Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Select your timezone:
G-poker ( G-poker.ca, online poker resource for Canadian poker fans ) reports that online poker site PokerStars has revealed details about its internal accounting procedures in an attempt to assure players of the security of their bankrolls. In a statement released by PokerStars, Head of Corporate Communications Eric Hollreiser states that PokerStars' methods absorb the risks of working with online payment processors rather than passing those risks on to players, a practice shared by companies like 888 Poker and PartyGaming.
According to Hollreiser, PokerStars maintains operational funds in separate accounts from players' funds, which is required by PokerStars' licensor. The AGCC, Full Tilt Poker's licensor, did not require this policy of segregating funds. "This is believed to be part of what caused Full Tilt Poker's financial problems, and part of the reason why the AGCC just announced it will conduct a review of its decisions regarding Full Tilt," said Jeremy Taylor, G-poker spokesperson. "PokerStars claims it is now going to be more transparent, but this statement, coming only after the April 15 online poker shutdown, is a bit too late in my opinion. Our readers already show a preference for publicly traded poker sites that are fully transparent by law."
888 Poker is a public company traded on the London Stock Exchange and regulated by the Gibraltar Licensing Authority, Taylor continued. "As of 2011, only 22 licenses have been granted by Gibraltar -- that's how stringent the requirements are. On top of those requirements, 888 also meets the level of transparency and stability demanded to trade on the LSE, which is one reason our readers choose this online poker site over others." For more details: Unique Treats and Free Cash at 888 Poker .
Party Poker is another company traded on the LSE and licensed by the Gibraltar Licensing Authority, in addition to being one of the largest gaming companies in the world today. For more information: Party Poker Are Practically Giving Cash Away
"While PokerStars moving toward additional transparency is a step in the right direction," Taylor added, "poker fans have learned to appreciate the security provided by companies like 888 and Party Poker, which adhere to the even stricter guidelines and greater transparency required by public establishments like the LSE."
According to Hollreiser, PokerStars maintains operational funds in separate accounts from players' funds, which is required by PokerStars' licensor. The AGCC, Full Tilt Poker's licensor, did not require this policy of segregating funds. "This is believed to be part of what caused Full Tilt Poker's financial problems, and part of the reason why the AGCC just announced it will conduct a review of its decisions regarding Full Tilt," said Jeremy Taylor, G-poker spokesperson. "PokerStars claims it is now going to be more transparent, but this statement, coming only after the April 15 online poker shutdown, is a bit too late in my opinion. Our readers already show a preference for publicly traded poker sites that are fully transparent by law."
888 Poker is a public company traded on the London Stock Exchange and regulated by the Gibraltar Licensing Authority, Taylor continued. "As of 2011, only 22 licenses have been granted by Gibraltar -- that's how stringent the requirements are. On top of those requirements, 888 also meets the level of transparency and stability demanded to trade on the LSE, which is one reason our readers choose this online poker site over others." For more details: Unique Treats and Free Cash at 888 Poker .
Party Poker is another company traded on the LSE and licensed by the Gibraltar Licensing Authority, in addition to being one of the largest gaming companies in the world today. For more information: Party Poker Are Practically Giving Cash Away
"While PokerStars moving toward additional transparency is a step in the right direction," Taylor added, "poker fans have learned to appreciate the security provided by companies like 888 and Party Poker, which adhere to the even stricter guidelines and greater transparency required by public establishments like the LSE."
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Earlier this month, MGM Resorts International filed a lawsuit against several entrepreneurs who have purchased domain names that pertain to different MGM properties, with attorneys for MGM stating that they were “cyber squatters.” This legal battle is beginning to heat up, as a Texas man has filed a response to the MGM lawsuit that challenges their stance.
On December 1, MGM attorneys dropped the lawsuits regarding their Las Vegas properties. These properties – the Aria, the Bellagio, Circus Circus, the Excalibur, the Luxor, Mandalay Bay and the MGM – all had website domain names that included the name “poker” (for example, excaliburpoker.com) that were registered between 2002 and 2005. The MGM lawsuit looks to seize those names, as they feel that there is a potential for confusion with their casino properties, and return them to the ownership of MGM Resorts.
Following the release of the lawsuit, one of the defendants, Texas’ Adam Majewski, filed a motion for dismissal this week. Majewski, who has owned the excaliburpoker.com domain name since 2005, states that his site doesn’t infringe on MGM Resorts’ trademark of the term “Excalibur.” According to an article from VegasInc.com’s Steve Green, Majewski’s motion states, “Excalibur is not a distinctive mark…It was the sword of kings in the Arthur legends. Thousands of businesses use this name – Excalibur Bowling, Excalibur Taxi and even Excalibur Condoms.”
While he does admit to being an entrepreneur in online gaming, internet marketing and social media, Majewski says he has gone out of his way to avoid targeting Nevada with his site, VegasInc says.
The reasons for the MGM lawsuit are clear, according to Majewski. “Recent changes in Nevada law have opened up the prospect for Internet gambling,” Majewski’s motion states. “Late to the feeding frenzy, MGM wants to leverage the well-known names of its hotels in Las Vegas.”
In November, the Nevada State Gaming Control Board began to accept applications for online poker licenses, albeit on an intrastate level rather than interstate or international level. While these licenses would allow operators to open up for online poker, they will not be enacted unless the federal government legalizes and regulates online gaming or the NGCB receives word from the federal government that a state-wide operation would be legal. Still, the rush is on for many casino owners to get their particular operations on the licensing list so that they will be ready to reap the benefits of a legalized online poker arena in the U. S.
The other sites in question are ariapoker.com, bellagioonlinepoker.com, circuscircuspoker.com, luxorpoker.com, mandalaybayonlinepoker.com and mgmpoker.com.
This isn’t the first lawsuit that MGM Resorts has filed against what they view as “cyber squatters.” Back in August, MGM Resorts struck against several domain name holders that incorporated the term “Gold Strike” into their poker operations. MGM owns the Gold Strike properties in both Nevada and Mississippi and felt this, again, was an assault against their properties. That lawsuit ended in September when a settlement was reached.
Green also reports in the VegasInc article a lawsuit that steps outside of the online poker world. MGM Resorts filed suit against a company in California that used the term “Bellagio” for their store. The store, which sells handbags and shoes from a retail outlet as well as an online website, uses the distinctive “B” mark that the Bellagio uses as its trademark.
In total, four individuals and two companies have been the target of the MGM Resorts lawsuit regarding the online poker angle. At this point, only Majewski has made any response regarding his excaliburpoker.com site (for visitors to the site, all that is presented is a logo but no further usage). Despite Majewski’s motion, U. S. District Court Judge Philip Pro has issued a preliminary injunction following the MGM lawsuit’s filing that locks up the sites in question until the case can be litigated or settled. As Majewski’s motion was only filed last week, Judge Pro has not had a chance to fully review and rule on it.
On December 1, MGM attorneys dropped the lawsuits regarding their Las Vegas properties. These properties – the Aria, the Bellagio, Circus Circus, the Excalibur, the Luxor, Mandalay Bay and the MGM – all had website domain names that included the name “poker” (for example, excaliburpoker.com) that were registered between 2002 and 2005. The MGM lawsuit looks to seize those names, as they feel that there is a potential for confusion with their casino properties, and return them to the ownership of MGM Resorts.
Following the release of the lawsuit, one of the defendants, Texas’ Adam Majewski, filed a motion for dismissal this week. Majewski, who has owned the excaliburpoker.com domain name since 2005, states that his site doesn’t infringe on MGM Resorts’ trademark of the term “Excalibur.” According to an article from VegasInc.com’s Steve Green, Majewski’s motion states, “Excalibur is not a distinctive mark…It was the sword of kings in the Arthur legends. Thousands of businesses use this name – Excalibur Bowling, Excalibur Taxi and even Excalibur Condoms.”
While he does admit to being an entrepreneur in online gaming, internet marketing and social media, Majewski says he has gone out of his way to avoid targeting Nevada with his site, VegasInc says.
The reasons for the MGM lawsuit are clear, according to Majewski. “Recent changes in Nevada law have opened up the prospect for Internet gambling,” Majewski’s motion states. “Late to the feeding frenzy, MGM wants to leverage the well-known names of its hotels in Las Vegas.”
In November, the Nevada State Gaming Control Board began to accept applications for online poker licenses, albeit on an intrastate level rather than interstate or international level. While these licenses would allow operators to open up for online poker, they will not be enacted unless the federal government legalizes and regulates online gaming or the NGCB receives word from the federal government that a state-wide operation would be legal. Still, the rush is on for many casino owners to get their particular operations on the licensing list so that they will be ready to reap the benefits of a legalized online poker arena in the U. S.
The other sites in question are ariapoker.com, bellagioonlinepoker.com, circuscircuspoker.com, luxorpoker.com, mandalaybayonlinepoker.com and mgmpoker.com.
