I believe the idea is workable, even in the USA. The tournament structure would be very similar to what Stars/FTP has.
I have a rough draft of the idea.
What's my play?

Patent it, then sell the idea

Post it here.

If you're trying to hatch a plan to get rich off your idea then you would probably need your own existing poker room to unveil your concept. If not your own poker room then you would need to be someone who is recognised as a specialist consultant within the poker tournament industry and whom would have the attention of major poker sites if they made such an assertion.

If neither you're sol. Might as well post it here in this thread and see if you hit a one-in-a-million shot of a site picking up the idea and giving you some kind of pat on the back.

Your play is to not post anything about it on a poker website full of donks and go to an actual business forum and/or contact those on this forum that are actually educated/business minded themselves (green plastic, etc).

Fair enough.

Distribute a poker client that does not contain a cashier
where you would need to deposit to play.
Let's call this company A.

The company A client software would be used for:
a) login and playing the poker tournaments
b) keep track of how much you have made for playing the game


Another portal would be used for deposit and buy ins.
This would be a different company, B.

The company B software would obviously only be available to those that can legally bet/handicap this type of event.

This software (B) would be used for:
a) buy in of your chosen player (horse) to an MTT.
b) looking at past performances of the players

Now A and B would not be the same corp. My idea would be that half of the rake would be distributed, from company B to A, to the top 30% on a graduated scale. As your performance improves, your potential payment for playing increases as your stakes go up.

Basically, you would be paid for playing as a service provided to company B.
Now, if you are able to legally open an account with company A and B, nothing would prevent you from posting a buy in for yourself on B.


You're Welcome Pokerverse.

Why wouldn't one company just do both aspects and keep all the rake?

I was thinking from a legal/USA/UIGEA aspect. It would be really hard for DOJ to apply any known law against if those that play on company A software only receive money and not deposit.
Keeping the two separate I think is ideal.

In addition, to pass a law to stop company A, politicians would have to say basically playing a game for pay is illegal. Think it has good protection from any future law debacle.

I like pokerstars .80 cent payout increases on 50$ buy ins much better

I mean it's a well thought-out concept but a pretty big risk considering what was happening was be obvious and blatant. Seems like it would just be seen as a loophole that politicians would quickly try and shut.

I get what your saying and agree. But, there will always be a politician or group that will be gunning for any type of cards/gambling/sport betting etc.. Can happen at any time in any country. The future is unknown.

I like this model because the poker software and IP that most of an investors money and development time would be in, I think would be safe. As I said, the financial side of the business will always be "on the run" so to speak.

I sure hope this isn't going to be your USP

Maybe flexible or creative is a better word.

It would have to be limited to professionals and run like fanduels.com. It probably would only be legal for live tournies that the pros are playing already though

In your scenario, courts would just view company A+B as the same company. I'm assuming your planning on having the same shareholders for both companies. It also would only be legal in states that allow online gambling.

The problem is, is that when you start talking about company A and company B the governement starts talking about money laundering.

I was thinking everything would be legal since players without the ability to deposit legally could still play and get paid if they do well.

Company A could be developed and run in the states.
Company B would be overseas/island wherever it's legal now.

It's all under the assumption that it can be done legally.

Wow, never heard of fanduels.com. Checked it out. How the heck can they use PayPal?

Shareholders wouldn't necessarily be same. B would collect buyins/rake legally. Company A would receive payment from B for running the game. I guess company B could actually be more than one company assuming they all use the same standard software API.

So what you're saying is that if I create a company. And a hitman creates a company. Then when my company hires the hitman's company to perform a service there's no way the cops can touch me?

Brilliant! Perfect crime! Nobody's ever thought of this before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_%28criminal%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_corporation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercin...corporate_veil

You forgot to mention which crime either company would have committed.
No crime, no conspiracy.

UIGEA does not apply to fantasy football. There is no comparison to that and operating a poker site in the US.

Then maybe the idea that could revolutionize online poker is Fantasy Poker.

Yeah, that's what I had in mind.

Honestly, it's something a company like stars could integrate into existing software without a total redevelopment.

TIL - Hiring a hitman to kill someone is not a crime.

No, I understand I'm not the legal expert on this subject, but common sense tells me that playing a game for pay while someone bet's on the outcome in a location where it's legal to do so is ok.

PS. I love to debate and argue things like this. I'm trying not to come off as a d-bag I really like TwoPlusTwo :-)

Your last post pretty much confirms that your idea is just one you like to debate rather than one that you truly believe is revolutionary, and a lot of the eye rolling type replies you receive are due to your amusing choice of a thread title.

Since you like common sense ask yourself if any of the companies that exist would have thought of any "legal" angle in all of these years, and if so how did they not stumble on yours. Also, common sense dictates that something self-declared as revolutionary, and then disclosed with minimal interest may not be quite as revolutionary as initially believed.

Additionally, you did not even research the industry enough in advance to know about how the relatively new fantasy sports sites operate (not that that really matters with regard to online poker) and overalll your thread was appears to be a tribute to the TV character Cliff Clavin.

Feel free to debate these opinions as you prefer for your enjoyment.

All the best.