And I want to gamble with Dennis Overbye

A couple of physicists have theorized (and I am not making this up) that the universe really doesn’t want us smashing up protons in a collider. Seems that they think the universe finds this act abhorrent to nature and so God or time-travelers are trying to stop us from doing that. Because it could kill us all. Such an action could create the Higgs boson, which using my own highly technical physics terms may be either a big ass thing (which it might not be since it’s apparently going to be small) or one of those mathematical concepts that can kill us all. And we know how much I hate those. Anyway, either God or time travelers may be thwarting our attempts at this and I think it’s amusing when physicists talk about God and time travelers.

And the author of the article, Dennis Overbye, writes:

Dr. Nielsen and Dr. Ninomiya have proposed a kind of test: that CERN engage in a game of chance, a “card-drawing” exercise using perhaps a random-number generator, in order to discern bad luck from the future. If the outcome was sufficiently unlikely, say drawing the one spade in a deck with 100 million hearts, the machine would either not run at all, or only at low energies unlikely to find the Higgs.

Sure, it’s crazy, and CERN should not and is not about to mortgage its investment to a coin toss.

He calls odds of 99,999,999:1 a coin flip? I want to gamble with this guy.

Bill to legalize online poker.

Feds seize online poker accounts.

A look at Frank’s bill over at Reason. The US is losing a lot of money due to its ban. And we know that Obama fancies himself a card player too.

From their 2009 rule book on pages 8-9:

Under no circumstances will any logo, slogan or promotional language be permitted that Harrah’s, acting in its sole discretion, determines:

[...]

Advertises any non-prescription or non “over the counter” drug, tobacco product, handgun or handgun ammunition;

So, it’s OK to advertise a questionably lawful product like online poker sites, though they do stipulate some convoluted rules to make sure the ads are for free sites. But those free sites go directly to pay sites. But advertising lawful products is forbidden.

In Jackson. In TN, all gambling is technically illegal except certain charitable events. Even your friendly home poker game is illegal. However, the police tend to view it as no problem unless you’re running a for profit gambling operation. This game was charging an entry fee and rake. The authorities tend to take the view that the law, though badly written, was to prevent for profit operations. A lot of leeway there. After all, the police could go arrest Chris Moneymaker for illegal gambling that lead to his win in the WSOP.

Related: Innumeracy tax.

Radley: A jury in Colorado has acquitted a man who organized poker tournaments at a local bar on charges of illegal gambling, apparently agreeing with his defense that poker is primarily a game of skill, not chance.

More on Is Poker a Game of “Chance”?. From a legal standpoint.

As I said, both luck and skill.

Discussion of whether it’s, legally, a game of chance or a game of skill. I can’t figure out why the two are viewed as mutually exclusive.

Another look at the WSOP and taxes. Eastgate has moved to London, possibly to avoid the ridiculous tax.

In other news, regulators have simply given up trying to enforce Bill Frist’s onerous Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

You may have heard that Peter Eastgate won the 2008 World Series Of Poker. Actually, it looks like the real winner was Denmark:

Denmark’s tax agency is called SKAT. Denmark, like the United States, does tax gambling winnings. For casino gambling (which is where I believe this will be classified) the tax rate is 45% on the first 4 million Danish Kroners; it’s 75% on income above that. Today $1 is worth 5.88907 DKK; Mr. Eastgate won 53,899,250.70 DKK before taxes. Mr. Eastgate will owe about 39,224,438 DKK in tax ($6,660,545). Put another way Mr. Eastgate will keep 14,674,813 DKK ($2,491,871) of his winnings—just 27.23% of his prize. Yes, he faces an effective tax rate of 72.77%. Ouch.

Wow.

Meanwhile, former commies have a flat tax:

Russia has a 13% flat tax rate, so Mr. Demidov will owe about $755,247 to the State Taxation Service of Russia.

From reader BWM.

Have you seen him look us in the eyes and lie:

Barack Obama’s hidden talent: He’s a top-notch poker player. Thank goodness—he’ll need it.

Among the countless blessings conferred by the election of Barack Obama is the energizing fact—until now little-known—that poker will be back in the White House for the first time in 35 years.

I think it’s illegal to gamble in DC. And probably illegal to gamble on .gov property.

Still, it’s pretty cool that he plays poker. Maybe we’ll see an end to Frist’s onerous online gambling bill.

An interesting read on some suspicious activity on a political futures exchange.

Seen at the Volokh conspiracy:

The Poker Players Association has an urgent action item:

Tuesday, the House Financial Services Committee will review a bill, H.R. 5767, that would block the implementation of UIGEA regulations. In order to get this bill out of Committee on onto the House Floor, we need your help. We need you to contact the committee and express your support for H.R. 5767, as well as the King amendment which will refine the bill language. PPA strongly supports H.R. 5767 and the King amendment, but this important bill and amendment won’t pass without your help!

