Even if everything you're saying were true, and I don't think it is, you're still missing the point that it is not in the best interest of sites to rob their customers. Just because stars probably could take all your money and get away with it doesn't mean you should be worried that they will.

Who exactly are these "fish" you speak of?

I'm sorry, most new poker players aren't jumping to the stakes where most of you pros are making your money unless you're all grinding micro limits.

So really, I don't see this hurting any of you.

I have mixed emotions on this. 60 Minutes, like most media, is fairly liberal in their reporting. They are, without question, anti the current (Bush) Administration.

If playing for money (or transferring money) to play off-shore is illegal, via the toothless UIGEA law, why would 60 minutes report this ?

1) Are they going to say that Americans are still playing (which they are).
This will just incite the DOJ further, which would be a bad thing.

2) Are they going to say that off-shore gambling will always exist, and if
it does, we are better off legalizing it ? Well this could be good, and
the revenue source good definitely be brought up, which would be pro-
regulation.

3) Are they going to say don't trust any online poker rooms - they are all
rigged - if that is the premise, that would give the industry an unneeded
black eye.

4) If betting off-shore is illegal, what interest will a story have to the
majority of 60 minutes viewers ? Probably very little.

They did a great peace on online poker several years back, before UIGEA, but the terms are different now. Hopefully, this piece will be put on the back-burner.

LDO, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

But if there were, this would be it.

I think that it's a bit unfair to assume that 60 Minutes will air a biased report. They did a special on internet gambling a few years ago that was a well done piece. Granted, the title I-Gaming: Illegal and Thriving sounds a bit doomsday-ish, but the report presented both sides of the argument in a fair light.

some fish buy in directly to the stakes I play. Some fish buy in at low stakes, go on a heater and play stakes I play. Some fish win a tourney then play stakes I play. It adds up. Some fish bust out at low stakes and give more money to fish a little better than them that still suck and will then play my stakes.

They tend to lump things together. All the US player sites will probably be labeled together, and somebody from Party will say this would have never happened at one of the public company sites.

It could be a great story if they filter out all the ****, like really say who did what. But if they just do a general thing saying some online site had a cheater, that will be very bad. Nobody will remember or care it was AP. They'll just remember "online poker".

QUOTE=captZEEbo;3105860]some fish buy in directly to the stakes I play. Some fish buy in at low stakes, go on a heater and play stakes I play. Some fish win a tourney then play stakes I play. It adds up. Some fish bust out at low stakes and give more money to fish a little better than them that still suck and will then play my stakes.[/QUOTE]



Do you have a fish finder?

[

It's the only news show that I still do take srsly and will watch from time to time, and if I could pick one show/group/etc with the potential to do the story right and put a positive spin on it (players watchdogging their own industry and cracking down to ensure a fair game, etc, etc) it would be them. It still doesn't mean they will, but i'm just saying, based on the contrast with how they've handled stories in the past and other shows.

Sick burn bro, i'm only 29.

You have limited to no knowledge of how the poker economy works, but I think zeebo pretty much explained it. Money trickles up, to put it short, and you start to see this effect as low as .25/.50 PL/NL.

no

Fair enough. See above, is that what you guys use?

[IMG][[/IMG]

Does it look something like this?

Ebay is selling them for a reasonable price.

I just think a 60 Minutes piece that shows young, white American guys (like Nat and Adanthar) talking about online poker might just inspire more people (aka fish/degens) to venture out into the world of online poker than it would turn away.

I'm not qualified to guess what kind of larger political or regulatory effect this might have on online poker, but I really think the casual viewer who is also a casual poker player might be impelled to investigate further, realize there's a whole wide world of online poker, figure out a way to deposit on Stars and start playing.

I would love to see 60 minutes bury absolute and show the country(with evidence) why we need regulation.

Yea, and most of the guys we make money from don't watch or give a damn about anything outside of ESPN news, but the ripples of the "ONLINE POKER CHEATING" commercial spots are what is the big danger imo.

Meh, I'm not about to go around worrying too much about potential fallout from this.

Too much remains to be seen to do anything but take a wait and see approach imo.

- the story may or may not make it to air.
- if it does it may or may not be balanced.
- we don't know how the public reacts overall anyhow.

A story that protrays the community as vigilant and self policing alongside a rogue site/s that didn't get away with cheating precisely because of that isn't necessarily a bad thing for the game.

No doubt the downside could be bad. I doubt the upside is huge. Maybe that weights the possible results towards more bad than good.

If I was a major player like Stars or Full Tilt I would be trying to figure out how I may or may not want to insert myself into the story.

For those worrying about how it changes people depositing money to play... people tend to think poker is rigged or they don't.
Those that do think generically that way tend to have irrational thoughts about it that prevent them from depositing anyhow.
Those that are skeptical but thinking will tend to be able to differentiate between one shady company and others. And a piece like this may actually allay some fears about all of online poker being rigged, or at least allow a unique opportunity for other sites to figure out ways to do just that.

Most other people are in the "doesn't affect them one way or another" camp. They either already play or aren't going to in the near future anyhow.

And I'm not about to worry about what happens to games on the particular site/s in question. No chance.

This is great, actually, as it will make these sites recognize that they need to clean up their acts.

But I doubt it will happen. I mean, whatever happened to the story on Hachem? Didn't.

<< Those gonifs at Party still have a few bucks of mine; all I got was a runaround. Gutless momsers! >>

I watch 60 Minutes and I'm only 25

Oldy McMoldy imo.

O snap this is the new model with the DONKEY ZOOOM!

I need to snatch one up quick.

Hehehe....Finally I get some love....

I really liked what I watched in those 2 clips, to bad its ancient though.