Whats going on with Nevada online gaming?

[Expert]

A deuces wild slot dealt me 5 of a kind the second hand I sat down, in a Vegas casino.

Recently released heads up poker machines versus the house are reportedly rigged hands.

The above is moderated by the Nevada Gaming Commission, and these machines do not state that the deal is not random. Patrons only assume.

Hold these casinos accountable to keeping a fair game. Random deals without superusers. The ability to prevent winners from cashing out is far too tempting for some to keep restraint, especially when advertising wars commence and the house feels pressure to increase revenue to win the brand race.

Merging with networks like party (bwin) is somewhat reassuring. And, to these corporations' credit, they have dealt very fair live poker games for decades. But, their digi games are #@*$*#! #&*@(!&&.

[knircky]

Originally Posted by Expert

A deuces wild slot dealt me 5 of a kind the second hand I sat down, in a Vegas casino.

Recently released heads up poker machines versus the house are reportedly rigged hands.

What exactly are u saying?

What do u mean with rigged?

[LT22]

Originally Posted by schlucky1

It just sounds like you will be able to play for play money from anywhere.

this...don't know why that's "interesting" lol

[VP$IP]

Originally Posted by schlucky1

It just sounds like you will be able to play for play money from anywhere.

It means you must be physically present in Nevada in order to play on an online poker site run by a Nevada-licensed operator. You don’t have to be a resident; you could get in a few hands of online poker on a vacation to Las Vegas or Reno. But only residents of and visitors to Nevada will be able to play on Nevada-licensed sites, a setup known as a “ring fence.”

But allowing non-residents to register and play for play money is good marketing.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by VP$IP

It means you must be physically present in Nevada in order to play on an online poker site run by a Nevada-licensed operator. You don’t have to be a resident; you could get in a few hands of online poker on a vacation to Las Vegas or Reno. But only residents of and visitors to Nevada will be able to play on Nevada-licensed sites, a setup known as a “ring fence.”

But allowing non-residents to register and play for play money is good marketing.

That is precisely why it WILL be allowed. ......

Jesus, think about it, non-residents can play on play money Nevada-entity sites RIGHT NOW, ...... Play money free sites are NOT gambling sites that require a Nevada gaming license.

Why would anyone think that would change ?

[tamiller866]

If the only time they confirm location, in order to comply with the UIGEA, is when money is exchanged, then visitors will be able to continue playing when they return home.

[VP$IP]

http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdoc...ocumentid=2942

5A.120 Interactive Gaming Accounts.
1. An operator shall record and maintain the following in relation to an interactive gaming account:
(a) The date and time the interactive gaming account is opened or terminated;
(b) The date and time the interactive gaming account is logged in to or is logged out of; and
(c) The physical location, by state or foreign jurisdiction, of the authorized player while logged in to the interactive gaming account.

[LT22]

Originally Posted by tamiller866

If the only time they confirm location, in order to comply with the UIGEA, is when money is exchanged, then visitors will be able to continue playing when they return home.

you're trying WAY too hard, please stop...I can't believe it's humanly possible for me to disagree with roughly 90% of a single person's posts

[sba9630]

Originally Posted by tamiller866

If the only time they confirm location, in order to comply with the UIGEA, is when money is exchanged, then visitors will be able to continue playing when they return home.

Good Lord, put down the crack pipe.

[tamiller866]

I'm reading the sentence verbatim:

The companies have said that their Internet games would be available to people outside Nevada boundaries but that those players wouldn't be able to exchange money.

Did the reporter intend to say:

The companies have said that their Internet games would be available to people outside Nevada boundaries but that those players wouldn't be able to play for real money.

?

Probably, but I found the literal translation interesting; hypothetically, if every shark in the country could fly to Vegas and deposit, but the fish sitting at home couldn't, how devastating/positive would that be for the NV online poker ecosystem?

[LT22]

There is always a limit to the number of sharks a poker site can feed. If there's not enough scraps to go around, some of the sharks won't play. Economics is a beautiful thing.

[tamiller866]

That's why I find it so interesting, again hypothetically, if NV were to allow sites to allow visitors to continue playing from home, would the sites even want that?