This isn’t the first lawsuit that MGM Resorts has filed against what they view as “cyber squatters.” Back in August, MGM Resorts struck against several domain name holders that incorporated the term “Gold Strike” into their poker operations. MGM owns the Gold Strike properties in both Nevada and Mississippi and felt this, again, was an assault against their properties. That lawsuit ended in September when a settlement was reached.
Green also reports in the VegasInc article a lawsuit that steps outside of the online poker world. MGM Resorts filed suit against a company in California that used the term “Bellagio” for their store. The store, which sells handbags and shoes from a retail outlet as well as an online website, uses the distinctive “B” mark that the Bellagio uses as its trademark.
In total, four individuals and two companies have been the target of the MGM Resorts lawsuit regarding the online poker angle. At this point, only Majewski has made any response regarding his excaliburpoker.com site (for visitors to the site, all that is presented is a logo but no further usage). Despite Majewski’s motion, U. S. District Court Judge Philip Pro has issued a preliminary injunction following the MGM lawsuit’s filing that locks up the sites in question until the case can be litigated or settled. As Majewski’s motion was only filed last week, Judge Pro has not had a chance to fully review and rule on it.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
While the legalization of online poker in the U.S. has seen progress in recent months with Congressional hearings being held on the issue and individual states ramping up efforts on their own toward statewide regulations, lawmakers are still not in full agreement on which type of legislation will be in the best interests of everybody involved.
At a time when raising revenue through a regulated online poker industry is much needed for many states faced with budget deficits, as well as the U.S. government’s revenue shortcomings, internet poker legislation could provide some relief. But the proper approach remains elusive, as there are many groups who would like a piece of the pie, including Indian tribes, land-based casinos, the horse-racing industry and state lotteries.
“It’s not a one-size-fits-all solution,” said U.S. Digital Gaming Executive Vice President and General Counsel Melissa Riahei. “A state like California [has] tribal casinos, card clubs, and a lottery. All of them have to be taken into consideration for a centralized solution. You also have to take into account the population to determine the model.”
If poker legislation were to be enacted on a state-by-state format, the possibility remains that not enough players will be involved from individual states to make the system work and be profitable. The lack of liquidity in a verifiable customer base is a reasonable concern.
“With regards to poker, liquidity is the key consideration,” said Dan Walsh, Greenberg Traurig Director of Governmental Affairs. “Even California, as big as it is, is one-tenth of the U.S. market. There’s no way without federal legislation that state licensing will be successful. Players will continue to go to unregulated sites.”
If state regulations may not be successful due to liquidity issues, then some industry insiders believe the solution must be federal legislation. But there are many concerns in trying to get legislation passed through that avenue as well.
“Congress is so boggled up, they can’t even pass gas, let alone a good bill,” said Rep. Jeff Danielson (D-IA). “What are the states supposed to do? We have an obligation as states to experiment. It’s better to be caught trying than to do nothing.” Danielson feels that his responsibility as a lawmaker is better-served in concentrating on policy, and not on liquidity.
Individual states such as Iowa, California and Nevada have been forging ahead with their own plans for online poker legislation. Nevada has already accepted applications from five companies, including 888 Holdings and Bally Technologies, who are itching to be first in line to offer legalized online poker from American soil. But further complicating matters is the possibility that the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) will intervene and attempt to prohibit state-run models of online poker sites by enforcing the Wire Act.
Online poker’s most vocal lobbying group, the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), has actively been supporting federal legislation that would bring internet poker to American homes and laptops. But the PPA has not completely ruled out state-by-state guidelines.
“We’re not opposed to state bills,” said PPA Executive Director John Pappas. “We’ve really pulled off all of our lobbying efforts in the states, which have been efforts in Florida and California. And if Florida or California is able to move forward with a bill that makes sense for consumers, we’re not going to stand in the way. At some point, we might be on the bandwagon pushing for that legislation. I do see a time where failing a federal bill, we’re going to have to take the less desirable approach, but it’s still an approach. Perhaps the Feds will wake up once they see a number of states act. I still think there’s a lot of promise for federal legislation between now and next year in June or July. After that, it’ll be difficult to do any legislating. Up until then, we’ll be monitoring what’s going on at the state level and supportive where we see good bills.”
Many are looking at the proposed bill of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), which favors the regulation of online poker in the U.S. giving authority to a series of agencies that are operated by the states, as the catalyst that will provide for online poker legislation. But Pappas prefers not to put all his eggs in one basket.
“The Barton bill is the most prominent bill out there right now, but there has been a lot of discussion about the Senate and what they might do,” Pappas said. “While the Barton bill is obviously the most visible bill right now, it might not end up being the end product that everything is based off of. I think we should not just look at the Barton bill, but also any potential internet poker vehicle.”
Perhaps clouding the picture even further is the announced retirement of arguably online poker’s biggest supporter, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). As the Ranking Member of the House Financial Services Committee, Frank’s efforts on behalf of online poker regulation have often been thwarted by the chairman of the committee, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), who ardently opposes online gaming.
Regarding the impending departure of Frank, Walsh said, “He’s been a tremendous asset, but in his committee, there hasn’t been a lot he can do.”
The jury is still out on the best possible legislative approach to online poker legislation. But Pappas is optimistic that the problems will eventually all be sorted out. “I think the prospect of some legislation between now and June of next year is actually pretty good,” he said. “I would put it at better than a 50% chance that something could become law by then. There are some hurdles we’ll have to face, but we truly believe that if the powers that be in the Senate…. can agree on a proposal, then it being done won’t be a big problem.“
At a time when raising revenue through a regulated online poker industry is much needed for many states faced with budget deficits, as well as the U.S. government’s revenue shortcomings, internet poker legislation could provide some relief. But the proper approach remains elusive, as there are many groups who would like a piece of the pie, including Indian tribes, land-based casinos, the horse-racing industry and state lotteries.
“It’s not a one-size-fits-all solution,” said U.S. Digital Gaming Executive Vice President and General Counsel Melissa Riahei. “A state like California [has] tribal casinos, card clubs, and a lottery. All of them have to be taken into consideration for a centralized solution. You also have to take into account the population to determine the model.”
If poker legislation were to be enacted on a state-by-state format, the possibility remains that not enough players will be involved from individual states to make the system work and be profitable. The lack of liquidity in a verifiable customer base is a reasonable concern.
“With regards to poker, liquidity is the key consideration,” said Dan Walsh, Greenberg Traurig Director of Governmental Affairs. “Even California, as big as it is, is one-tenth of the U.S. market. There’s no way without federal legislation that state licensing will be successful. Players will continue to go to unregulated sites.”
If state regulations may not be successful due to liquidity issues, then some industry insiders believe the solution must be federal legislation. But there are many concerns in trying to get legislation passed through that avenue as well.
“Congress is so boggled up, they can’t even pass gas, let alone a good bill,” said Rep. Jeff Danielson (D-IA). “What are the states supposed to do? We have an obligation as states to experiment. It’s better to be caught trying than to do nothing.” Danielson feels that his responsibility as a lawmaker is better-served in concentrating on policy, and not on liquidity.
Individual states such as Iowa, California and Nevada have been forging ahead with their own plans for online poker legislation. Nevada has already accepted applications from five companies, including 888 Holdings and Bally Technologies, who are itching to be first in line to offer legalized online poker from American soil. But further complicating matters is the possibility that the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) will intervene and attempt to prohibit state-run models of online poker sites by enforcing the Wire Act.
Online poker’s most vocal lobbying group, the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), has actively been supporting federal legislation that would bring internet poker to American homes and laptops. But the PPA has not completely ruled out state-by-state guidelines.
“We’re not opposed to state bills,” said PPA Executive Director John Pappas. “We’ve really pulled off all of our lobbying efforts in the states, which have been efforts in Florida and California. And if Florida or California is able to move forward with a bill that makes sense for consumers, we’re not going to stand in the way. At some point, we might be on the bandwagon pushing for that legislation. I do see a time where failing a federal bill, we’re going to have to take the less desirable approach, but it’s still an approach. Perhaps the Feds will wake up once they see a number of states act. I still think there’s a lot of promise for federal legislation between now and next year in June or July. After that, it’ll be difficult to do any legislating. Up until then, we’ll be monitoring what’s going on at the state level and supportive where we see good bills.”
Many are looking at the proposed bill of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), which favors the regulation of online poker in the U.S. giving authority to a series of agencies that are operated by the states, as the catalyst that will provide for online poker legislation. But Pappas prefers not to put all his eggs in one basket.
“The Barton bill is the most prominent bill out there right now, but there has been a lot of discussion about the Senate and what they might do,” Pappas said. “While the Barton bill is obviously the most visible bill right now, it might not end up being the end product that everything is based off of. I think we should not just look at the Barton bill, but also any potential internet poker vehicle.”
