Shouldn't We Be Focusing On The Poker Carve Out?

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
It is about time ....

However, PLEASE do not push for any poker carveout until next year's Congress.

Also, the PPA has been pretty inept. Online Poker needs a better voice.

[/ QUOTE ]

why wait till next years congress?

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that that arguments for internet poker, perhaps regulated in a way not previously done, are a lot stronger than arguments for allowing unfettered internet casino gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]I think this is true, and I think you could be a powerful force in this endevor, at least from the factual side of it. Working the arguments into the polticial world correctly would take some caerful planning and a lot of work- or so I'd suppose.

[ QUOTE ]
it is a game that teaches many traits used in life.

[/ QUOTE ]If I were on the outside, I'd think this a dubious point- however from personal experienced I know it to be true. Learning BR management has made me better with money. Heck, understanding +EV and -EV has made me better with money and life choices. I do think it's going to be hard to make outsiders see this, though.

[ QUOTE ]
They are concerned about foreign, unregulated casinos that don't pay taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]I don't think this is true. I think Americans are concerned that "with a click of a mouse you can lose your house". I think the substance of the opposition to poker is of a moral nature more than a fiscal one. As a very conservative evangelical Christian, I've heard a lot of the relgious right arguments against poker (though ironically, I've never personally experienced another Christian criticizing my poker playing).

They argue that it is immoral to receive money when you have not produced any good or service. They also argue that if poker must be played for money, then it logically follows it is a game of greed. Finally, they'll say that all forms of gambling, poker included, lead to other sins such as greed, lust, etc. And because they feel that poker is immoral, they believe that we as a society benfit from not allowing it.

Unfortunatly, though all of these issues are answerable (otherwise I wouldn't be playing poker, as personal morality is a huge issue for me), fighting these notions is going to be an uphill battle. Libertarian notions that people should be free to make their own decisions aren't going to thwart those with this perspective, nor is trying to answer each objection rationally.

Having said all that, I think the poker carve out battle is the one 2+2 can wage most effectivly, and right now we need all guns firing. Poker is such a natural game for the average American mindset (isn't "chip and a chair" the poker version of the American Dream?) that people may just be looking for excuses to legalizes it- that the arguments are being made at all might be more important than the substance of them.

[Xhad]

One thing about sites going belly-up and taking player deposits...

Banks are already required under law to keep a percentage of their deposited funds in segregated accounts to prevent exactly this kind of occurrence. Some poker sites (most notably stars) do this voluntarily as it is. I don't think it would be unreasonable for the US government to insist that the sites do this to protect their players, especially any based in the US (if that ever happens).

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
TPCEO,

In another thread I said that it would behoove the industry to start developing a cohesive protocol that would:
Ensure minors are not playing
Ensure winnings are reported
Provide revenue to the government representing the players (not just the one where the site is incorporated).

The last point is tricky, in that it breeches the nebulous nature of internet commerce, but it is one that will need to be addressed everywhere eventually. If a such a plan was developed, I think it would greatly increase the chances of getting internet poker formally recognized and allowed in the US as a whole or at least in certain states. Leaving it up to congress to conceive and develop a plan is a bit much, but giving them a well thought out straw man could conceivably go a long way.

This is especially true if your beliefs on the current legislation bear out. If so, the issue will arise again, and I think we would all love to see ideas competing with the current notion that the solution is one of closing loopholes to effect a prohibition.

[/ QUOTE ]

The last point of the 4 in unneccesary. A US B&M sponsored online industry would capture more than enough market share to make the Scrooges drool.

[jimmytrick]

I suspect that the poker scene will be one of pirate companies serving US customers for a number of years.

In my mind any effort to create a carve out for poker would likely be deflected into a study that will most likely result in a bill of regulation.

All our efforts should be to support that outcome. We need to organize and reach out to the other players..B&M companies and B&M pros.

Sklansky, are you just goofing off or are you going to do something?

[alelitan]

I think it would be brilliant! If we succeed in carving out poker as a game of skill, imagine how many people (fish) will join our game. They will not be able to gamble at other places and will use our game of skill for their desire to gamble.

[chopchoi]

online blackjack is not a game of skill, insofar as it cannot be beaten.

[suzzer99]

I think the time to be on the ball and get the poker carve-out was *before* the damn bill got written - like the horse racing lobby and NFL obviously did.

[Q_and_A]

Party's original success was attracting US players to their poker room. For the last two years they have been slowly exposing poker players to their casino games and integrating the casino site with the poker site. The line has blurred between casino games and poker at Party. For legal/moral issues requiring a distinction between poker and casino games, this is unfortunate.

Though I believe that all types of internet gaming/gambling should be a purely individual choice, online poker (arguably a game of skill) is usually easier to advocate and rationalize versus casino games (based largely on chance). Some have argued that "offering" real money poker online is not prohibited by any federal law, even the latest UIGEA legislation. The thought of an expressly clear federal legislative exemption for online poker is batted about as an eventual likelihood. Sportsbooks and casinos seem to face a much more difficult road to exemption.

Are sites that offer gaming in addition to poker in a more difficult position (Party)? Should these sites do more to segregate poker from other gaming?

[AJay]

Yes, blackjack is not a game of skill really...well, yes, it's a game of skill in that there is an optimal strategy, but it's STILL a losing strategy! There's also an optimal strategy for slots (bet the max!), but that doesn't really make it a game of strategy either.

If the optimal strategy just makes you less of a loser, it's not much of a real game, IMO.