Yes, it's for research purposes. Many think it will be a valuable tool for learning about compulsive behaviors.

lets just hope it keeps on winning.

Amazing. Congrats.

+1

We have a reasonable chance, especially if YouBet and TwinSpires wish to enter the market.

Kyl was just put on strong notice that poker players are keeping the door open for online casino gaming.

We have a poker-only bill in the Senate. It will be interesting to see how it all works out.

goodbye rakeback if passed

So does this mean BoDog will be done in the US since they allow Sports Betting?

Check my earlier response. FTP and PS will be there seeking licenses.

Also, why assume there will be no U.S. sites? Surely these companies will have sites going in short order.

Could you expand on that?

The deposit penalty tax would be on the unlicensed sites, not on the players.

It's unlikely that an unlicensed site would pay this penalty.

However, they violated STATE gambling laws (Washington State) as well as UIGEA provisions - so Stars, Tilt, and others are going to have a tough fight on their hands - my guess is they won't be allowed to compete in the US market as their original entity. Harrahs et al I'm sure will use their weight to keep em out.

ONE represnetative voted PRESENT instead of Aye or Ney,

RON PAUL

Thats because Ron Paul is the man.

What makes you think that? There's nothing in the bill banning rakeback.

IMO, it's more likely that we lose poker -- and rakeback along with it -- if we don't get something through Congress.

They will likley claim that states lack authority over interstate commerce. It will be interesting.

what does a PRESENT vote do?

He supports the objectives of the bill. He probably found something in an amendment that he felt was unconstitutional.

He finds a lot of what congress does unconstitutional. But thats a different topic.

I thought there's a 2% deposit tax that's in the other bill that will almost certainly end up tacked on to this one.

I probably would agree that rakeback would be gone as there would be little need for it. That said most sites are going to an "in house" model in the first place which has similar to the same benefits. While this bill if passed would create another mini-boom the sites that will do well won't take that for granted this time (in my opinion). It's pretty obvious that PokerStars got a big jump on everyone and I think you can expect the more savvy operators to emulate their programs (which are pretty close to rakeback).

Remember that there will be a lot more competition, this in theory should be very good for the consumer. What we may lose slightly in rakeback we should gain in casual players. So I don't think the rakeback issue is something that should derail this for anyone on the fence.

It is basically stating you were there for the vote, but chose to abstain on the bill.

nice -- reposted to my FB.

favorite quote

IMO, this is similar to abortion. If the anti-abortion movement was really only about preventing abortions then they would be pushing for better and cheaper contraception because 0 unintended pregnancies means 0 abortions. But the abortion issue is not just about "think of the fetus", it is about the anti-abortion lobby's desire to control other people's sexual behavior. Consequently, many (most?) of the anti-abortion crowd are also in favor of abstinence only education despite overwhelming scientific evidence that astinence only sex-ed fails miserably.

Likewise, Bachus is not all that interested in preventing problem gambling, he is interested in trying to force people to live what he believes is the one true moral lifestyle. In his eyes, non-problem gambling is just as bad and needs to be prevented.

Alternatively, you might claim Bachus is just a mercenary (I don't know -- I doubt it but it is possible) in which case the above applies to the constituency that is pulling the strings.

gg international poker

edit: apparently this law does not say anything about the nationality of the players?

?