Perhaps clouding the picture even further is the announced retirement of arguably online poker’s biggest supporter, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). As the Ranking Member of the House Financial Services Committee, Frank’s efforts on behalf of online poker regulation have often been thwarted by the chairman of the committee, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), who ardently opposes online gaming.
Regarding the impending departure of Frank, Walsh said, “He’s been a tremendous asset, but in his committee, there hasn’t been a lot he can do.”
The jury is still out on the best possible legislative approach to online poker legislation. But Pappas is optimistic that the problems will eventually all be sorted out. “I think the prospect of some legislation between now and June of next year is actually pretty good,” he said. “I would put it at better than a 50% chance that something could become law by then. There are some hurdles we’ll have to face, but we truly believe that if the powers that be in the Senate…. can agree on a proposal, then it being done won’t be a big problem.“
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
James Dempsey has won the 2011 $10,000 buy-in World Poker Tour Doyle Brunson Five Diamond World Poker Classic at Bellagio. He outlasted 413 players to take $821,612.
He also grabbed 2,400 points for Card Player’s 2011 Player of the Year race.
Dempsey beat a stacked final table of Andrew Lichtenberger, Vanessa Selbst, Vitor Coelho, defending champ Antonio Esfandiari and runner-up Soi Nguyen.
Nguyen had Dempsey out chipped more than 3:1 at one point, but couldn’t hold on for the title.
Here are the final results:
1. James Dempsey — $821,612
2. Soi Nguyen — $517,478
3. Vanessa Selbst — $338,351
4. Andrew Lichtenberger — $218,933
5. Vitor Coelho — $159,224
6. Antonio Esfandiari — $119,418
He also grabbed 2,400 points for Card Player’s 2011 Player of the Year race.
Dempsey beat a stacked final table of Andrew Lichtenberger, Vanessa Selbst, Vitor Coelho, defending champ Antonio Esfandiari and runner-up Soi Nguyen.
Nguyen had Dempsey out chipped more than 3:1 at one point, but couldn’t hold on for the title.
Here are the final results:
1. James Dempsey — $821,612
2. Soi Nguyen — $517,478
3. Vanessa Selbst — $338,351
4. Andrew Lichtenberger — $218,933
5. Vitor Coelho — $159,224
6. Antonio Esfandiari — $119,418
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
A French gambling addict is suing the government for 100,000 euros ($133,000) because it failed to prevent him from accessing online poker sites, his lawyer said on Monday.
The 37-year-old from the city of Reims registered with the interior ministry last year to be voluntarily banned from casinos and online gambling sites, but was still able to access them, lawyer Emmanuel Ludot told AFP.
"It's all well and good to moralise about online games but we all know that they rely on the addiction and sickness of players," Ludot said.
He said the ministry registered the man, whose identity was not released, under the wrong address when he asked to be banned, "which allowed him to continue playing".
The interior ministry refused to comment on the case because legal proceedings were under way.
Under French law gambling addicts can register with the ministry to be banned from casinos and from being allowed access to Internet gambling sites, which must consult the ban list before allowing players to sign up.
There are currently about 36,000 people registered on the list. 😄
The 37-year-old from the city of Reims registered with the interior ministry last year to be voluntarily banned from casinos and online gambling sites, but was still able to access them, lawyer Emmanuel Ludot told AFP.
"It's all well and good to moralise about online games but we all know that they rely on the addiction and sickness of players," Ludot said.
He said the ministry registered the man, whose identity was not released, under the wrong address when he asked to be banned, "which allowed him to continue playing".
The interior ministry refused to comment on the case because legal proceedings were under way.
Under French law gambling addicts can register with the ministry to be banned from casinos and from being allowed access to Internet gambling sites, which must consult the ban list before allowing players to sign up.
There are currently about 36,000 people registered on the list. 😄
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
When I started playing poker in 2005 it was like many of the other addictions I have latched onto in my life. It was a way to pass the time and become engrossed in the excitement of gambling for real money. Just as I had done with blackjack and craps (both in casinos and online) for many years.
I would estimate since my first visit to a Shreveport casino soon after my twenty first birthday in 1990, that I lost somewhere between twenty five and fifty thousand dollars, mostly playing blackjack. It is truly hard to estimate, especially considering most of it was done in the blinding fog of all night drunkenness. I have never been a daily drinker, but somehow drinking and gambling seemed to go together for me. It was somewhat of a curse that I won over six hundred dollars on that very first visit. What incredible exhilaration and value. I had a great time, got blasted drunk for free, and not only paid for the trip, but came home with several hundred dollars in profit. I got paid to have fun!
Like many addictions I was continuously chasing that original rush from then on. I went to Shreveport and Las Vegas dozens of times in the next fifteen years. I even dabbled in online gambling with blackjack and craps but somehow knew that if I got hooked on that, I would be completely ruined, and stayed away from it (for the most part).
Then (in 2004) I found online poker. It struck me that this game could be profitable. I noticed that a player only had to "pay" to play two of every nine hands (on a nine man table), those hands being the small blind and the big blind. It was apparent to me, mathematically, that if one played more patiently than everyone else, than it might be possible to grind away a profit.
I had never played poker before in my life. I didn't even know the ranking of the hands. But by playing very tight (playing very few hands), I was able to hold my own. In the beginning I didn't win money, but I didn't lose much either, and it was a cheap way to have fun and satisfy my gambling urges.
Then I was given a beginner poker book for Christmas. By learning some basic concepts, I became a slight winner. Over the next six months I was able to pay for a new desktop computer with my winnings.
I read more books, online poker started to boom, and in the next year I was able to make about ten thousand dollars doing something I loved! Never before in my life had I experienced the rush of actually enjoying making money. Work had always meant drudgery, and I had assumed it would always be that way.
And something strange happened. I completely lost the urge to gamble in other ways. I quit playing blackjack and poker entirely and still have no desire to play those games. It seems stupid to me now, to play a game that I know is impossible to beat (long term).
But what was even more amazing was the effect that poker started to have on my life. Without realizing it, I was improving as a human being. I began to grow up and mature. I started to make better decisions both in poker and in real-life situations. And for that, I give a great deal of credit to my desire to be good at poker.
That may sound strange but it actually makes a lot of sense. Poker is a game of decisions. And one way to look at life is as a long series of decisions.
To get better at poker, one has to be very honest in self evaluation. The poker player operates in a vacuum, with only himself to critique his play and make adjustments. For those that are unable to see their own faults, improving at poker is an impossible proposition.
So I had to be very honest with myself. I had to admit my mistakes and calmly think through my decisions. Daily, I had to review the previous day's play for opportunities to learn and make adjustments.
Year after year I became better at doing this. And this process also seeped into the way I dealt with life decisions. Without realizing it at first, improving my poker game was leading to me being a better person.
I continued to play poker professionally online until April 15, 2011. I never made a great deal of money, averaging about two thousand in profit per month. At first I was pretty lazy, and didn't work very hard. In the beginning it was quite easy and I naively thought that it was only a matter of time until I hit the big stakes and started making big money.
Online poker got harder every year. Players skills improved. I wasn't the only one who was enjoying playing this game for a living.
To keep up I had to read more books, watch online video lessons, and research the best players. I began to track a player named Dusty Schmidt. He is well known as the biggest cash games winner online and made many tutorial videos.
I watched all of them. I began to see where I was falling short. Dusty advocated treating poker like a business (the title of one of his books), and I started doing so.
It finally appeared I was on track to follow in Schmidt's footsteps and "hit the big time" when everything was taken away in an instant. The day is known as "Black Friday" in the poker world.
I was playing online at Full Tilt Poker when someone typed in the chat box-"how are you guys in the U.S. still playing?". That comment didn't sound like good news. And it wasn't.
After some Googling I saw that the Department of Justice (DOJ) had seized bank accounts of Poker Stars and Full Tilt. Initially, I still wasn't too worried. I had been doing this for years. These companies were located off shore and making huge profits. The big names in poker were celebrities. Certainly all this wasn't going away!
Well it did go away. And my bankroll went with it. I kept most of my money in my Full Tilt account. When I needed money I could cash out via electronic bank transfer and have my money the next day. I had become very comfortable that my bankroll was safe. It was not.
U.S. players were immediately barred from playing at Poker Stars and Full Tilt. Poker Stars turned out to be a sol
I would estimate since my first visit to a Shreveport casino soon after my twenty first birthday in 1990, that I lost somewhere between twenty five and fifty thousand dollars, mostly playing blackjack. It is truly hard to estimate, especially considering most of it was done in the blinding fog of all night drunkenness. I have never been a daily drinker, but somehow drinking and gambling seemed to go together for me. It was somewhat of a curse that I won over six hundred dollars on that very first visit. What incredible exhilaration and value. I had a great time, got blasted drunk for free, and not only paid for the trip, but came home with several hundred dollars in profit. I got paid to have fun!
Like many addictions I was continuously chasing that original rush from then on. I went to Shreveport and Las Vegas dozens of times in the next fifteen years. I even dabbled in online gambling with blackjack and craps but somehow knew that if I got hooked on that, I would be completely ruined, and stayed away from it (for the most part).
Then (in 2004) I found online poker. It struck me that this game could be profitable. I noticed that a player only had to "pay" to play two of every nine hands (on a nine man table), those hands being the small blind and the big blind. It was apparent to me, mathematically, that if one played more patiently than everyone else, than it might be possible to grind away a profit.
I had never played poker before in my life. I didn't even know the ranking of the hands. But by playing very tight (playing very few hands), I was able to hold my own. In the beginning I didn't win money, but I didn't lose much either, and it was a cheap way to have fun and satisfy my gambling urges.
Then I was given a beginner poker book for Christmas. By learning some basic concepts, I became a slight winner. Over the next six months I was able to pay for a new desktop computer with my winnings.
I read more books, online poker started to boom, and in the next year I was able to make about ten thousand dollars doing something I loved! Never before in my life had I experienced the rush of actually enjoying making money. Work had always meant drudgery, and I had assumed it would always be that way.
And something strange happened. I completely lost the urge to gamble in other ways. I quit playing blackjack and poker entirely and still have no desire to play those games. It seems stupid to me now, to play a game that I know is impossible to beat (long term).
But what was even more amazing was the effect that poker started to have on my life. Without realizing it, I was improving as a human being. I began to grow up and mature. I started to make better decisions both in poker and in real-life situations. And for that, I give a great deal of credit to my desire to be good at poker.
That may sound strange but it actually makes a lot of sense. Poker is a game of decisions. And one way to look at life is as a long series of decisions.
To get better at poker, one has to be very honest in self evaluation. The poker player operates in a vacuum, with only himself to critique his play and make adjustments. For those that are unable to see their own faults, improving at poker is an impossible proposition.
So I had to be very honest with myself. I had to admit my mistakes and calmly think through my decisions. Daily, I had to review the previous day's play for opportunities to learn and make adjustments.
Year after year I became better at doing this. And this process also seeped into the way I dealt with life decisions. Without realizing it at first, improving my poker game was leading to me being a better person.
I continued to play poker professionally online until April 15, 2011. I never made a great deal of money, averaging about two thousand in profit per month. At first I was pretty lazy, and didn't work very hard. In the beginning it was quite easy and I naively thought that it was only a matter of time until I hit the big stakes and started making big money.
Online poker got harder every year. Players skills improved. I wasn't the only one who was enjoying playing this game for a living.
To keep up I had to read more books, watch online video lessons, and research the best players. I began to track a player named Dusty Schmidt. He is well known as the biggest cash games winner online and made many tutorial videos.
I watched all of them. I began to see where I was falling short. Dusty advocated treating poker like a business (the title of one of his books), and I started doing so.
It finally appeared I was on track to follow in Schmidt's footsteps and "hit the big time" when everything was taken away in an instant. The day is known as "Black Friday" in the poker world.
I was playing online at Full Tilt Poker when someone typed in the chat box-"how are you guys in the U.S. still playing?". That comment didn't sound like good news. And it wasn't.
After some Googling I saw that the Department of Justice (DOJ) had seized bank accounts of Poker Stars and Full Tilt. Initially, I still wasn't too worried. I had been doing this for years. These companies were located off shore and making huge profits. The big names in poker were celebrities. Certainly all this wasn't going away!
Well it did go away. And my bankroll went with it. I kept most of my money in my Full Tilt account. When I needed money I could cash out via electronic bank transfer and have my money the next day. I had become very comfortable that my bankroll was safe. It was not.
U.S. players were immediately barred from playing at Poker Stars and Full Tilt. Poker Stars turned out to be a sol
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The U.S. Supreme Court's June 2010 ruling in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, which foreclosed securities-fraud claims by plaintiffs who bought their shares on foreign exchanges, continues to show up in some unexpected places. As Alison Frankel has reported, the decision has been invoked by defendants accused of everything from trade-secret theft and copyright violations to antitrust price-fixing. Those defendants have seized on the decision's holding that unless Congress has explicitly said otherwise, there's a presumption that U.S. laws do not apply extraterritorially. We can now add another group of defendants invoking Morrison: those accused of aiding and abetting illegal gambling operations. As you'll recall, back in April, the U.S. Attorney for Manhattan brought a $3 billion civil forfeiture case against the three largest online poker companies operating in the United States. Criminal indictments were also returned against 11 individuals, including four who allegedly helped the poker companies process payments from their customers here.
Two of the payment-processor defendants -- Chad Elie and John Campos -- are contending that that under Morrison, they cannot be targeted for violating the Illegal Gambling Business Act, a 1970 statute that outlawed large-scale gambling operations. At a hearing earlier this month in the Manhattan federal courtroom of U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, that argument was presented by a fellow who knows a thing or two about Supreme Court precedent: Paul Clement, the former U.S. Solicitor General who has argued more than 50 cases at the high court.
Clement, now a partner at Bancroft PLLC, argued on Elie's behalf that the IGBA was passed to target organized crime in the United States and that Congress never intended the statute to be applied to businesses operating abroad, which are subject to different laws and regulations.
"One of the things Morrison is worried about is the idea that when you project U.S. law abroad to jurisdictions where the activity you're covering is perfectly legal there, that can create all sorts of diplomatic problems," said Clement, according to a transcript of the argument. "And look, if Congress and the president, who are responsible for our diplomacy, want to, you know, get crosswise with Ireland or the Isle of Man over an issue like this, so be it. They're the diplomats. They can deal with it."
Assistant U.S. Attorney Arlo Devlin-Brown countered that the government's case was not an extraterritorial application under Morrison. To determine whether a law is being applied extraterritorially, Devlin-Brown said, the Supreme Court held that Congress's focus of concern was the most important consideration. When it passed the IGBA, Devlin-Brown said that that Congress's focus was "the gambling business being conducted in a state," the exact kind of activities targeted in the government's case.
Devlin-Brown also rejected Clement's argument that enforcing the IGBA in this case would create a diplomatic cause celebre.
"Look, any company can go wherever it wants and be a regulated entity and follow the regulations of that jurisdiction," said Devlin-Brown, according to the transcript. "But it's not an accident, it's not sort of like you put your website up there and then, oh, my gosh, I can't control all the people around the world who happen to be going on who are Americans. I'm sorry. That's not how it works."
Two of the payment-processor defendants -- Chad Elie and John Campos -- are contending that that under Morrison, they cannot be targeted for violating the Illegal Gambling Business Act, a 1970 statute that outlawed large-scale gambling operations. At a hearing earlier this month in the Manhattan federal courtroom of U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, that argument was presented by a fellow who knows a thing or two about Supreme Court precedent: Paul Clement, the former U.S. Solicitor General who has argued more than 50 cases at the high court.
Clement, now a partner at Bancroft PLLC, argued on Elie's behalf that the IGBA was passed to target organized crime in the United States and that Congress never intended the statute to be applied to businesses operating abroad, which are subject to different laws and regulations.
"One of the things Morrison is worried about is the idea that when you project U.S. law abroad to jurisdictions where the activity you're covering is perfectly legal there, that can create all sorts of diplomatic problems," said Clement, according to a transcript of the argument. "And look, if Congress and the president, who are responsible for our diplomacy, want to, you know, get crosswise with Ireland or the Isle of Man over an issue like this, so be it. They're the diplomats. They can deal with it."
Assistant U.S. Attorney Arlo Devlin-Brown countered that the government's case was not an extraterritorial application under Morrison. To determine whether a law is being applied extraterritorially, Devlin-Brown said, the Supreme Court held that Congress's focus of concern was the most important consideration. When it passed the IGBA, Devlin-Brown said that that Congress's focus was "the gambling business being conducted in a state," the exact kind of activities targeted in the government's case.
Devlin-Brown also rejected Clement's argument that enforcing the IGBA in this case would create a diplomatic cause celebre.
"Look, any company can go wherever it wants and be a regulated entity and follow the regulations of that jurisdiction," said Devlin-Brown, according to the transcript. "But it's not an accident, it's not sort of like you put your website up there and then, oh, my gosh, I can't control all the people around the world who happen to be going on who are Americans. I'm sorry. That's not how it works."
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The owner of the poker website excaliburpoker.com has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed against him by MGM Resorts International, who claims that the website infringes on the trademark held by MGM for its popular Excalibur Hotel & Casino.
Adam Majewski of McKinney, Texas, says he is an entrepreneur engaged in internet marketing, social media and online gambling and that his website in no way infringes on MGM’s trademark casino. Majewski’s site is merely a page that does not offer online gaming and has remained as such for several years after he acquired the domain name, the court filing said.
