Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

[FlagDUDE08]

I'm sure by now most have heard the news about the indictment and the shutdown of three websites.

Personally, I stopped playing online poker at the time of the first shutdown, but noticed that my poker game when significantly downhill at that time. Did anyone on here play online poker (and may have some cash stuck on the sites, which may now be released, although at this point there's pretty much a run on the sites)?

 

[MavHockey14]

I'm sure by now most have heard the news about the indictment and the shutdown of three websites.

Personally, I stopped playing online poker at the time of the first shutdown, but noticed that my poker game when significantly downhill at that time. Did anyone on here play online poker (and may have some cash stuck on the sites, which may now be released, although at this point there's pretty much a run on the sites)?

Brent will be all over this thread.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Mav, you are correct. I laid low, but still played after the first "crackdown" (which was a laugher). Actually shut down for about 5-6 months, and literally gave my $10 that I had left (out of $25 to start; always maintained an initial deposit, if needed, of $25) to Bakunin because of some jack wagon calling my all in with 72o (I had AA) and he won. Melted down that bad.

Came back with $25, bounced back and forth, and with this current crackdown, I think I had about $25-30 in my account. Played it for a fix/fun, more than anything.

Chances are, the money will come back, but it will be a loooonnnnng time. The first crackdown, I guess I had $10 in transit, and I just got that back last December (totally forgot about it).

And Bodog is still running, and they have sports gambling, too. At least, from what I hear, winkwink.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Mav, you are correct. I laid low, but still played after the first "crackdown" (which was a laugher). Actually shut down for about 5-6 months, and literally gave my $10 that I had left (out of $25 to start; always maintained an initial deposit, if needed, of $25) to Bakunin because of some jack wagon calling my all in with 72o (I had AA) and he won. Melted down that bad.

Came back with $25, bounced back and forth, and with this current crackdown, I think I had about $25-30 in my account. Played it for a fix/fun, more than anything.

Chances are, the money will come back, but it will be a loooonnnnng time. The first crackdown, I guess I had $10 in transit, and I just got that back last December (totally forgot about it).

And Bodog is still running, and they have sports gambling, too. At least, from what I hear, winkwink.

I certainly hope you're able to get that money back, but given there is pretty much a run on those sites (almost as bad as a Great Depression bank panic), who knows when they'll be able to pay. The same thing happened with the Moola site; they don't have any money to pay out. Granted it stated in the terms and conditions that there was no guarantee to be paid any money, but so be it.

I wonder if casinos are going to try to cash in on this and set up electronic dime or quarter tables. I know the casino around here does $1/$2 NL and $2/$4 Limit as their lowest stakes, with some $50 tournament games.

All I can say is, Canada, hope your immigration people are ready for some online gamblers...

 

[Handyman]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

I don't think you will see Minnesota go to that...I am pretty sure NL is illegal here just like craps is.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

I don't think you will see Minnesota go to that...I am pretty sure NL is illegal here just like craps is.

MN's laws are due to whether or not it's considered more chance than luck. FFL was under scrutiny in court, and it was proven that FFL was more skill. Unfortunately, card games are under the belief that it's all luck. The old guard doesn't realize that with poker it is more skill than luck. In a tournament, to win the whole thing, you only have to show ONE winning hand (theoretically). You can bluff (again, theoretically) until that last hand, which is all skill.

It's bullsh*, but that's the way it is.

 

[komey1]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

I had a $25 balance until a couple weekends ago when I cashed in some pretty good sized tournaments to put my balances over $200. I lost some of it back to have a balance of $180. Who knows when/if I will be able to see that.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

MN's laws are due to whether or not it's considered more chance than luck. FFL was under scrutiny in court, and it was proven that FFL was more skill. Unfortunately, card games are under the belief that it's all luck. The old guard doesn't realize that with poker it is more skill than luck. In a tournament, to win the whole thing, you only have to show ONE winning hand (theoretically). You can bluff (again, theoretically) until that last hand, which is all skill.

It's bullsh*, but that's the way it is.

There are several people I speak with that believe poker is just gambling, and sadly, most of them haven't really ever played poker or seen a finals match, so I try to take with a grain of salt that their argument is based upon ignorance. Sure, there's some luck involved, but when isn't there a little luck involved with any game or sport? I don't see governments banning Euchre. Yes, there are some people that don't realize the little nuances of the game and are content to just take a gamble on their decisions, and I wonder if the government is just trying to control those people as if they were their parents.

Personally, I play blackjack, and believe that is also a game of skill, even if it's against the house. There's a basic strategy involved of when to hit/stand/double/split, and card counting will help you make a better informed decision, especially when you are playing a live game and know for sure that the decks are finite (i.e. I won't play with continuous shufflers). Yes, there will be some dumb luck involved with what each player gets for a hand, and there's also the factor of people around you who will treat it as if there isn't skill involved, i.e. take a gamble. That's the case with anything people will experience in life.

 

[Tundra]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

This is sad. where we getting the next crop of poker bratz from.

You can definitely see the skill of bluffing and reading players. I never understood how Dwan could raise so much so often with junk hands and get others to fold decent hands and how he could fold monster hands when raised on the river.

I think on TV, unibomber has uncanny reading ability. I still remember him calling the exact hand of the eventual champion, explaining how his buddies noticed the exact same betting style on a bluff earlier and then he folds the best hand.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

This is sad. where we getting the next crop of poker bratz from.

You can definitely see the skill of bluffing and reading players. I never understood how Dwan could raise so much so often with junk hands and get others to fold decent hands and how he could fold monster hands when raised on the river.

I think on TV, unibomber has uncanny reading ability. I still remember him calling the exact hand of the eventual champion, explaining how his buddies noticed the exact same betting style on a bluff earlier and then he folds the best hand.

Negreanu also can read others very, very well. What's really fun is to see a few hands involving him and Gus Hansen, both of whom never met a hand they didn't like.

 

[MavHockey14]

There are several people I speak with that believe poker is just gambling, and sadly, most of them haven't really ever played poker or seen a finals match, so I try to take with a grain of salt that their argument is based upon ignorance. Sure, there's some luck involved, but when isn't there a little luck involved with any game or sport? I don't see governments banning Euchre. Yes, there are some people that don't realize the little nuances of the game and are content to just take a gamble on their decisions, and I wonder if the government is just trying to control those people as if they were their parents.

Personally, I play blackjack, and believe that is also a game of skill, even if it's against the house. There's a basic strategy involved of when to hit/stand/double/split, and card counting will help you make a better informed decision, especially when you are playing a live game and know for sure that the decks are finite (i.e. I won't play with continuous shufflers). Yes, there will be some dumb luck involved with what each player gets for a hand, and there's also the factor of people around you who will treat it as if there isn't skill involved, i.e. take a gamble. That's the case with anything people will experience in life.

Blackjack is definitely a game of skill. It takes a table of players who play the right way to be successful. Card counting is a lot easier than people think, and even cluster counting is a basic skill that even the most basic players can use to help their chances. Why don't you play where they use continuous shuffle machines?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Blackjack is definitely a game of skill. It takes a table of players who play the right way to be successful. Card counting is a lot easier than people think, and even cluster counting is a basic skill that even the most basic players can use to help their chances. Why don't you play where they use continuous shuffle machines?

Continuous shuffle machines eliminate the card counting ability, because the cards are very quickly returned to the deck. Card counting is dependent upon a number of cards not being in the deck, because it gives you better insight as to the cards left in the deck, and you can make a prediction based on what cards are left. It's not a guarantee, but you have a better chance.

Yesterday I decided to play blackjack for about 17 hours straight. (That is not a typo.) I noticed that when people around me were just gambling and not playing any form of basic strategy or strategy that would be dependent on card counting that my bankroll was going down. At least by the sunrise, I was able to get it back close to even, so it was a successful day of fairly free entertainment (didn't win anything, but didn't lose all that much, pretty much knocked out my winnings from last week).

 

[MavHockey14]

Continuous shuffle machines eliminate the card counting ability, because the cards are very quickly returned to the deck. Card counting is dependent upon a number of cards not being in the deck, because it gives you better insight as to the cards left in the deck, and you can make a prediction based on what cards are left. It's not a guarantee, but you have a better chance.

