If a poker site were to offer insurance on hands backed by the house

[MotorBoatingSOB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't get me wrong I don't want the sites taking more money from the fish, but why would the time delay be so bad? Give them like 5 seconds or however long they give people to show a winning hand.

"Take insurance for $xxx?"

Yes - No

What's tough about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not going to try to explain it in detail here, but let me just say that your mind would be boggled by what 1 second can generate.
In addition to the time delay, there were several other things talked about that stopped it. Like the fact that a site would all of the sudden have an interest in the outcome of the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

So according to your logic, an internet gaming house would never offer blackjack/craps/keno because they have an interest in the hand/dice/number outcome? By offering insurance, the house would get a large and repeatable edge on the players. The house cheating at the insurance game is roughly equivalent to the house cheating at any other game. Why would they do it?

I mean, there might be other problems with offering insurance. But house dishonesty is not one of them.