“Excalibur is not a distinctive mark,” Majewski’s court documents stated. “It was the sword of kings in the Arthur legends. Thousands of businesses use this name – Excalibur Bowling, Excalibur Taxi and even Excalibur Condoms.”
In early December, MGM filed legal action against four individuals and two companies who had registered domain names for seven poker websites that are using the names of well-known MGM casinos. In addition to excaliburpoker.com, the other websites MGM accuses of infringement are mgmpoker.com, mandalaybayonlinepoker.com, ariapoker.com, circuscircuspoker.com, bellagioonlinepoker.com, and luxorpoker.com.
MGM claims in its lawsuit that the defendants are attempting to profit on MGM’s well-recognized name and its substantial investment over the years in advertising and promoting the brick-and-mortar casinos. The domain name registrants are guilty of “cybersquatting” and “have done nothing more than tack on the descriptive terms ‘poker’ or ‘online poker’ to each of the MGM marks to form the domain names,’ thereby causing confusion with the MGM trademarks, the casino companies’ lawsuit said.
In Majewski’s motion to dismiss, he claims that the excaliburpoker.com site doesn’t compete with Excalibur Hotel & Casino and “there is no likelihood of confusion because the hotel does not offer online gaming.” Majewski said he purposely avoided Nevada casinos with his registered online poker sites and has registered domain names for various U.S. cities and free poker such as BostonFreePoker.com and DallasFreePoker.com with the intention that players could play poker against others in their specific hometowns for prizes provided by local advertisers.
“I specifically left off Las Vegas, Reno and Henderson as I concluded that individuals that could already gamble for real money would not want to play for prizes valued at a few dollars,” he said.
It is typical in trademark infringement matters for the trademark holder to first request that the accused party “cease and desist” from using the trademark. Majewski complained that MGM “made no attempt to contact me prior to filing this action” and the lawsuit was initiated to “impose substantial burdens on me to defend my private property,” including the travel expenses of answering the allegations in a Nevada courtroom.
Last month, the Nevada State Gaming Control Board (NGC😎 started accepting applications for internet poker licenses on an intrastate level. The licenses would permit operators to provide online poker services, but that would still be on hold until the federal government regulates online gaming or the NGCB obtains assurances from federal authorities that running a state-wide poker site would be legal. Many Nevada casinos are proceeding accordingly, attempting to secure licensing in order to be prepared for when online poker is legalized in the U. S.
The defendants registered the poker domain names between 2002 and 2005. Majewski believes that MGM is now concerned about the possible legalization of online poker in the U.S., but is rather tardy in protecting its marks that have nothing to do with online poker.
“Recent changes in Nevada law have opened up the prospect for internet gambling,” Majewski’s filing states. “Late to the feeding frenzy, MGM wants to leverage the well-known names of its hotels in Las Vegas.”
U.S. District Judge Philip Pro issued a preliminary injunction ruling in MGM’s favor that blocks the poker website owners, Majewski and the other five named defendants, from possibly transferring them to other or new domain name registrars and/or transferring the registrations to other entities or people. This is accomplished by ordering GoDaddy.com and/or other registrars to “place the domain names on hold and lock and deposit them into the registry of the court.”
“The issuance of a preliminary injunction is in the public interest because it would protect consumers against deception and confusion arising from domain names containing plaintiff’s trademarks, and from the use of plaintiff’s trademarks, by persons other than plaintiff,” the order says.
The judge indicated that Majewski’s motion for dismissal will be considered after all the parties have filed their necessary pleadings. The Texas entrepreneur also urged the court to transfer the lawsuit to Dallas if his pleading fails to persuade the judge to dismiss the case.
Adam Majewski of McKinney, Texas, says he is an entrepreneur engaged in internet marketing, social media and online gambling and that his website in no way infringes on MGM’s trademark casino. Majewski’s site is merely a page that does not offer online gaming and has remained as such for several years after he acquired the domain name, the court filing said.
“Excalibur is not a distinctive mark,” Majewski’s court documents stated. “It was the sword of kings in the Arthur legends. Thousands of businesses use this name – Excalibur Bowling, Excalibur Taxi and even Excalibur Condoms.”
In early December, MGM filed legal action against four individuals and two companies who had registered domain names for seven poker websites that are using the names of well-known MGM casinos. In addition to excaliburpoker.com, the other websites MGM accuses of infringement are mgmpoker.com, mandalaybayonlinepoker.com, ariapoker.com, circuscircuspoker.com, bellagioonlinepoker.com, and luxorpoker.com.
MGM claims in its lawsuit that the defendants are attempting to profit on MGM’s well-recognized name and its substantial investment over the years in advertising and promoting the brick-and-mortar casinos. The domain name registrants are guilty of “cybersquatting” and “have done nothing more than tack on the descriptive terms ‘poker’ or ‘online poker’ to each of the MGM marks to form the domain names,’ thereby causing confusion with the MGM trademarks, the casino companies’ lawsuit said.
In Majewski’s motion to dismiss, he claims that the excaliburpoker.com site doesn’t compete with Excalibur Hotel & Casino and “there is no likelihood of confusion because the hotel does not offer online gaming.” Majewski said he purposely avoided Nevada casinos with his registered online poker sites and has registered domain names for various U.S. cities and free poker such as BostonFreePoker.com and DallasFreePoker.com with the intention that players could play poker against others in their specific hometowns for prizes provided by local advertisers.
“I specifically left off Las Vegas, Reno and Henderson as I concluded that individuals that could already gamble for real money would not want to play for prizes valued at a few dollars,” he said.
It is typical in trademark infringement matters for the trademark holder to first request that the accused party “cease and desist” from using the trademark. Majewski complained that MGM “made no attempt to contact me prior to filing this action” and the lawsuit was initiated to “impose substantial burdens on me to defend my private property,” including the travel expenses of answering the allegations in a Nevada courtroom.
Last month, the Nevada State Gaming Control Board (NGC😎 started accepting applications for internet poker licenses on an intrastate level. The licenses would permit operators to provide online poker services, but that would still be on hold until the federal government regulates online gaming or the NGCB obtains assurances from federal authorities that running a state-wide poker site would be legal. Many Nevada casinos are proceeding accordingly, attempting to secure licensing in order to be prepared for when online poker is legalized in the U. S.
The defendants registered the poker domain names between 2002 and 2005. Majewski believes that MGM is now concerned about the possible legalization of online poker in the U.S., but is rather tardy in protecting its marks that have nothing to do with online poker.
“Recent changes in Nevada law have opened up the prospect for internet gambling,” Majewski’s filing states. “Late to the feeding frenzy, MGM wants to leverage the well-known names of its hotels in Las Vegas.”
U.S. District Judge Philip Pro issued a preliminary injunction ruling in MGM’s favor that blocks the poker website owners, Majewski and the other five named defendants, from possibly transferring them to other or new domain name registrars and/or transferring the registrations to other entities or people. This is accomplished by ordering GoDaddy.com and/or other registrars to “place the domain names on hold and lock and deposit them into the registry of the court.”
“The issuance of a preliminary injunction is in the public interest because it would protect consumers against deception and confusion arising from domain names containing plaintiff’s trademarks, and from the use of plaintiff’s trademarks, by persons other than plaintiff,” the order says.
The judge indicated that Majewski’s motion for dismissal will be considered after all the parties have filed their necessary pleadings. The Texas entrepreneur also urged the court to transfer the lawsuit to Dallas if his pleading fails to persuade the judge to dismiss the case.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
It was all a hustle and bustle at the Ambassador Casino, Wenceslas Square in Prague yesterday as iPoker’s first ever live event kicked off alongside the conclusion of iPOPS 4. Today poker fans can follow the action live as the online-turned-live event makes its way towards finding its champion.
The final 27 players of iPOPS 4 came together to finish what they started online on Dec. 4 in the $500,000 guaranteed $125 + $10 no-limit hold’em freezeout. That 27 made it through an original field of 3,383 but now only nine players remain. Of the final table the most familiar names aiming for the $90,550 top prize are Veronique Gourdon and chip leader Tim Van de Riet.
Here is the final table and their chip counts:
Seat 1: Dara “daramcc” McCarthy (Irish) 3,085,000
Seat 2: Tim “panjodeluxe” Van de Riet (Dutch) 5,740,000
Seat 3: Tomas “mitchelll” Mitell (Swedish) 5,045,000
Seat 4: Geoff “geoffowen” Owen (English) 2,300,000
Seat 5: Veronique “veryunique” Gourdon (French) 3,115,000
Seat 6: Nick “nbban” Baghai (English) 3,155,000
Seat 7: Mads “POKZ 1337” Fournaise (Danish) 5,435,000
Seat 8: Andrew “heyjoe26” Ritchee (Scottish) 1,230,000
Seat 9: Alfie “NashvilleSkyline” Baldwin (English) 2,625,000
Here is what they are playing for:
1. $90,550
2. $55,000
3. $35,500
4. $27,750
5. $22,000
6. $15,350
7. $11,500
8. $9,000
9. $6,700
The final table of iPOPS 4 will be streamed live today from 12.30 p.m. (GMT) at Winmedia.ie, William Hill, Parimatch, and Titan Poker. There will be a 30-minute delay as viewers will be able to see the hole cards. You can also check out the Winmedia blog for information throughout the final day as both the main event and iPOPS 4 come to a conclusion.
