Topic: General / Future of poker?

The UIGEA will probably cease to exist in the next year or two I believe. Lobbyist organizations like the PPA who advocate poker as a game of skill are making great strides to promote the game that is truly Americas national pass time. Professionals like Annie Duke who have addressed Congress on the issue are bringing to light the inefficiencies of the UIGEA. Why can people bet on horses online or play the lottery which has no element of skill? Because the government regulates the industry and taxes it accordingly to raise much needed funds. The industry as a whole is very strong still and will continue to thrive. Look at new start up companies like www.trapthreads.com who are investing in the popularity and the future of poker with new innovative ideas. The stronger the market in the retail market for poker accessories, merchandise, etc. the better the outlook for the future of the game we love.

Topic: General / London casino's - where

Fifty is the place to be IMHO! Check here http://www.fiftylondon.com/

Topic: General / London casino's - where

Anyone know any cool London based card clubs that are not full of wanna-be WSOP’s and Russian sharks?

Topic: General / Favourite UK sites?

Did you find one you liked?

Topic: General / Favourite UK sites?

Thanks!

Topic: General / Favourite UK sites?

I like Partypoker and Full Tilt

Topic: General / Favourite UK sites?

Hey everyone, I’m quite new to all of this!

What are anyone’s favourite UK Poker sites?

Topic: General / Future of poker?

Internet gambling, once considered a certain bet as a business with global prospects, instead finds itself in a protracted high-stakes poker game with authorities in the US – which the industry sees as unblinkingly imposing their mores on the world.

The outcome could help shape the future of online commerce, because it tests the extent to which one country can control what people outside its jurisdiction buy and sell.

The US has long had laws against internet gambling, so sites set up shop away from its shores and millions of Americans flocked to use them. All that changed last July, when the US Department of Justice ordered the first in a spate of arrests of executives from those companies who chanced to set foot on US soil.

Then, in September, Congress passed a law barring US banks and credit card issuers from processing internet gambling transactions. Suddenly, online gambling groups were locked out of the US market.

Online gambling companies are convinced the crackdown has been driven by a few Republican senators in tandem with lobbyists working for influential voices in the US leisure sector – onshore casino groups and the horse racing industry among them – seeking to protect the status quo.

US authorities say they are simply going after unlicensed gambling in every form. In New York, federal prosecutors cite half a dozen recent offline cases, including charges they have brought for operating illegal gambling parlours or Mafia-run numbers games.

But gaming executives and experts on electronic commerce say the effort should also be seen as part of a battle by various countries to restrict what happens in cyberspace. While China and Iran, for instance, try to weed out political and sexual content, other countries worry about defamation and invasion of privacy and the US fights gambling, spam e-mail and identity theft through “phishing”.

“We are creating a Balkanised internet where states are exerting more authority,” says Jonathan Palfrey, a Harvard University law professor. “The online space is getting more complicated.”

Cross-border legal clashes date back at least as far as 1999 when iCraveTV, a Canadian company, began rebroadcasting US and Canadian television signals on the internet. Though the site was legal in Canada, a US judge found it violated copyright and ordered the company to block access by US viewers. The site shut down almost immediately.

Conversely, Dow Jones, the US publisher, hit a snag when an Australian court gave Joseph Gutnick, a mining investor, the right to sue there for defamation, where winning such a claim is easier than in the US – even though the article in question had appeared in the online version of Barron’s, a US weekly it owns. Two years on, the parties settled with a clarification by Barron’s and a contribution to Mr Gutnick’s costs.

Even in a crackdown on gambling, the US is not alone. France, where the state has a monopoly on gambling, last year arrested the two leading executives of Bwin, an online gambling company based in Austria. The two, later bailed protesting their innocence, were on French territory to promote Bwin’s shirt sponsorship of AS Monaco, football team of the adjacent principality.

Bwin, listed on the Vienna Stock Exchange, was already among online gambling groups that had suffered big hits to their share prices and earnings outlook from the US clampdown. Gaming companies had blithely floated on London’s Aim and other European exchanges. Though their offer prospectuses contained clauses highlighting the dangers inherent in the existing American ban, most in the industry assumed that if the US were truly serious about online gambling, its enforcement agencies would have taken action long ago.

Then came last July’s arrest of David Carruthers, at that stage the high-profile chief executive of the UK-listed Betonsports, in the transit lounge of Fort Worth airport en route from London to Costa Rica, where the company is based.

Federal prosecutors in New York in January detained the Canadian founders of Britain’s Neteller, which processes gambling transactions. The US authorities have also issued dozens of subpoenas demanding bank records, documents and e-mails in connection with a wide-ranging investigation. Mr Carruthers as well as Stephen Lawrence and John Lefebvre, the Neteller founders, are on bail awaiting trial on charges relating to illegal online gambling – which, along with others implicated, they deny. Betonsports faces court proceedings and Gary Kaplan, its founder, is sought by US authorities.

