skill involved so that anyone can imitate it. But then again there's tons of poker books and still tons of fish.

[antneye]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Link to the bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h110-2140

I e-mailed the following to my Congressman, Peter King, who is a co-sponsor of Frank's bill...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice letter! Please also snail-mail a hard copy.

I have a lot of respect for King and Wexler. They were once against us. Each actually spoke out in favor of banning online gambling on the House floor. They each took a deep look at the issue and came around, not because they were pressured into changing their minds by interest groups, but because they decided to do what was right. It's good to see some politicians do still actually think, and it's also good to see some will vote on convictions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like to think my scalding phone calls to King had something to do with it. I have always been a big supporter of his and made it extremely clear my vote was gone forever without him taking some action to right the wrong.

Of course my one voice is not the key here, but all of our calls in the aggregate make a difference.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you have any proof on their apparent change of heart or are you just extrapolating?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty much extrapolating. However, while I don't know why Wexler changed his mind, we do know he stood up on the floor of the House in opposition to HR 4411. And, that was prior to any real organized effort on our belalf (the PPA has just started up). Also, his constituents (at least the ones who vote for him) consist of 80 year olds who were confused and bebuddled by the "butterfly ballots" in the 2000 election...hardly the folks to lobby for Internet gambling. Regardless of the reason, I'm glad he's on our side now.

As for Peter King, I have no idea why he changed his mind, but I'm glad to see he has an open mind, which was really my point.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not at all, IMHO. It may help. They think they're skilled! That's why they keep coming back for more. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This is debatable. At the extreme end of the skill/luck spectrum is chess, and you don't see many fish playing chess. Also, things like Pokernomics and some of the ideas talked about at that Harvard seminar are somewhat concerning if they find a way to dumb down the essence of the skill involved so that anyone can imitate it. But then again there's tons of poker books and still tons of fish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker is chess with variance. Fish don't play chess because they get killed every time. They win sometimes, which is what keeps them coming back. Again, this is just my personal opinion, but I come from a blackjack card counting background. The thing that made me think poker had great potential was watching the ploppies (that's what we call blackjack "fish") play blackjack. These gamblers are really just looking for action. Also, the slot machines were rarely empty. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I don't think we'll run out of fish, especially if we get good legislation soon.

[Flacks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Link to the bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h110-2140

I e-mailed the following to my Congressman, Peter King, who is a co-sponsor of Frank's bill...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice letter! Please also snail-mail a hard copy.

I have a lot of respect for King and Wexler. They were once against us. Each actually spoke out in favor of banning online gambling on the House floor. They each took a deep look at the issue and came around, not because they were pressured into changing their minds by interest groups, but because they decided to do what was right. It's good to see some politicians do still actually think, and it's also good to see some will vote on convictions.

[/ QUOTE ]


You may want to rethink your theory about them "doing what was right"

Ask yourself what they had to gain by putting pressure on offshore gambling. Then what they will they gain if they do studies and convince enough people that they can regulate online gambling the way they do in the state of.....NEVADA. *Gasp..shocking coincidence.

Make no mistake where the money and motivation came from to pass the bill we are currently working under. The names are up in lights across the desert.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
You may want to rethink your theory about them "doing what was right"

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhh...okay, I'll get right to rethinking. Thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
Ask yourself what they had to gain by putting pressure on offshore gambling. Then what they will they gain if they do studies and convince enough people that they can regulate online gambling the way they do in the state of.....NEVADA. *Gasp..shocking coincidence.

Make no mistake where the money and motivation came from to pass the bill we are currently working under. The names are up in lights across the desert.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like proof to me! Of course, Wexler's been on our side for years. He spoke up against HR 4411 when the casinos weren't near us. Anyway, thanks for sharing.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is chess with variance. Fish don't play chess because they get killed every time. They win sometimes, which is what keeps them coming back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think we'll run out of fish, especially if we get good legislation soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree. The huge influx of players from a formal "sanctioning" of online poker would far outweigh the marginal drawbacks of labelling poker as a game of skill.

[permafrost]

This study could be handy to have in place if the promised UIGEA regulations prove to be effective. The biggest problem is that poker will get lumped in with other gambling. There needs to be recognition of the widespread belief that poker is a skill game, not gambling, and promises that the belief will be part of what is addressed.

[Flacks]

I wasn't trying to post proof but if you think that these politicians are having a change of heart for any other reason than it benefits them then you are fooling yourself. The casinos gave millions to be sure that they put a clamp on online poker while behind closed doors they were putting together their own plans to start websites.

Everything is going exactly how they planned.

Of course lining a few politicians pockets or showing them how it will benefit their state would make most politicians have a change of heart. It has absolutely nothing with "doing what is right"

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't trying to post proof but if you think that these politicians are having a change of heart for any other reason than it benefits them then you are fooling yourself. The casinos gave millions to be sure that they put a clamp on online poker while behind closed doors they were putting together their own plans to start websites.

Everything is going exactly how they planned.

Of course lining a few politicians pockets or showing them how it will benefit their state would make most politicians have a change of heart. It has absolutely nothing with "doing what is right"

[/ QUOTE ]

You sound quite certain. No offense, but I always get a chuckle when someone comes by and posts their random thoughts as unequivocal fact. It always has the same "[fill in the blank] then you are fooling yourself" discussion style. Unfortunately, it's that attitude that keeps many from fighting back.

You may wish to consider that politicians like to get elected. As such, they care about public opinion.

Your post does not explain why Wexler would support HR 4411. Frist was well-compensated by Harrah's and he led the charge against it. Sorry, but not everything is some conspiracy.

I recommend you join with us in writing to your congressman to support IGREA and the Berkley study bill. You may find your congressman may respond to public opinion as well.