The final 27 players of iPOPS 4 came together to finish what they started online on Dec. 4 in the $500,000 guaranteed $125 + $10 no-limit hold’em freezeout. That 27 made it through an original field of 3,383 but now only nine players remain. Of the final table the most familiar names aiming for the $90,550 top prize are Veronique Gourdon and chip leader Tim Van de Riet.
Here is the final table and their chip counts:
Seat 1: Dara “daramcc” McCarthy (Irish) 3,085,000
Seat 2: Tim “panjodeluxe” Van de Riet (Dutch) 5,740,000
Seat 3: Tomas “mitchelll” Mitell (Swedish) 5,045,000
Seat 4: Geoff “geoffowen” Owen (English) 2,300,000
Seat 5: Veronique “veryunique” Gourdon (French) 3,115,000
Seat 6: Nick “nbban” Baghai (English) 3,155,000
Seat 7: Mads “POKZ 1337” Fournaise (Danish) 5,435,000
Seat 8: Andrew “heyjoe26” Ritchee (Scottish) 1,230,000
Seat 9: Alfie “NashvilleSkyline” Baldwin (English) 2,625,000
Here is what they are playing for:
1. $90,550
2. $55,000
3. $35,500
4. $27,750
5. $22,000
6. $15,350
7. $11,500
8. $9,000
9. $6,700
The final table of iPOPS 4 will be streamed live today from 12.30 p.m. (GMT) at Winmedia.ie, William Hill, Parimatch, and Titan Poker. There will be a 30-minute delay as viewers will be able to see the hole cards. You can also check out the Winmedia blog for information throughout the final day as both the main event and iPOPS 4 come to a conclusion.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The progressive jackpot for PKR's Caribbean Stud Poker mini-game has today reached $149,000 and is expected to grow to a record size within the next few days.
The game is available directly through PKR's pioneering 3D poker room client, and invites poker fans to beat the dealer's five card Texas Hold'em hand. Players can be eligible for the rapidly rising jackpot by placing a side bet of just $1, with jackpot payouts activated by hitting the highest ranked poker hands.
On 27 November, poker player GVincredible won 10% of the jackpot after hitting a straight flush, turning his $4 stake into $15,838. The Belgian, a regular at PKR's online poker tables since July 2007 with a $1,833 tournament victory to his name, commented "I just couldn't believe I'd won. I'd already planned to play more poker on PKR in 2012 and to buy a new car, but this makes it much easier!"
PKR's Caribbean Stud Poker mini-game forms part of the award winning operator's suite of gaming products which includes a revolutionary 3D poker room, innovative 3D casino and sportsbook.
For more information on PKR's Caribbean Stud, please visit:
About PKR
PKR is a revolutionary new concept in online poker that has changed the way the game is played. Featuring stunning real-time 3D graphics and a uniquely engaging and immersive gaming system, PKR brings an unparalleled and previously unseen level of realism to online poker. Developed by some of the brightest stars in the video games and poker industries, PKR continues to be the most innovative poker room in the world.
The game is available directly through PKR's pioneering 3D poker room client, and invites poker fans to beat the dealer's five card Texas Hold'em hand. Players can be eligible for the rapidly rising jackpot by placing a side bet of just $1, with jackpot payouts activated by hitting the highest ranked poker hands.
On 27 November, poker player GVincredible won 10% of the jackpot after hitting a straight flush, turning his $4 stake into $15,838. The Belgian, a regular at PKR's online poker tables since July 2007 with a $1,833 tournament victory to his name, commented "I just couldn't believe I'd won. I'd already planned to play more poker on PKR in 2012 and to buy a new car, but this makes it much easier!"
PKR's Caribbean Stud Poker mini-game forms part of the award winning operator's suite of gaming products which includes a revolutionary 3D poker room, innovative 3D casino and sportsbook.
For more information on PKR's Caribbean Stud, please visit:
About PKR
PKR is a revolutionary new concept in online poker that has changed the way the game is played. Featuring stunning real-time 3D graphics and a uniquely engaging and immersive gaming system, PKR brings an unparalleled and previously unseen level of realism to online poker. Developed by some of the brightest stars in the video games and poker industries, PKR continues to be the most innovative poker room in the world.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The World Series of Poker is the Holy Grail of poker. Winning the Main Event and your life instantly changes. All you need is $10000 laying around not earmarked for anything else. Can you imagine winning $8.7 million for playing poker. That is what Pius Heinz of Germany did this year. 6865 players all paid $10000 for the chance, some were from leagues. They had much less on the line, but still got to experience the thrill. World Series poker leagues are becoming ever more popular. The chance to win a seat at on-line sites went away on Black Friday. Some groups were not affected by the closing of the big three poker sites. I personally have been in a WSOP league for five years now. I have been fortunate enough to win a trip and seat three times. They were lessor events, only $1500 buy-ins, but I got to see first hand what the WSOP experience is all about.
To form a WSOP league you need the following things. 10 to 15 or more players with a passion for good poker and $350 to a $1000 dollars to invest. Yes I said invest, not lose outright. You will need a weekly tournament for these players to play in. You will need about 6 month time period to make this happen.
Every player will put up the same amount of money. ALL, the money will go into an account, to be managed by two or three players the group has trust in. You can set up payment plans, or you can get all the money upfront, whatever works best for the group. Take whatever the total money collected is, divide it by the buy-in amounts, add a little travel money, and someone is off to Vegas.
The following is how our league sent 6 players to represent our group in $1500 buy-in events, and one to the $10000, 2011 Main Event. We had 19 players involved. Each player put up $1000. We played for 16 weeks, tracking our finishing order, each player got to throw out his worst 6 finishes. Finishing first got you 10 points, second got you 9, and so on until 10 places got points. Finishing worst than 10th and you got no points for that week.
At the end of 16 weeks, after totaling the points, the player in first received a buy in to the Main Event. Second thru fifth places received a $1500 buy-in to a smaller event. The following week places six thru 15 played a one table shootout for the last buy-in of $1500. Using this format we sent seven, our best seven players at the time to Vegas. They were representing our group not just themselves. 25% of anything they won, was brought back to the group and split 19 ways. Everybody shared equally in the groups part and the players got to keep 75% for themselves.
Our group has not been lucky enough to win the big one yet. We have won some money and several of us have gotten to chase our poker dream. Without the league, some may never have gotten that chance. I also play in a league where we include $500 travel money to the players who go, which is a nice added benefit. A complete trip with very little cost.
So if you and your buddies have aspirations of going to Vegas for the WSOP. Forming a league may be your best bet to make it happen at a reasonable price. You also have the added benefit of going around Vegas, playing with some of the world's best poker players. It is an experience you will never forget.
To form a WSOP league you need the following things. 10 to 15 or more players with a passion for good poker and $350 to a $1000 dollars to invest. Yes I said invest, not lose outright. You will need a weekly tournament for these players to play in. You will need about 6 month time period to make this happen.
Every player will put up the same amount of money. ALL, the money will go into an account, to be managed by two or three players the group has trust in. You can set up payment plans, or you can get all the money upfront, whatever works best for the group. Take whatever the total money collected is, divide it by the buy-in amounts, add a little travel money, and someone is off to Vegas.
The following is how our league sent 6 players to represent our group in $1500 buy-in events, and one to the $10000, 2011 Main Event. We had 19 players involved. Each player put up $1000. We played for 16 weeks, tracking our finishing order, each player got to throw out his worst 6 finishes. Finishing first got you 10 points, second got you 9, and so on until 10 places got points. Finishing worst than 10th and you got no points for that week.
At the end of 16 weeks, after totaling the points, the player in first received a buy in to the Main Event. Second thru fifth places received a $1500 buy-in to a smaller event. The following week places six thru 15 played a one table shootout for the last buy-in of $1500. Using this format we sent seven, our best seven players at the time to Vegas. They were representing our group not just themselves. 25% of anything they won, was brought back to the group and split 19 ways. Everybody shared equally in the groups part and the players got to keep 75% for themselves.
Our group has not been lucky enough to win the big one yet. We have won some money and several of us have gotten to chase our poker dream. Without the league, some may never have gotten that chance. I also play in a league where we include $500 travel money to the players who go, which is a nice added benefit. A complete trip with very little cost.