Cases like these “will hasten the development of technologies and practices that geographically carve up the internet”, says Jonathan Zittrain, a Harvard professor of internet governance. “Innovative content distribution models might have to be negotiated one state at a time, at the risk of, say, US citizens being told, ‘Sorry, you can’t see this content that everyone else can – it’s not licensed in your jurisdiction’.”

But the experience of MGM Mirage highlights the problem of doing business without access to the lucrative US market. In 2001, the big American casino operator set up an offshore internet gambling site with security in place to screen out US residents. The site shut for lack of customers after less than two years.

Some countries are fighting back. The Caribbean island of Antigua has been pursuing a case with the World Trade Organisation that claims the US law is protectionist because it forbids foreign online gambling companies from serving US consumers.

The WTO has provisionally ruled the US law inconsistent because it allows domestic internet operations for horse racing and lotteries while banning overseas gambling sites. A final ruling is expected within weeks.

Antigua has little leverage, but the European Union has declared itself an “interested party” in the dispute. This week Charlie McCreevy, the internal market commissioner, said the “protectionist” US legislation might prompt a separate action by the EU.

As the US cracks down on internet gambling, the UK is moving to regulate it. Tessa Jowell, culture secretary, last year hosted a conference on global gambling regulation that attracted 31 nations. This September Britain will begin licensing gaming sites.

That is a position to which many in the industry expect the US will eventually move. They point to November’s congressional elections, when Democrats won the majority and Jim Leach of Iowa, a proponent of the 2006 law, was a surprise loser. Some also predict that the law will prove unworkable.

Las Vegas Sands, the biggest casino company by value, is to set up an online gaming site this year in the UK and then continental Europe. It assumes that the US will eventually permit online gaming.

Europe’s gambling industry has learnt its lesson not to be too confident about reading between the US political and judicial lines. But one UK executive, predicting that the US will at some point relent, reminds America of its own history by saying: “Prohibition won’t work.”

Instead, what is happening now could be “the start of a process that will lead to legalisation, regulation and taxation in the US”.

Topic: Poker theory / Strange strategy for a game...

Your strategy should be the same as your normal game if you are a winning player. Play the same number of hands you would normally play, play your position as you normally would with the same number of blind steals, if called continuation bet a percentage of the time, if a draw shows and you get called and the draw card doesn’t materialize fire again, you’ll have to fold if reraised. Absolutely reraise LAG now and then, they like to steal but don’t want to lose any more than you do, steal from the tight and resteal from the loose, avoid the idiot who calls everything, your best play will be against good players who know when to fold (or like to think they do). I actually tried this in a cash game, I played 30 hands without looking at my cards, the other players didn’t know of course, I came out quite a bit ahead, even had one or two comments “I hit that flop, but you’ve been running so hot I can’t call you” of course that could have been the standard poker lies we all tell. Good luck, love to hear how it turns out. I think it makes for an exciting challenge, pick who you are going to pick on but don’t make them so upset they call with anything, leave them enough respect so they don’t mind giving you some of their money. By the way, I don’t agree that only a weak game can be beat, I think a strong game is more likely to be, as most decent players (not exceptional players) moves tend to be more predictable than the fool who thinks his any two suited cards are the favorite. Just avoid playing too many hands, or you will lose for sure.

Topic: Poker theory / Strange strategy for a game...

this might be stupid but…what would be your strategy to win a NL holdem game where you got blank cards (cant win a showdown) but no one knew this but you. lets say also that you get to decide the structure, big stacks, cap buy, short, full ring, etc. also the player types run the gammot, what would be your pet play for each type of player (lag, tag, tp, station etc.)

i ask this because i bet a friend i could win in a specific home game w/o ever showing down a hand. the bet is i get 100x the biggest pot i win if im up after 5 hours. if im down after 5 hours he gets 25x the amount im down.

Topic: General / Future of poker?

I think that one of the key issues which is causing problems for the industry is the arrests being made by US authorities.

This essentially frightens the hell out of people who are running companies in the industry who (a) are conducting business in the US now, or (b) have ever conducted business in the US.

Although as one of the previous contributors mentioned the laws don’t necessarily make online gambling illegal, the arrests mean that no-one involved in the industry who has done business there before can risk going there.

And let’s face it, for all its problems, most people would like to go to the US at some point, even on holidays.

And now the US authorities are subpeonaing information from all advisers who assisted any online gaming companies that traded in the US with flotations and such like.

These are essentially scare tactics that the US authorities are using which initially can be very effective. Similar tactics were used in the Enron case and other similar situations.

However, the US is now suffering from the effects of over regulation and prohibition in financial services as the methods used to prevent Enron and the like are now causing financial services business and innovation to move away from the US.

It is not unreasonably that something similar could happen in online gaming. So that when the US finally regulates the industry it will have lost significant ground to non-US operators.

As ACE said, if a produce is demanded offline and it works online then you can’t stop it, any more than alcohol consumption could be stopped during Prohibition.

Topic: Poker theory / Winning big off a small BR- what are the odds?

It’s not nearly as probable to bust if you’re a big winner.

For a 2BB/100 winner, one buy in will often suffice to play over an infinite time horizon supposing that they do not withdraw until they far surpass the critical early stages Without knowing their exact winrate or standard deviation you cant say exactly how often. But your chances of making it are far better than 10%.

And if you dont manage to after the period attempt, there is just as good a chance you will the second time over. If you regularly take shots at higher stakes with as little as one buy in and have yet to succeed, the most probable explanation is that you are not good enough. Not that you were playing beyond your means.

If stakes were infinitely divisible and you move down any time you dip below 2 buy ins, if you can win at ANY level, you will never go bust. Ever.

“Variance” is an excuse for people who arent as good as they think they are.

Topic: Poker theory / Winning big off a small BR- what are the odds?

Mulmuth addresses all of these topics in Gambling Theory and Other Topics. I just read it for my first time and it is my new favorite book. I got through it in very little time because it is so hard to stop reading, and I recommend it heavily for any poker player. Since you leave possibly the most important factor (Standard Deviation) it is impossible to give you more than generalizations and SD is the key to how much risk you are taking. I do not have enough information about the cypto player you are asking about, like how much did he play in those few months? what stakes did he play at? and of course his sd… but from the vague information you provide, it sounds very likely his chance of long-term success is razor thin if he continues to follow his strategy. Although he may be a great player, and if his win rate is high but he has a low standard deviation he expects to win in the long run. But if (like you imply) he is constantly playing too high for his bankroll, he runs a very high risk of going broke no matter what he does. Suppose he is barely a losing player, but has been moderately lucky playing a short time. When he moves up and plays better competition, if he does not continue to “run good” he will go broke very fast. Of course it is not much risk if a player decided to take shots at higher stakes with only a small portion of his bankroll, if he is just as easily willing to drop down. Doing so habitually will likely result in his ruin (it really depends on the SD).

I think at higher stakes there is certainly a lot of tougher opponents, but I don’t believe all of them have a better understanding of bankroll management also (unless it is a pro). So I think a lot of them play out of their bankroll because they are not statisticians.

Topic: Poker theory / Winning big off a small BR- what are the odds?

Quote: Not everyone needs a 300x BB bankroll. The better the player, the smaller the bankroll they need. I’d bet that 97% of all the big-name players we hear about have often played way above their bankrolls – and most of those probably still do so.

A strong player serious about maximizing his bankroll growth needs much less bankroll than often-misused “risk of ruin” metrics indicate in most cases to rationally play in a game. What he needs is a willingness to quickly step down if things go even mildly poorly.

A friend recently did some calculations that indicated that if you were equally likely to finish in any money position and 2.5 times as likely to finish in the money as an average player in the field (ie had a 1.5x overlay), your optimal Kelly bankroll for this year’s WSOP would be $210,000.

A player faced with the choice of two games—a 100-200 game with a win rate of $200/100h and sd of $3k/100h or a 200-400 game with a win rate of $400/100h and sd of $6k/100h should prefer the higher game as long as his bankroll is at least $67k, a far cry from the 300 BB benchmark. (This of course is from a Kelly utility standpoint.)

If you are a pro, then your win rate is lower because you have to, you know, pay bills and buy expensive watches and stuff.

Topic: Poker theory / Winning big off a small BR- what are the odds?

This is my first post, so i apologise if it is in the wrong place.

i have been following a blog recently 88% concentration that has raised some interesting questions i don’t feel equiped to answer.

This player started with much less than 1 buyin for the £25/50 tables on crypto. Miraculously he has managed to turn that into £100,000+ in the last couple of months. He didn’t work his way up and was in fact losing badly at the micro stakes at one point. Given that we don’t know his sd etc can anyone estimate his chances of success following such a stategy?

This has led me to another question regarding the economy of these high stakes tables- im hoping one of the regulars could shed some light on this for me- how many players are there attempting a similar strategy to this at any given time? of these, how many would expect to make it?

An example i like, not my own, is the global game of russian roullette. imagine that everyone in the world were to play russian roulette at dawn every day, and that this was to continue until the human race was extinct. it would take roughly 90 days to reach the last man standing.

Applying this analogy to the high stakes poker game, we can imagine a pool of 100 or more players attemtping to win big at high stakes with a risk of ruin @ 95%+ most of whom go broke and leave their money there and the odd one that catches the necessary heater to make a go of it. how much of the money in these games comes from such players?