Not exactly a parallel, but Spanish law allows sites to take customers throughout the EU, but PokerStars.es only accepts players within Spain, presumably to keep their EU customers playing on the tax free .com site, but keeping the sharks out of such a small pool might also be a factor.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by tamiller866

That's why I find it so interesting, again hypothetically, if NV were to allow sites to allow visitors to continue playing from home, would the sites even want that?

Not exactly a parallel, but Spanish law allows sites to take customers throughout the EU, but PokerStars.es only accepts players within Spain, presumably to keep their EU customers playing on the tax free .com site, but keeping the sharks out of such a small pool might also be a factor.

Hypothetically ? ....

"Now, gentlemen, let me ask you this: What if Da Bears were all 14 inches tall, you know, about so high? Now, what's your score of today's game?

Carl Wollarski: Against Da Giants?

Bill Swerski: Yes, give 'em a handicap.

Carl Wollarski: Bears 18, Giants 10. And that would finally be a good game.

Pat Arnold: Yeah, it would be a good game. Mini Bears 24, Giants 14.

Todd O'Conner: What about Ditka? Would he be mini, too?

Bill Swerski: No, he would be full-grown.

Todd O'Conner: Oh, then, uh.. Mini Bears 31, Giants 7.

Carl Wollarski: Oh, hold on. Then I change mine, too. I thought it was Mini Ditka."

Basically, your hypothetical is less likely than Da Bears fielding a 14 inch tall team.

[tamiller866]

I disagree, I even think it's more likely than the chances of us seeing a Federal bill pass under this administration, but we've spent almost four years discussing that hypothetical.

A few years ago, most people would of said the same thing about the hypothetical idea of New Jersey passing sports betting and daring the DOJ to take them to court, but that's exactly what they plan to do (if they can find a casino willing to go first).

Right now Nevada is focused on moving legislation during the lame duck session, but if/when that fails, a similar 'nuclear option' to force the Federal government's hand is a real (albeit slim) possibility.

They really won't have much to lose, if this goes State by State they won't even be a major hub, let alone the market leader, California had 39% of pre-BF U.S. players, along with the worlds best software developers, by the time they take their ring-fence down their sites will be dominant.

The interesting questions are:

Would it work?
Obviously Utah, on the border, which allows no gambling would be able to get an immediate injunction and 11 other states have internet gambling laws, but the application of those laws extraterritorially when they allow gambling themselves hasn't been tested, Rousso only ruled on the application against Washington players, moreover, with no money exchanged online and no targeted advertising, visitors from the other 38 States should be open season.

Would any casino/software provider take the risk?
New Jersey casino's have balked at the idea of risking their gaming license creating an expensive sports-book that might be promptly shut down, and with a poker site there probably isn't much financial incentive in allowing real money play from a few thousand (?) out of State sharks.

What would congress do?
I think the worst case scenario would be that they pass a law saying no State can allow out of State wagers without a compact, but if Harry Reid could twist enough arms they might pass a more favorable law saying that State licensed sites can only allow play from States where it's legal.

Meaning they wouldn't need to wait for a compact, as soon as another State passes a law authorizing i-poker, NV could target their players (with some form of revenue sharing).

I think it's interesting, but maybe it's just the crack talking.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by tamiller866

I disagree, I even think it's more likely than the chances of us seeing a Federal bill pass under this administration, but we've spent almost four years discussing that hypothetical.

A few years ago, most people would of said the same thing about the hypothetical idea of New Jersey passing sports betting and daring the DOJ to take them to court, but that's exactly what they plan to do (if they can find a casino willing to go first).


I think the worst case scenario would be that they pass a law saying no State can allow out of State wagers without a compact, but if Harry Reid could twist enough arms they might pass a more favorable law saying that State licensed sites can only allow play from States where it's legal.

Meaning they wouldn't need to wait for a compact, as soon as another State passes a law authorizing i-poker, NV could target their players (with some form of revenue sharing).

I think it's interesting, but maybe it's just the crack talking.

You are 100% off the mark if you really believe the WORST case for federal legislation in 2012 0r 2013 is a requirement of a state2state compact before a state could accept play from residents of the other state. That is the BEST case, not the worst.

The Worst case for federal legislation is a very possible ban on ANY licensing of play across state lines or internationally, by compact or otherwise.