Call or Fax the House Financial Services Committee* Democrats’ Committee Office:* Ph: (202) 225-4247 – FAX: (202) 225-6952 Republicans’ Committee Office:* Ph: (202) 225-7502 – FAX: (202) 226-4301

At online poker.

Rich notes HR 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act, which would classify poker as a game of skill and exempt it from Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. Currently, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act doesn’t even define the illegal gambling it regulates so it could come up as someone’s defense that poker is not gambling and is a game of skill. But that’s gonna be a tough sell. Sure, a skilled player will, on average, make money. But there is an ever present element of luck. If there wasn’t, then there would be no fish.

Overall, the game involves skill but luck is the difference between someone winning a big tournament and not. Don’t believe me? Then let’s play a fun game. It’s a tournament and, lucky you, you will be dealt pocket aces every time. Great! Sign me up! But pocket aces against a random hand still only wins about 85 percent of the time. If you play ten hands in a row, you will lose 1.5 of those hands on average. To win, you’ve probably got to not lose some of that 15 percent of the time. And that involves some luck.

More realistically, though, is that you’ll often be getting all your chips in when you’re about a 70 percent favorite and your hand will have to hold up more often than odds dictate to win a big tournament.

For the record, I think poker is a game of skill but whether or not a court of law would buy it is questionable. So, defining it in the law wouldn’t hurt.

Update and bump: Seems that typing percent signs in wordpress breaks my comment function. Hence, the bump.

Tomorrow, there is a bass tournament held by the Knox County Sheriff’s Office to benefit D.A.R.E. Seems to me that under Tennessee’s gambling statutes, this would be illegal.

More on TN gambling laws here.

Turns out Congress’ half-assed attempt at banning internet gambling by making it unlawful for banks to process transactions to gaming sites is unclear, vague, and almost impossible to implement.

And, as is usually the case, Congress passed a bill it doesn’t understand.

Tennessee’s AG has released an gambling opinion. It is here. Some store in Memphis said that if Memphis wins the title, then the store will give you your furniture free. So, some legislator asked the AG if this was gambling as defined. The AG says of course it is.

Cardplayer.com reports:

A Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) study revealed that the United States has the potential to collect at least $8.7 billion and up to $17.6 billion in the next 10 years if it would tax and regulate online gambling, including poker. And those figures don’t include potential sports wagers.

The study was commissioned by the UC Group, an online payment service provider that currently doesn’t do business with U.S. customers. The UC Group specifically asked PWC to determine how much tax would be generated if two separate bills addressing online gambling in the U.S. were passed: Barney Frank’s H.R. 2046, “Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007” (which would regulate and license online gambling in the U.S.) and Jim McDermott’s H.R. 2607, which would impose a 2 percent licensing fee on online gambling companies who want to operate here. Both bills remain in committee.

Instead, however, your government has decided to sign an agreement to pay billions of your tax dollars to countries that allow online gambling for violating WTO agreements. But you can’t get a copy of the agreement because then the terrorists will win.

Online poker is a threat to national security. Actually, the agreement that the US signed in which (and I am not making this up) they agree to pay billions of your tax dollars to countries that allow online gambling for violating WTO agreements is classified in the name of national security. So, you can’t get a copy under the freedom of information act. Seriously.

Good to see San Mateo County police so hard at work:

Police in San Mateo County, California apparently first spent months investigating the small-stakes poker game. From this firsthand account, it looks like a couple of the officers were playing regularly for several weeks before sending in the SWAT team, guns drawn, last week.

It’s a $20 – $50 game. Sebastian asks:

Can someone explain to me why this is a crime?

Depends. In some places, it’s a crime because you’re avoiding taxes and registration. In other places, it’s because you’re too stupid and untrustworthy to decide how to waste your money.

Joe reports that Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo have to shell out megabucks to settle a suit that they promoted gambling. And by promote, they mean sold ads too companies that offer online gambling. Ya know, I watched the World Series of Poker on ESPN and every commercial break had an ad for an online gaming site.

Seems the US would rather pay an undisclosed amount than allow people to waste their own money.

You guys know I like to play poker. But I don’t play any underground games and that’s because they keep getting robbed. I stick to the non-raked games at peoples’ houses and not full on gambling enterprises.

Also that Ed Miller notes the madness involved in NY:

In my opinion, NYC government has its head up its ass on this one. Not only are they wasting everyone’s time by “enforcing” the law in a way that annoys people but doesn’t actually change anything, they are creating a very dangerous environment for club management, players, and even those who live and work in the vicinity of the card clubs.

Noted Poker Authority Ed Miller notes that the IRS has issued a bulletin stating that effective March 2008, tournament directors are to withhold taxes from tournament winnings. The impacts on poker tournaments (notably satellites) would be substantial. But, then, that is the point. To make it hard to play poker.

Radley notes that Rep. Ralph Hall is sponsoring a poker night fundraiser. Rep. Hall was a sponsor of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Act.

Earlier, I said:

I’m betting on the man

Should be interesting. I can’t see a computer being bluffed off a hand or slow-played, which is important against a human.

Told ya so:

In a match of wits between man and machine this week, a software program running on an ordinary laptop computer fought a close match, but lost to two well-known professional human poker players.

The contest, which was billed as the “First Man-Machine Poker Championship” and which offered prize money totaling $50,000, pitted two professionals, Phil Laak and Ali Eslami, against a program written by a team of artificial intelligence researchers from the University of Alberta. They gave it a name that probably no gambler would ever choose as a nickname, Polaris.

Poker is thought to be a more difficult challenge for software designers than games like chess and checkers. Computer scientists have to develop different strategies and algorithms to deal with the uncertainties introduced by the hidden cards held by each player as well as difficult-to-quantify risk-taking behaviors such as bluffing.

The AP:

Poker champion Phil Laak has a good chance of winning when he sits down this week to play 2,000 hands of Texas Hold’em — against a computer.

It may be the last chance he gets. Computers have gotten a lot better at poker in recent years; they’re good enough now to challenge top professionals like Laak, who won the World Poker Tour invitational in 2004.

But it’s only a matter of time before the machines take a commanding lead in the war for poker supremacy. Just as they already have in backgammon, checkers and chess, computers are expected to surpass even the best human poker players within a decade. They can already beat virtually any amateur player.

“This match is extremely important, because it’s the first time there’s going to be a man-machine event where there’s going to be a scientific component,” said University of Alberta computing science professor Jonathan Schaeffer.

As to details:

The Alberta researchers have endowed the $50,000 contest with an ingenious design, making this the first man-machine contest to eliminate the luck of the draw as much as possible.

Laak will play with a partner, fellow pro Ali Eslami. The two will be in separate rooms, and their games will be mirror images of one another, with Eslami getting the cards that the computer received in its hands against Laak, and vice versa.

That way, a lousy hand for one human player will result in a correspondingly strong hand for his partner in the other room. At the end of the tournament the chips of both humans will be added together and compared to the computer’s.

Should be interesting. I can’t see a computer being bluffed off a hand or slow-played, which is important against a human.

Cash game, third position and look down to: J♦J♣.

Woohoo. Raise it up to five times the blind. Guy one off the button minimum raises. I call. Then

Flop: J♥, 3♣ A♥

I bet about the size of the pot. He goes all in. I call:

Turn: 8♦

River: 8♥

He had aces. Blech.

Neteller founder pleads guilty to, err, not quite sure what:

The co-founder of NeTELLER pleaded guilty today to a charge of criminal conspiracy.

Stephen Lawrence admitted in court today that the operation illegally helped Americans place bets online, “I came to understand that providing payment services to online gambling Web sites serving customers in the United States was wrong.”

Neteller is a means of transferring funds online, rather like paypal.

Noted Poker Authority Ed Miller is giving some away. Go leave a comment, if you want a shot at one.

We had the discussion a bit back. Now, Harvard wants to study it:

By making the case for poker as a skill, aficionados hope to roll back the law, and even win the game newfound freedoms in states where wagering on poker is currently banned.

Noted Poker Authority Ed Miller issues a warning that the IRS may target online gamblers for audits.

And since the Gun Blogger Rendezvous is in Reno.

I gamble. Not a lot but often enough. I enjoy it and I only play with an amount of money I am willing to lose. If I engage in a game, all the money I take to the table I consider already spent. Never gamble more than you’re willing to lose. I’m not encouraging you to gamble and assume no responsibility if you lose money. Now, with those lame disclaimers out of the way, here’s Uncle’s brief intro to gambling.

The way you win is to stake money when the odds are in your favor. And that doesn’t happen often or, with many games, at all. And staking money when the odds are in your favor consistently over time. The classic example is in poker and you have a flush draw with two cards to come. If you hit your draw you will win. In the pot, there is $100. Assume your opponent will do one of two things: (longish post, you’ve been warned.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Looks like Barney Frank will introduce a bill to repeal the ban on transfers of money to online gaming sites. More at The Politico. In other news, SayUncle agrees with a Democrat from Massachusetts.

Hard to tell. Radley has an email from a guy who was at a raid on a Dallas poker room. Seems the cops ninjaed up and took an A&E film crew to bust these miscreants who are a danger to society.

And, of course, the tapes that would confirm one guy’s story disappeared.

A new (to me) site Knoxpoker.com. A message board for strategy, tips, and local meet-ups.

In comments here, DrawingDead writes:

There appears to be some dispute as to whether poker generally, and a home poker game specifically, is illegal in Tennessee. It’s certainly a valid question, especially for those of us who love to play, and have no ready access to a legal live game (absent driving or flying several hours for one). Given what I do for a living, I thought I’d put some of my training to use, and post this note here. While I don’t like the law, here’s what the statute on this says:

Certain portions not applicable to analysis have been omitted.

Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-501

“As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires:

(1) Gambling is contrary to the public policy of this state and means risking anything of value for a profit whose return is to any degree contingent on chance, or any games of chance associated with casinos, including, but not limited to, slot machines, roulette wheels and the like.

. . .

(2) “Gambling bet” means anything of value risked in gambling;

(3) “Gambling device or record” means anything designed for use in gambling, intended for use in gambling, or used for gambling;

. . .

(6) “Profit” means anything of value in addition to the gambling bet.”

The statute goes on to note, in the specific comments of the Tennessee Sentencing Commission, more detail to the meaning of the statute’s language. Their interpretation seems pretty clear.

“This section contains the definitions for gambling offenses. The definitions are intentionally broader than those found in prior law. The commission intends to include any scheme by which value is risked upon a chance for greater value as a “gambling” offense. The definition of “gambling” includes lotteries, chain or pyramid clubs, numbers, pinball, poker or any as yet unnamed scheme where value is risked for profit.”

The Tennessee Courts have not often addressed the issue of poker as gambling within the meaning of the statutes on this point. Since 1899, there have only been four reported cases in which gambling on poker (not video poker machines, but actual live games) is considered. The statutes on permissible gambling have changed several times during the last hundred years or so.

The statute is more geared at preventing casinos and card rooms seeking to operate the games for a business. The primary punitive aspects of the law are geared toward operating a gambling enterprise. The law is truly designed to restrict these businesses from operating. The punishment for the players are only somewhat secondary, in my opinion.

In other words, the law really wants to prevent shady backroom casinos operating for a profit which, as you would all suspect, is due to the fact that none of these proceeds would be TAXED. Punishment for the players is just a deterrent trying to keep these folks away from the untaxed card games for fear of a fine and/or jail time.

Saying all of that, I’m not sure that local law enforcement is going to get that worked up about enforcing the law against a group of friends playing a weekly low stakes game. However, under a strict interpretation of the statute, the weekly home game for pennies and nickels would probably be illegal gambling.

So you all know, according to T.C.A. § 39-17-502, “ The offense of gambling is a Class C misdemeanor.

In other words, the “skill” versus “chance” distinction doesn’t mean much in Tennessee. As for my opinion, I believe that poker is largely a skill-based game. Certainly, there is a degree of chance, or pure gambling, involved.

However, I draw the distinction on this simple point. In a game like craps or roulette, the outcome of your bet (and whether you win or lose) is based SOLELY on the roll of the dice or the drop of the ball. In poker, you can win a hand based on your bets, with the worst hand if you are a skillful player. It’s hard to win a Pass Line bet on a bluff.

Thought I’d share it.

I’ve heard and used the phrase: I don’t gamble, I play poker. And there’s truth to it. But is the skill involved in poker enough to warrant a classification from game of chance to game of skill?

Apparently, there is some debate on that in the legal system in the UK.

Update: Some question on what is meant by poker. I mean card games (like Texas Hold-Em) and not video poker (which is 1 – obviously gambling and 2 – typically stacked against the player).

A summary of 122,031,244 poker hands ranked by expected value of the hand.

And Ed Miller has 6 Must-Have and Mostly Free Poker Tools You May Not Know About.

Via AC, comes this post on the online gambling ban:

Look, this has nothing to do with protecting the morality and sanctity of America. This is about greed and corporate power. Call it what it is. And, any conservative Congressman who supported this should examine his or her own ideology.

I think that I am most bothered by this issue because of its implications. For years now, the U.S. Government has been trying to get its greedy little paws all over Internet commerce. And, moves like this just evidence the government’s intent, even further.

Yes, it could be the opening salvo in the .gov getting its mitts on internet commerce. But, more importantly, it is a merely a protectionist racket likely paid for by brick and mortar casinos to protect their interests. Except horse-race betting, which is still legal because it’s gambling for the wealthy.

Oh dear:

FBI investigators have visited Second Life’s Internet casinos at the invitation of the virtual world’s creator Linden Lab, but the U.S. government has not decided on the legality of virtual gambling.

Via publicola.

Boy, that’s not shocking at all.

I ordered a book from Amazon that was published by Two Plus Two. They publish poker and gambling books. Anyway, I get the book which is unread. After page four, it skips to page 37. Later in the book, I find pages 22 – 36. But pages 5 – 21 aren’t there. I send an email to the feedback link at their site and ask if I could get the missing pages and if this was a common problem.

In a couple of hours, I get a response telling me to send them the front cover and they’ll send me a new book. Excellent customer service!

What is it with gun bloggers and poker?

Recent poker tourney at the final table with 6 players, I’m the short stack due to a bad beat two hands before. I’m the big blind, which is about a third of my stack. I have no choice but to take any two cards and go all in. In this situation, most of your opponents will call since putting you out is a priority at the final table. I get 9♠ 10♣. Last to act with three limpers, I go all in. Limpers call. Flop:

9♣ 9♥ 9♦

I quadruple up, now have the second biggest stack and take second in the tourney due to bad beat in the coin flip err heads up portion.

Repeal of online gaming ban sought:

Barney Frank, the Democratic chairman of the powerful House financial services committee, is working on legislation to repeal the sweeping ban that was passed in Congress last year against online gaming, he told the Financial Times in an interview.

Mr Frank called the ban, formally known as the Unlawful Enforcement Gambling Act, one of the “stupidest laws” ever passed and said he wanted to “repeal” the law.

Also, former NY Senator and poker player Al D’Amato has joined the Poker Players Alliance as chairman.

Late in a tourney, five players. I’m the big stack. I’m in late position. I get:

K♣Q♣

I raise it up to three times the big blind. Two callers. Flop:

2♣ 4♥ Q♦

A caller (the short stack – I have at least 20 times his stack) minimum raises. Though the small stack, he’s in no danger of being blinded out yet. Other player folds. Action to me and I think he has a good hand and figure we’re in a kicker war. I put him all in. He flips over 4♦ 2♦. I catch a queen on the river and win. He says: Nice suck out. I say Yeah, but I didn’t call a pre-flop raise with deuce four.

I did suck out. But, ferrchrissakes, who calls a raise with 4♦ 2♦? Even as a short stack, there are better hands to make a move with.

Poker hand from last night. Loose table. I’ve not hit a hand all night except the very first hand I played. I get absolutely nothing playable for an hour and a half. Creates the image that I am a much tighter player than I really am. I am a bit bored and decide it’s time to play a hand no matter what it is. I get:

5♥4♣

Crappy hand. I’m first to act. I raise it up to six times the big blind. Two callers and the button raises it to 12 times the big blind. It comes to me. I move my whole stack in the middle. The callers fold. The button thinks for a long time and says You’ve not played all night. You must have me beat. He folds and flips his cards over:

A♦K♦

Stupid play on my part, really. But it worked out. Remember kids: Don’t play poker when bored.

Pro Poker Player Daniel Negreanu on the number of poker players in the US:

What journalist hears a man say there are 70 million poker players in the U.S., and then tries to argue that by saying only 23 million people played online poker last year? Then goes on to basically insinuate that D’Amato is a liar. Mr. Kriedler, don’t you see the holes in your article? Did D’Amato say that 70 million people play online poker, or did you make a boo-boo? Which is it, because based on what you wrote, you come off though you really don’t have a clue what you are trying to say?

70 million! That’s a lot. There are an estimated 80-100m gun-owners, for reference. And politicos fear the NRA. Poker players would be dangerous to politicians if they managed to get organized. They cost one man his congressional seat in the last election cycle. Negreanu also notes:

Just like liquor, in other words. Well, drinking, gambling, you get the idea. Try to ban card games online, and they’ll only start playing poker in somebody’s living room late at night, buying their own chips or using makeshift materials like pretzels and M&Ms as token “money.” Where will the madness end?”

[...]

What Mr. Kreidler fails to understand is that online poker isn’t going anywhere. There will always be ways to fund online accounts, so while they can make it harder to play by putting pressure on companies like Neteller, they won’t put an end to online poker in this country. In fact, the bill that was passed doesn’t make playing poker on the internet illegal for the player.

Indeed. I have noticed that in my small hometown, many home games are cropping up since the ban.

So, first, any readers play poker? Secondly, ya’ll gonna bitch if I start blogging about it? The local bar has two free tournaments each week. I suck at tournaments and was much more adept to cash games until the Republicans decided that poker is a threat to national security. But, I still like to play and there was a game.

This hand bugged me. First hand of the night, no reads on anyone:

Eight handed, I’m in fifth position. Blinds are 25/50. Full stack of 4,000. My hand:

J♠ J♣

Sweet. Every body limps in. To me, the pot is 275 I raise 275. Jacks are good but they’re probably only good now. I don’t want over cards flopping. Dealer calls. Everyone else folds. The pot is now 550. I put dealer on either a smaller pocket pair or over cards.

Flop: 3♥2♦7♠

I figure I’m still the best hand. Bet 550 in case he’s on a draw. Called.

Turn. 4♥. I stick with my original feeling that he has a worse pocket pair. Bet 1,500. Called. Groan.

River: Forgot but it was a blank. It didn’t scare me. All-in.

He calls. Flips over 2♠ 3♣

Two pair. I, sarcastically, said: nice hand

Him: Thanks.

Me: I didn’t mean it.

Who calls a pot sized bet with 2♠ 3♣?

Two things: 1) I suck at tournaments and should have stopped betting after the flop. 2) Only in a tournament will someone call you with a 2♠ 3♣.

Thankfully, I got an additional 1,500 in chips for buying an adult beverage. I made quite a come back and placed 9th of roughly 30ish.

This hand bugged both because I played it badly after the river, over bet the flop, and because I was beaten by bad play.

Update: Too late, done added a poker category.

They listed a bunch of clothing items that can’t be worn. One is:

Logos for habit-forming drugs, tobacco or handguns

‘Cause those are similar.

Seems a Tennessee Senator is wanting to liberalize our liquor laws and wants to allow gambling establishments. I’m all for it. There’s likely a lot of Tennessee dollars that go to casinos in Tunica and to the casino at Cherokee, NC.

Says Braisted:

Legalize it, regulate it, and tax it…the liberal philospy(sic) of life

Actually, I thought it was If you can’t tax it or ban it, fuck it up to the point where no one wants it anyway.

The US government has seized $55M from NETeller:

NETeller execs have announced that the U.S. government has seized “not more than $55 million” in U.S. funds and that those seizures will result in ongoing delays in repaying customers what they are owed.

While NETeller continues to make efforts to find a way to repay its U.S. customer base, there is no timetable for payment.

NETeller’s Ron Martin said, “The return of funds for our U.S. customers is a top priority for NETeller.”

This guy has withdrawn his money.

A while back, the US banned online gambling. Well, that’s not true. They banned banks from processing payments to and from sites that offer illegal gambling. Illegal gambling is undefined, of course. Excluded from the ban was horse racing and other gambling that rich people engage in but people like me who enjoy their $0.25/$0.50 no limit hold-em games are out of luck. Party Poker pulled from the US market and its stock price went from about $160 to less than $40 per share instantly. After the bill passed, yours truly pulled his money out of Party Poker.

The US Ban takes effect 270 days after the bill was signed. The bill was snuck into a larger port security bill under cover of darkness. The bill also cost the author of the bill his congressional seat. Seems people don’t re-elect dickheads. The bill is also why Bill Frist will not be our governor, count on it. Some poker sites fought on, like pokerstars and continue to allow US residents to play. Good for them but when the ban goes into effect, no US banks will transfer funds. Enter Neteller.

Neteller, which is not a bank, still offered money transfer services to gaming sites. Well, until this week because US agents arrested the founders of the site for . . . well, I’m not sure what for. The article states it’s for handling billions of dollars in illegal gambling proceeds. Well, that doesn’t exactly sound illegal if you take out the word illegal. And since illegal is undefined, I’m guessing it’s just bullying. Neteller has pulled itself from the US. This is devastating the online gambling industry:

According to gambling portal Gambling911.com, Full Tilt Poker depended on NETeller for 75 percent of transactions, and the world’s biggest site, Pokerstars, used NETeller for around 60 percent of wagers.

CJ has a details on how this affects your neteller account.

Another installment of vomit from my mind.

No, Mr. Spam Man, the number one rule of investing is Don’t buy stocks based on tips you get from spammers via email.

Fucking windows. No, not that kind but same to them. New house has a lot of windows. Blinds and window treatments cost a small fortune.

The wife wants to put up Christmas decorations this weekend. God help me. She’s cool with the rule and I told her any decorations not going out will go to the trash.

A particular company that processes data with whom I deal with regularly sends me so much mail that I cannot possibly read all of it. They charge fees per task. Each particular task results in a bill. They send me a bill, for example, for $4. They’re called statements, guys. Get with the 1990s.

To the annoyed lady in the Buick at the 4 way stop: Yes, I know it was my turn to go. You were impatient and angry with me as I did not go but instead motioned you go go. You see, you’re driving a Buick, which is nature’s way of warning other drivers that you’re a danger to them. That and the blue hair. So, I did realize it was my turn. I did not let you go first because I was nice; rather, I let you because I assumed you couldn’t drive.

Speaking of 4 way stops, let’s just dispatch with the real legal rule about right of way and incorporate the way it really is into law: shittiest car goes first.

Plasma TeeVees: Despite being thinner than regular TeeVees, they sure do seem to weigh a lot more. And, despite being thinner, the manufacturers put them in boxes about four times the size of the TeeVee.

Never, ever pull someone’s finger. No good can come of it.

I am no longer amazed by statistical improbability in poker games. You’ll recall my bad beat here. I had two more at the GBR in Reno that cost me about $600. But, last week, I was dealt pocket kings three hands in a row (won one, lost two but still came out ahead). Tuesday night, I was dealt 7/4 three times in a row. Each is probably as likely (though, I’d say two kings is slightly less likely due the fact that up to 8 cards make 7/4 but only four make KK – I could calculate it but that’s no fun) but only one amazed me.

The AP:

Nine states approved eminent-domain measures barring the government from taking private property for a private use.

And hats off to Arizona for being the only state not afraid of gay cooties.

And good for the poker lobby for unseating 15 term congressmonkey Jim Leach. Otis says:

In a race that Republicans ignored because they didn’t think it could be lost, in a race the national media ignored because they didn’t see it as a potential pick-up for Democrats, in a race that even the candidate didn’t think he could lose, Rep. James Leach (R-IA) lost his seat to a guy named Loebsack.

A lot of people I know, who ordinarily vote Republican, have said the one thing that will cause them to either 1) not vote or 2) vote for Democrats is, believe it or not, the recently passed poker bill. Tom expressed the same thing a while back but I can’t find the post because the search feature is busted. Seriously. They don’t like nannies from either side of the aisle. Now, it looks like the poker lobby has set their sites on political races. Good.

If America gave a rat’s ass what the world thought, we’d use the metric system.

The online poker ban is stupid. It had the effect of devastating a few British companies and the Brits aren’t taking it lying down. There will be a summit:

Britain’s culture secretary on Friday compared the U.S. crackdown on online gambling to the failed alcohol ban of the Prohibition as she prepared to host an international summit on Internet gambling next week.

Tessa Jowell warned that the U.S. ban on Internet gambling would make unregulated offshore sites the “modern equivalent of speakeasies,” illegal bars that opened in 1920s America when alcohol was banned.

U.S. Congress caught the gambling industry by surprise earlier this month when it added to an unrelated bill a provision that would make it illegal for banks and credit-card companies to settle payments for online gambling sites. President Bush signed the law Oct. 14.

The decision closed off the most lucrative region in a market worth $15.5 billion this year in “spend” value – the amount gambling companies win from their clients, or the amount gamblers lose.

First of all, Britain has a culture secretary? Well, it’s broken. Hope you kept a receipt.

As I said, it’s a stupid law and I agree with (shiver) British culture secretary. But I don’t really see the US government giving much of a damn about an international gambling summit.

Lately (and entirely due to this blog), I’ve been getting a few requests from reporters to talk to them (I’ve had them in the past but they seem more frequent now). For example, one lady from the Wall Street Journal wanted to talk to me about the poker bill. I told her I blogged about it but was probably not the best and referred her to some poker players I know. Now, I have one from a New York paper that wants to talk about the Mayors Alliance Against Guns. My inclination generally is to decline for the following reasons:

So, it is with reservation that I even consider talking to the press. Am I paranoid? A bit. The downside, of course, is that I am missing the opportunity to speak truth to power. So, what are your thoughts?

Some stuff since the Republicans decided that we can’t spend our own money on entertainment by banning banks from engaging in transactions with illegal gambling sites. Illegal gambling being undefined.

Up For Poker has an FAQ on the new bill.

Neteller, the last hope for online transactions, pusses out.

David Post says outlines the stupidity of the bill.

The NYT says it could cost the Republicans some seats. I hope so.

Kinda funny how when you go to a blogging event that you neglect the blogging. That’s ’cause there’s poker to play and guns to shoot.

Also, I am apparently the youngest gunblogger alive.

At the Gunbloggers Rendezvous. Blogging will resume later. Off to a poker tourney.

CJ has the dope:

The banking industry response to the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act is something in which we can take some heart. The banks were initially afraid the bill would hold them liable for not enforcing the law. Now, bankslawyers are telling them that it appears the banks’ exposure is limited.

Full Tilt Poker issued a statement:

In the short term, we assure you that your online experience at Full Tilt Poker will not change. You will still be able to deposit and withdraw money from the site using the same methods and payment processors you have always used, and your money will remain completely safe and secure. We cannot predict how the online poker experience may change in the future, but we do not expect any immediate impact from the legislation, as the banking industry has 270 days to implement new rules after the bill is signed.

I have a confession. I like to play poker. Not that I’m all that good at it, but I like it. I’ve been tempted to try my chops at online poker but, thanks to the US congress, that urge will no longer be an option:

To summarize what was passed, this bill is designed to prevent the use of payment instruments (credit cards, fund transfers, etc.) for certain forms of online gambling that are defined as “unlawful Internet gambling.” The bill requires financial institutions to identify and block payments related to so-called unlawful Internet gambling transactions. If there is a violation, the government may file a lawsuit (known as an injunction) to prevent or restrain the violation. The bill provides a special exemption for three types of Internet gambling: (1) horse racing under the Interstate Horseracing Act (IHA), so OTBs and account wagering systems can remain in business, (2) Indian gambling that takes place on a reservation or between two reservations; and (3) Internet gambling that occurs solely within a state’s own borders, referred to as Intra-state gambling.

The bill doesn’t define “unlawful Internet gambling”. So, I guess he horseracing folks have some pull, since it is a sport for rich dudes. Anyway, it’s a stupid bill.

The bill passed by an overwhelming margin because it was attached to a port security bill. CJ says:

What this Congress is saying, then, is that it is more important to attack the scourge of online gaming than it is to make sure our buses and trains do not blow up. This is the Congress we elected. This is the Congress we have to get rid of.

Terry Frank tells us that all Tennessee congress monkeys voted for it, except for Jenkins. Good for Jenkins. (Update: Terry comments that Jenkins was a no vote and not a nay – that is, the dude didn’t vote not that he voted no. Stupid reading comprehension).

Party Gaming, the largest online gambling site, issued a statement:

After taking extensive legal advice, the Board of PartyGaming Plc has concluded that the new legislation, if signed into law, will make it practically impossible to provide US residents with access to its real money poker and other real money gaming sites. As a result of this development, the Board of PartyGaming has determined that if the President signs the Act into law, the Company will suspend all real money gaming business with US residents, and such suspension will continue indefinitely, subject to clarification of the interpretation and enforcement of US law and the impact on financial institutions of this and other related legislation. Access to PartyGaming’s online gaming sites for the Group’s US free play customers will be unaffected. Access for all of PartyGaming’s non-US customers will also be unaffected.

The back-alley sports-book and poker games will be on the uptick. Poker is now more popular than it ever has been and there will be an expansion of criminal activity as a result of this legislation. Yes, illegal gambling has been around but, with poker’s popularity, it’s bound to increase.

CJ (who I think is that CJ) notes that the ban on online gambling is rearing its ugly head again:

Over the past 24 hours, there have been a series of reports telling us that the dreaded internet gambling bill is both alive and dead. In recent weeks, we’ve reported that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) had hoped to sneak the gambling bill into the massive Defense Department 2007 Appropriations Bill.

That bill has now passed through the conference committee, but it doesn’t seem to be headed for guaranteed passage, nor is it clear that the gambling bill will ever be attached. Currently, House Republican leaders are holding up the bill hoping to add unrelated bills on immigration and court security.

So, today I signed up for one of those online poker sites. I’ve been playing the free tables since the last thing an unemployed person needs to do is take up a new hobby that costs money. Well, I’ve turned my fake $1,000 into fake $45,474. This tells me one of two things: Either I am a good poker player or the types that play on free tables are bad poker players. I’m betting the latter.

True story and rare poker blogging

I play Texas Hold ‘em poker with friends on occasion and this really happened. I’m dealt a pocket pair of fours. With a pair (even a low one), I’ll stay in at least for the flop. So, I do and flop is most kind when it reveals another four, a five and a face card. Three of a kind on the flop, I think. Sweet. Now, not to overplay and scare folks whose money I want off, I slow play a bit. Everyone folds but me and one guy. The turn turns out to be another four. Sweet, four of a kind. I am invincible! I bet more aggressively. The opponent stays in. The river, another five. You play four of a kind to win because the odds dictate you do that. I’m all in. My opponent is too. I assume he’s riding a face card full house or he’s overplaying a three of a kind.

He flips over a pocket pair of fives. Son of a bitch. Four fours beat by four fives. He looks at me and says: Look on the bright side. That will probably never happen to you again as long as you live.

Every other Saturday, me and my homies get together to play some Texas Hold ‘Em. And by play some Texas Hold ‘Em, I mean we sit around, talk shit, and drink adult beverages. There’s usually between five and eight guys and we put in $10, winner take all. It never works that way because the house rules have some low blinds, which makes the game last longer than it should. Usually the top two guys wind up splitting. I was always one of the top two guys. But the last two times, I came in third. I’ve lost my mojo. I think it happened when my brother-in-law really bluffed the shit out of me and then showed me his cards to rub it in. Anyway, here’s hoping I get my mojo back.

Last game, one of my buds said that he thought my posts about Laurie Berkner’s kind-of-hotness were funny. I told him I was serious (girls got moves). He almost fell out of his seat laughing. Then, day before yesterday, my wife asks me who this Laurie Berkner person is that I was yammering on about on my blog. I told her it was some lady who sings kids’ songs on Noggin. She didn’t know who she was. Yesterday, one of Laurie’s videos came on during Jack’s Big Music Show (which Junior happens to love) and I said That’s Laurie Berkner! She looked at me like I was nuts and said she’s not hot. I said She’s kinda hot.

The wife then tells me that it’s not any jealousy sort of thing. And tells me that she knows I find Lucy Liu hot and she concurs that Lucy Liu is in fact hot. However, she says Laurie Berkner definitely is not hot. So, maybe it is just me.