Yesterday I decided to play blackjack for about 17 hours straight. (That is not a typo.) I noticed that when people around me were just gambling and not playing any form of basic strategy or strategy that would be dependent on card counting that my bankroll was going down. At least by the sunrise, I was able to get it back close to even, so it was a successful day of fairly free entertainment (didn't win anything, but didn't lose all that much, pretty much knocked out my winnings from last week).

Oh, I was confused, I thought you were talking about the electronic shuffle machines. I play 8 deck shoes and they switch shoes, so I still have a read on what's left in the deck, etc. It's all about weathering the storm playing blackjack. You have to set a limit that you're okay losing with, so that you have the resources to weather the storm, etc. Yesterday I got a very, very hot table, progressively bet once the count was high, and I made 250 bucks in two shoes. I love blackjack, it's such a good time.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Oh, I was confused, I thought you were talking about the electronic shuffle machines. I play 8 deck shoes and they switch shoes, so I still have a read on what's left in the deck, etc. It's all about weathering the storm playing blackjack. You have to set a limit that you're okay losing with, so that you have the resources to weather the storm, etc. Yesterday I got a very, very hot table, progressively bet once the count was high, and I made 250 bucks in two shoes. I love blackjack, it's such a good time.

Yeah, shuffle tracking takes a little more skill. Yesterday I was playing a $250 stake at a $5 table, and lost $35 in 17 hours. I have made $150 on a shoe, though.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Updates, in case anyone was interested:

http://www.webpronews.com/online-poker-update-arraignments-downsizing-and-alternatives-2011-04

You ain't seeing your cash for a while. This is very similar to when Neteller stopped catering to Americans. I didn't see the money for probably at least 6 months, then had a couple weeks to reclaim the cash.

 

[Tundra]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Yeah, shuffle tracking takes a little more skill. Yesterday I was playing a $250 stake at a $5 table, and lost $35 in 17 hours. I have made $150 on a shoe, though.

Dang thats a lot of hours playing black jack. I usually lost money playing black jack except one time when I was playing 2 or 4 deck and the dealer was hitting soft 17. Not sure what the dealer rotation schedule was but the lady dealer left and guy took over and he was the best dealer ever. only 2 of us were playing and we were all chatting and the dealer was very helpful on strategy and getting busted etc... by the time he left I had a stack of $25 chips. and the original lady dealer looked shocked when she came back.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Updates, in case anyone was interested:

http://www.webpronews.com/online-poker-update-arraignments-downsizing-and-alternatives-2011-04

You ain't seeing your cash for a while. This is very similar to when Neteller stopped catering to Americans. I didn't see the money for probably at least 6 months, then had a couple weeks to reclaim the cash.

I basically am writing my cash off, but it doesn't make my blood boil. I figure over the years, I've made at least a small profit (and "bought" a decent long-sleeve T-shirt with my player points). And that Neteller thing was what I was referring to as "the first crackdown." That 3rd party transfer thing took out a LOT of players, since CCs, banks, and debit cards refused to deposit to anything relating to, smelling like, or resembling a gambling site.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

I profited $100 from Neteller thanks to the first crackdown. I put in for $100 instant transfer the day of the crackdown, the money hit my PS account, but it never left my bank account.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

I profited $100 from Neteller thanks to the first crackdown. I put in for $100 instant transfer the day of the crackdown, the money hit my PS account, but it never left my bank account.

Well done.

And Brent, is there anyone's blood that ISN'T boiling over the government keeping you from your money? I realize that PokerStars probably can't pay it all off because it's all fiat and numbers at this point and they need to actually gain the funds in order to pay you.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Online Poker: Prohibition returns?

Well done.

And Brent, is there anyone's blood that ISN'T boiling over the government keeping you from your money? I realize that PokerStars probably can't pay it all off because it's all fiat and numbers at this point and they need to actually gain the funds in order to pay you.

I said it's not making my blood boil. It's a little annoying, but it was only about $25. Risks of the business I guess.