So if you and your buddies have aspirations of going to Vegas for the WSOP. Forming a league may be your best bet to make it happen at a reasonable price. You also have the added benefit of going around Vegas, playing with some of the world's best poker players. It is an experience you will never forget.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Play at the Best Poker Sites for 2011. This site features the top online poker sites, with great online poker information designed to help you learn about online poker, choose the best poker room.
BetOnline - Poker
We help you choose the best poker room that suits your needs!!
BetOnline - Poker
We help you choose the best poker room that suits your needs!!
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson, who has a great deal of clout when it comes to the legalization for online gambling with Republican lawmakers due to his large donations to political campaigns, made a comment last week that Internet gambling technology isn’t advanced enough to prevent underage gambling. Adelson is especially tied to Senator Jon Kyl, Republican from Arizona, who happens to be a big supporter of the UIGEA and the opposition against US Internet poker.
Adelson’s statement has outraged poker players, who have decided to boycott the Venetian Poker Room at the Sands and are urging others to stay out of the room as well.
Spokesperson for the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) Richard Muny urged radio broadcast listeners to send messages via Twitter straight to the Venetian telling them of their displeasure with Adelson’s statement.
Seventy-eight-year-old Adelson is on Forbes list for richest American, ranking 8th, 16th in the world, and is estimated to have a net worth of $21+ billion, taking in an estimated 80% of the $2.4 billion in quarterly earnings from the Las Vegas Sands, and casinos in Macau and Singapore.
Adelson traveled to Asia just recently in support of casino legalization in Japan and Vietname and is also backing a Miami casino resort property in hopes that Florida will legalize gaming. Before he went to Asia though, he visited DC to notify the American Gaming Association (AGA) and Kyl of his opposition to the regulation of Internet poker.
Despite the attempt by other Las Vegas casino owners to change Adelson’s opinion based on the potential $5+ billion in possible annual revenue that regulated online poker would generate, the billionaire casino mogul refuses to change his mind.
While many big casino operators in Vegas have already formed partnerships with successful overseas Internet poker companies, Adelson has not. Many insiders, including Internet poker pro and poker writer Zach Tracy, believe Adelson is so strongly opposed to regulated online poker because he has not yet made any connections and is not in a position to compete with these other brands.
Tracy says, “He is in opposition because all of his industry ducks are not in a row yet to compete in a new market. I think he is trying to block competitors from getting a bill through.”
Recently inducted into the Gaming Hall of Fame, Adelson may be only hurting himself by alienating his brand from its customer base and the rest of the online poker community for that matter. Despite his obvious business sense that has brought him this far, many do not believe this is the best decision for his company because of the far-reaching impact it may have on the cause to regulate online poker in the US.
Adelson’s statement has outraged poker players, who have decided to boycott the Venetian Poker Room at the Sands and are urging others to stay out of the room as well.
Spokesperson for the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) Richard Muny urged radio broadcast listeners to send messages via Twitter straight to the Venetian telling them of their displeasure with Adelson’s statement.
Seventy-eight-year-old Adelson is on Forbes list for richest American, ranking 8th, 16th in the world, and is estimated to have a net worth of $21+ billion, taking in an estimated 80% of the $2.4 billion in quarterly earnings from the Las Vegas Sands, and casinos in Macau and Singapore.
Adelson traveled to Asia just recently in support of casino legalization in Japan and Vietname and is also backing a Miami casino resort property in hopes that Florida will legalize gaming. Before he went to Asia though, he visited DC to notify the American Gaming Association (AGA) and Kyl of his opposition to the regulation of Internet poker.
Despite the attempt by other Las Vegas casino owners to change Adelson’s opinion based on the potential $5+ billion in possible annual revenue that regulated online poker would generate, the billionaire casino mogul refuses to change his mind.
While many big casino operators in Vegas have already formed partnerships with successful overseas Internet poker companies, Adelson has not. Many insiders, including Internet poker pro and poker writer Zach Tracy, believe Adelson is so strongly opposed to regulated online poker because he has not yet made any connections and is not in a position to compete with these other brands.
Tracy says, “He is in opposition because all of his industry ducks are not in a row yet to compete in a new market. I think he is trying to block competitors from getting a bill through.”
Recently inducted into the Gaming Hall of Fame, Adelson may be only hurting himself by alienating his brand from its customer base and the rest of the online poker community for that matter. Despite his obvious business sense that has brought him this far, many do not believe this is the best decision for his company because of the far-reaching impact it may have on the cause to regulate online poker in the US.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
In celebration of the 10th anniversary of PokerStars online poker room, the December 18th Sunday Million will feature a $10,000,000 guaranteed prize pool, and you can qualify for as little as $1 or buy-in directly for $215. The first place finisher is guaranteed $2 million. This will be the biggest Sunday Million ever.
PokerStars is hosting hundreds of satellites up until the main event. You can find these satellites by logging in to your PokerStars account, click “Tourney,” then click “Events,” then “10th Anniversary,” and then click “All.” Your best bet is to register for the $11 Sunday Million Mega Satellite that takes place about an hour before the Sunday Million at precisely 13:45. There are 1,000 guaranteed seats for the big event that will run live at 14:30 ET.
Another easy way into this massive tourney is to use turn your Frequent Player Points into cash, then buy-in for $215.
PokerStars and the Sunday Million have come a long way over the past 10 years. The first Sunday Million ran in 2006 on March 5th, and US player “aaaaaaaa” won the inaugural event after beating 5,892 other players. Since then, this event has grown to be the biggest weekly online poker tourney and averages about 7,000 players each week, though that number is expected to increase for the special $10 Million Sunday Million taking place this weekend. The largest Sunday Million took place on March 6, 2011 when nearly 60,000 players took part and helped raise a prize pool of almost 12 million.
PokerStars is hosting hundreds of satellites up until the main event. You can find these satellites by logging in to your PokerStars account, click “Tourney,” then click “Events,” then “10th Anniversary,” and then click “All.” Your best bet is to register for the $11 Sunday Million Mega Satellite that takes place about an hour before the Sunday Million at precisely 13:45. There are 1,000 guaranteed seats for the big event that will run live at 14:30 ET.
Another easy way into this massive tourney is to use turn your Frequent Player Points into cash, then buy-in for $215.
PokerStars and the Sunday Million have come a long way over the past 10 years. The first Sunday Million ran in 2006 on March 5th, and US player “aaaaaaaa” won the inaugural event after beating 5,892 other players. Since then, this event has grown to be the biggest weekly online poker tourney and averages about 7,000 players each week, though that number is expected to increase for the special $10 Million Sunday Million taking place this weekend. The largest Sunday Million took place on March 6, 2011 when nearly 60,000 players took part and helped raise a prize pool of almost 12 million.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Bwin.party digital entertainment plc today issued a trading update indicating the sale of bwin’s legacy online poker network Ongame was at an advanced stage.
The company said, “As one of the world’s leading online poker networks with a state-of-the-art technology platform, the sale of Ongame’s B2B business has attracted a number of interested parties.
“The sale process is at an advanced stage but is unlikely to be finalised before the end of the year.”
Ongame was acquired by bwin in 2005 for just under €500 million.
Elsewhere the company said it expected to be among the first group of operators to be granted a license when a regulated and licensed Danish online gaming market opens in January 2012.
The company also said it remained “optimistic” that online gaming regulation in the U.S. would take a step forward in 2012 added it was well placed to take advantage of such an opportunity through its agreements with MGM and Boyd Gaming.
The company said, “As one of the world’s leading online poker networks with a state-of-the-art technology platform, the sale of Ongame’s B2B business has attracted a number of interested parties.
“The sale process is at an advanced stage but is unlikely to be finalised before the end of the year.”
Ongame was acquired by bwin in 2005 for just under €500 million.
Elsewhere the company said it expected to be among the first group of operators to be granted a license when a regulated and licensed Danish online gaming market opens in January 2012.
The company also said it remained “optimistic” that online gaming regulation in the U.S. would take a step forward in 2012 added it was well placed to take advantage of such an opportunity through its agreements with MGM and Boyd Gaming.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
On Dec. 13, 2011, PokerStars took to TwoPlusTwo to announce that Team PokerStars Online's Randy "nanonoko" Lew will attempt to set or break an unknown Guinness World Record at this year's PokerStars Caribbean Adventure. The record that will be attempted is unnamed, and PokerStars is enlisting the help of its fans to determine exactly what it will be.
According to the PokerStars post on TwoPlusTwo: “We would like to have TwoPlusTwo's input on what Randy attempts. The record should be poker authentic (and preferably online poker authentic) while being easily understood by the public.”
The post also stresses the importance of keeping the record simple, so that nonpoker players, notably those at the Guinness Book of World Records, will know what’s going on. Bertrand "ElkY" Grospellier's record of "Most Online Poker Tables Played in One Hour" is an example of one that would not be suitable. Others who were rejected included Most ring-game tables played profitably in a given time period and most raises in a given time period.
Here’s a look at some suggestions thus far by TwoPlusTwo users:
Most hands played in X hours.
Longest time standing on head while playing online poker.
Most tables played with profit while riding a exercise bike.
Most poker hands in 24 hours is a good challenge and very easy to understand.
Most hands played in an hour without seeing hole cards and showing profit.
The latest promotion idea comes as no surprise because Lew has been one of the hottest members of Team PokerStars Online, although he is making noise in the live arena, as well as the virtual felt. It all started in January when Lew took 10th in the AUD$10,000 Aussie Millions Poker Championship for AUD$100,000, which he followed up with three World Series of Poker cashes over the summer. Then, just a few weeks ago, Lew conquered a field of 575 players to win the Asian Pacific Poker Tour Macau Main Event for $484,617.
According to the PokerStars post on TwoPlusTwo: “We would like to have TwoPlusTwo's input on what Randy attempts. The record should be poker authentic (and preferably online poker authentic) while being easily understood by the public.”
The post also stresses the importance of keeping the record simple, so that nonpoker players, notably those at the Guinness Book of World Records, will know what’s going on. Bertrand "ElkY" Grospellier's record of "Most Online Poker Tables Played in One Hour" is an example of one that would not be suitable. Others who were rejected included Most ring-game tables played profitably in a given time period and most raises in a given time period.
Here’s a look at some suggestions thus far by TwoPlusTwo users:
Most hands played in X hours.
Longest time standing on head while playing online poker.
Most tables played with profit while riding a exercise bike.
Most poker hands in 24 hours is a good challenge and very easy to understand.
Most hands played in an hour without seeing hole cards and showing profit.
The latest promotion idea comes as no surprise because Lew has been one of the hottest members of Team PokerStars Online, although he is making noise in the live arena, as well as the virtual felt. It all started in January when Lew took 10th in the AUD$10,000 Aussie Millions Poker Championship for AUD$100,000, which he followed up with three World Series of Poker cashes over the summer. Then, just a few weeks ago, Lew conquered a field of 575 players to win the Asian Pacific Poker Tour Macau Main Event for $484,617.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Every week, Bodog hosts thousands of poker tournaments, ranging from single table events to our massive $100,000 guaranteed tournaments. There's just no way we can cover all of them, but we want to make sure you keep up with who won the biggest of the big games.
Who took the top spot in the $100,000 guaranteed online poker tournament held this past Sunday, December 11? John S took first place this week, earning $20,500. They were followed by Matthew D ($14,000) and Albert H , who rounded out the top trifecta while earning $10,200. Here are the rest of the final table results: Matthew P ($7,800.00); Kyle M ($5,300); John M ($4,100); Nicholas D ($3,100.00); Tadas I ($2,000) and Brent A-S ($1,400).
In addition to show-stopping Sunday events, Bodog hosts a series of regular weekly tournaments for players, and here are the winners of last week's events!
December 5 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Larry A ($2,920.94)
December 6 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Brandon P ($2,831.41)
December 7 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Rhia D ($2,758.80)
December 8 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Mike C ($2,698.37)
December 9 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Sehn S ($3,062.84)
December 10 • $10k Guaranteed Turbo Double-Stack: Ryan F ($2,311.17)
December 11 • $15k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Daniel K ($3,718.00)
December 11 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Vance E ($2,576.00)
December 11 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Emilio S ($2,565.20)
Bodog's guaranteed tournaments mean that there's always a big cash pool and with more players getting in on the action every week, that means there's more to be won! Play poker online at Bodog and get your share!
Who took the top spot in the $100,000 guaranteed online poker tournament held this past Sunday, December 11? John S took first place this week, earning $20,500. They were followed by Matthew D ($14,000) and Albert H , who rounded out the top trifecta while earning $10,200. Here are the rest of the final table results: Matthew P ($7,800.00); Kyle M ($5,300); John M ($4,100); Nicholas D ($3,100.00); Tadas I ($2,000) and Brent A-S ($1,400).
In addition to show-stopping Sunday events, Bodog hosts a series of regular weekly tournaments for players, and here are the winners of last week's events!
December 5 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Larry A ($2,920.94)
December 6 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Brandon P ($2,831.41)
December 7 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Rhia D ($2,758.80)
December 8 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Mike C ($2,698.37)
December 9 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Sehn S ($3,062.84)
December 10 • $10k Guaranteed Turbo Double-Stack: Ryan F ($2,311.17)
December 11 • $15k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Daniel K ($3,718.00)
December 11 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Vance E ($2,576.00)
December 11 • $10k Guaranteed Double-Stack: Emilio S ($2,565.20)
Bodog's guaranteed tournaments mean that there's always a big cash pool and with more players getting in on the action every week, that means there's more to be won! Play poker online at Bodog and get your share!
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
James Dempsey isn't a household name in poker, despite winning his first WSOP event last year, but this past weekend, his name was on everyone's lips as he took the World Poker Tour Five Diamond event at the Bellagio for a very, very nice $821,612 along with a seat in the $25,000 World Poker Tour World Championship event. According to the pro, he almost wasn't even involved in the tournament; he was in town to run an errand for friend Chris Moorman and decided to enter the 413-strong field on a whim.
The gregarious UK pro beat two-time WPT winner (and reigning Five Diamond champ) Antonio Esfandiari, Vanessa Selbst and online star Andrew Lichtenberger before taking on November Niner Soi Nguyen heads-up for the title. It took 80 hands of back and forth before the critical hand: Nguyen holding KJ and Dempsey with KQ on a Jc9h6c flop. Thankfully, a 10d hit the river, completing Dempsey's gutshot straight draw and his fellow UK players exploded.
This win takes Dempsey to over $2,600,000 in winnings between his live and online poker play.
Here's how the final table shook down, for those who are curious:
1. James Dempsey $821,612
2. Soi Nguyen $517,478
3. Vanessa Selbst $338,351
4. Andrew Lichtenberger $218,933
5. Vitor Coelho $159,224
6. Antonio Esfandiari $119,418
The gregarious UK pro beat two-time WPT winner (and reigning Five Diamond champ) Antonio Esfandiari, Vanessa Selbst and online star Andrew Lichtenberger before taking on November Niner Soi Nguyen heads-up for the title. It took 80 hands of back and forth before the critical hand: Nguyen holding KJ and Dempsey with KQ on a Jc9h6c flop. Thankfully, a 10d hit the river, completing Dempsey's gutshot straight draw and his fellow UK players exploded.
This win takes Dempsey to over $2,600,000 in winnings between his live and online poker play.
Here's how the final table shook down, for those who are curious:
1. James Dempsey $821,612
2. Soi Nguyen $517,478
3. Vanessa Selbst $338,351
4. Andrew Lichtenberger $218,933
5. Vitor Coelho $159,224
6. Antonio Esfandiari $119,418
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
While there were plenty of big weekend winners in the Bodog casino it was Michael G. of MO who struck gold while playing Goldbeard in online Slot that won the most. Michael made $91,788 to earn the top spot. Congratulations!
Other big Bodog Casino winners from the weekend included:
-Eric S of MA who won $73,600 while playing Blackjack
-Steven G of RI also won $24,254 in another Blackjack game.
-Terry F of SC cast his spell and won $15,077 in Witches and Wizards
-Victoria S of CA got paid out with $10,238 in Aztecs Treasure
-Denise D of AL won $8,806 in Green Lights
-Roxanne B of MI also won $7,718 in Cleopatra’s Gold.
-Brendan M of NJ got paid out $7,708 in Caesar’s Empire
-Robert S of SC was another winner when he won $7,655 in 3Card Poker
-James R of VA manage to keep his head above water and won $7,339 in Crystal Waters
Blackjack seems to be treating the players well lately. Head over to Bodog's online casino to try it out for yourself.
Other big Bodog Casino winners from the weekend included:
-Eric S of MA who won $73,600 while playing Blackjack
-Steven G of RI also won $24,254 in another Blackjack game.
-Terry F of SC cast his spell and won $15,077 in Witches and Wizards
-Victoria S of CA got paid out with $10,238 in Aztecs Treasure
-Denise D of AL won $8,806 in Green Lights
-Roxanne B of MI also won $7,718 in Cleopatra’s Gold.
-Brendan M of NJ got paid out $7,708 in Caesar’s Empire
-Robert S of SC was another winner when he won $7,655 in 3Card Poker
-James R of VA manage to keep his head above water and won $7,339 in Crystal Waters
Blackjack seems to be treating the players well lately. Head over to Bodog's online casino to try it out for yourself.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
.jpg?v=1.014689161)
.png?v=1.014689161)
A bill in the State Legislature would add poker to a list of games of chance that charitable organizations can...