Topic: General / Future of poker?

I’m not as up on this info as I should be (especially with a growing bank roll on Stars). But, I don’t understand the logic behind it. Online poker is a goldmine for everybody involved (except the fish). Players benefit with experience and $$, and obviously the sites are making bank. The government can make this a win for them too. Shutting down online play does not benefit the government. Finding a way to get a piece of the action would. I would think the government would lean towards finding a way to tap that resource…not shut it down. I’ve also heard arguements that they believe shutting down online will boost casino turn out. That may be true IF YOU LIVE NEAR A CASINO! But, if you compare the number of people playing online everyday to the people that live near a casino and could go everyday, there is a big difference. I live an hour away from a casino, but I can’t find time to make it there a whole lot. However, I play online pretty much every day.

Topic: General / Future of poker?

Admittedly the decision by neteller to prohibit transactions from US banks is going to be a problem – albeit minor. The current legislation is mmm, interesting and barely scrapes by the former WTO ruling that the US could not declare international online gambling illegal for their citizens, as that would be a violation of international law. The current piece of legislation apparently was passed by piggy-backing onto a port security or authority bill. So, essentially, the US government is fighting an uphill battle to stem the tide of online gambling, a battle I doubt they can win.

Why shold online poker succeed? First point is that just about any industry that is successful in real life, and whose product/service is amenable to online retail has succeded quite well onine. Poker (in general) is absolutely booming right now. B&M poker rooms are springing up and operating successfully everywhere they are legal. The consumers are obviously there and the convenience of the internet (including lower limits, lower rakes, convenience, etc) makes this game even more attractive to new players.

Unless international law changes significantly, the online poker rooms will continue to flourish, although they obviously may slow their growth while Americans sort out what precisely their new law means.

Topic: General / Future of poker?

Obviously the external environment (US Laws, Netteler, Etc.) has made it extremely difficult for online poker to grow or even stay at its current position. With a lot of people drawing out of online poker, games will lose a lot of donkeys, yet I am doubtful that online poker will die off. A lot of people don’t fully understand the ramifications of the US Laws. It doesn’t outlaw online poker, it just doesn’t allow you to transfer money through American bank accounts. I have not experienced any problems with Neteller as of yet, and I think that there will always be a demand for online poker. Many poker sites, such as Full Tilt, Pokerstars, and Bodog have addressed the problems in the external environment and have stated that they aren’t going anywhere. I recently signed up for a rakeback site (www.rakebackforever.com) and their newsletters have assured customers that online poker will stay strong. They have also given me a back a hefty amount of rake. With online poker still pretty strong after the legislation, I feel that there is no way it will fade away.

Topic: General / Future of poker?

Hi all I am interested to hear what people think will happen to poker in years to come. At this minute it is on A down spiral (US Laws, Netteler Etc). Does anyone think poker will boom again sometime or will it just fade away?

Topic: Feedback / Forum test

How do I set up a new forum home page category? E.g. Texas Holdem

Topic: General / Need advice on Texas Hold'em poker

You can try to increase the size of your raises until they are large enough for most of the table to back off. There have been tables where 9x the bb is the standard raise. It sounds crazy, but if that’s what it takes…

Topic: General / Need advice on Texas Hold'em poker

I advise you first to understand the difference between cash games and tournaments. A lot of people hold tournaments at home which requires players to be quite loose when their stack drops below a certain amount of buy-ins. We tend to see this on television when players are pushing with A4 off or some sub-par hand. I have taught many of my friends who play low limit cash games to be quite tight at those tables. Low limit cash games are filled with donkeys and will stack off to you when you have a premium hand. Recently I was playing .05/.10 because I was training a friend and I tripled up with a flush vs. top pair and mid pair. Players in low limits tend to be really bad thus playing tight is the best strategy. I also recommend signing up for a rakeback site because it is practically free money. I use Rakeback Forever (www.rakebackforever.com) and they have already supplied me with five buy-ins when I wouldn’t have gotten anything back without their services.

Topic: General / Need advice on Texas Hold'em poker

I started playing about 6 months ago and have mainly been playing with a few friends over and over. We play two games a week and I have consistently placed in the money almost everytime. I feel like the more books I read, the weaker my play becomes.

Is there any advice to consistently beating a loose low stakes games? I couldn’t imagine a pro sitting down at out game and losing, so what can I do to improve in general?

Thanks in advance – new to the forums.

Topic: Feedback / Forum test

Can you put the ‘reply to topic’, ‘new topic’ and other links in the G-Style purple buttons

Topic: Feedback / Forum test

Can you add a mini edit suite just ‘bold’, ‘italic’ and ‘underline’ buttons on the right – as the formatting help is a little to undertand