You need to be careful how you approach this, it's going to have to be super deep stacked no blind increases etc. If you make a challenge like this, you really can't afford to lose.

In other news i can't log in to party poker today. anyone else able to? (it may just be a software issue my end).

And again joey, thanks for all your hard work!

I'm a hyper heads up sng specialist - the only problem with 3 games is it's not much of a sample so I'm really just as likely to win as lose.
If there was a way to play more games it would be an awesome idea

It's obviously got to be deep stacked, no blind increases etc, probably by a hu cash game player

yeah not a big fan of this. i play turbo/reg speed husng's and understand the variance is insane over these small samples. i'd also hate to be the player who does it, too much pressure when playing for australia's online poker future

FYI: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...pone.0115479):

"In what follows, we analyze the role of skill in the performance of online poker players, using a large database with 456 million player-hand observations from real money ring games at three different stakes levels .....

Simlations point out that skill dominates chance when performance is measured over 1,500 or more hands of play".

Honestly this radio guy would probably be pretty bad though, like never folding before the river because anything could happen, it's all luck right? He may even not know whether a straight out flush is better. And he would probably think an underpair on a double paired board is good

But yeah even if the pro wins 70% of the time they would still loss 2/3 like 22% of the time. (If my calculations are correct)

It's a good publicity raiser that he's unlikely to agree to but even if he does and we can set a deep structure and get a Hu pro and win most of the time. Plus the charity offer demonstrates this is a grassroots player effort and we can emphasise we raise this money ourselves and aren't funded by big gambling or however they refer to the industry

Just follow joey's lead and retweet it's good publicity for our cause and on the off chance he accepts we can go from there as playing him Hu our pro can explain probability as playing etc while it's publicised even if we lose we can explain sample size cite studies etc

Drove past a sign recently that read "poker cost members of x council $90 million last year". I guess people still can't differentiate between poker and pokies, so it should hardly come as a surprise when someone doesn't know poker is a game of skill.

You guys are fighting a tough battle, but kudos on the effort.

If you are based in Australia you can get get a licence to offer gaming on the Internet.

Could an Australian registered gambling company enter into a agreement (contract) with Pokerstars and re-sell their services in Australia under licence?

Australian companies can't provide poker to Australians, unlike sportsbetting it can't be licensed here. If it could Pokerstars would just operate Pokerstars.com.au from Australia.

It may be possible to convince the Gov to regulate it at some point since that means they get more tax revenue, which is what matters to them most. However governments are also slow, dumb, incompetent and get bribed by special interest groups.

Check out the latest article from PokerNews regarding #AusFight4Poker

Comments from Australian Online Poker Alliance representatives Joseph Del Duca (JoeyDel) and Oliver Gill (SwoopAE)

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2017/...-war-27452.htm

I assume the brick and mortar casinos are one of the biggest and most powerful special interest groups - are they actually in favour of legal online poker, or do they see it as a threat to their existing business?

Hard to know, they haven't commented on it and live poker would make up such a tiny percent of their business they probably don't care that much. It's the TAB, Tatts and possibly Crownbet that benefit the most from the bill as a whole passing.

Crown don't care one way or the other, spoke with a few of the higher ups in the poker room there. They lean towards preferring online poker staying due to sats boosting their marquee event numbers but are fairly indifferent

No idea about Star but I assume it's similar and none of the other casinos in Australia have a live poker scene worth mentioning

Sounds about right I guess.

I can't help but think that if the casinos wanted legal online poker then they could probably make it happen, but there's probably not enough money in it to motivate them.

Unless they wanted to enter the online market themselves, but then they'd need to do what Crown did with BetEasy and buy up or at least partner with an existing technology provider...

The latest episode of Poker Pod Radio has an interview with me on it.

The interview starts at the 21 min 30 mark and discusses the latest with #AusFight4Poker including what happens now, Senator David Leyonhjelm's push for a committee inquiry, info on how Senator Nick Xenophon may have helped our cause and an update on our (still unaccepted) Heads Up Challenge to Ross Greenwood!

http://pokerpodradio.com/Shows/Show232.mp3

Great interview Joey.

Any opinion on whether something like this would be a good idea?

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2014/...on-n-17218.htm

Indirectly - yes it is because of him. To trade horses on other matters, the government has decided to pull the rug from underneath all of us poker players. When you have a moderate leader of the conservatives it makes making this deal all the more easier and the true conservatives in the Liberal Party are going to turn a blind eye on it because after all it is just poker to them and who really supports them who plays poker as well.

even if no one was to do this challenge, surely just presenting this article would hold some merit considering a politician has experienced this first hand, even though it isn't one of our own.

lol at thanking Xenophon. You have no idea where his heart truly is. It is not with professional poker players who thrive on getting as much money as they can from whale Australian players as if they are poker machine operators.

OK, Its time to put an eagle eye on this whole saga, particularly the amendment put forward by Senator David Leyonhjelm, in-particular the wording he choose to use 'Casino Style Poker and Blackjack' Is that a Joke?, Its quite obvious these politicians played u 4 newbs,' Sure will help.. knowing full well nothing was going to be even remotely possible 2 amend the IGA,at this stage down the road, flopping quads fivehands in a row probable, looked 2have you;re interests aligned.. , all ic is a 'pretend friends move' kept you quiet so the agenda(bill) could move smoothly along,


why should we be thanking these politicians...seriously.

Also predicting xenophon to block any future online poker reform when it comes down to the crunch in the senate, fairies need 2learn

wat

He's obviously a complete imbecile. No further explanation required.

Obvious enough that he knows you reckon?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk