An interesting article from the current New Yorker, particularly for the legal machinations.
https://www.newyorker.com/sports/spo...mi-legal-poker

I'll post this quote for any Austinites who happen to wander by. It's the punchline to a joke that's been ongoing for decades...

thats a great and very well written

thanks for sharing.

I agree that it's well written. It's much better than I expected. I found it telling that it came from New York and that no Texas media had matched it.

The author loses much credibility when he makes the statement in the third paragraph:
‘...money-making method called a “rake,” which is commonly employed by casinos and poker rooms but not often seen in a home game.’
I’ve played in 100’s of home games all over and every single one had a rake.

To rbmadd,

You're referring to these unregulated poker rooms passing themselves off as social clubs to avoid tying their business models into traditional "rake" or "gambling" rhetoric? I agree with you on that, but don't believe the author loses any credibility.

The article is extremely well written and very insightful imo. For one, it sheds light on concepts such as "regulatory entrepreneurship," which has made its way into the video game, gaming, eSports, poker, and online gambling industries.
---

I think the article highlights the importance of obtaining a license before leading customers to believe that your poker room has some legitimate/official standing within the corresponding jurisdiction -- such as what regulated online poker has achieved in New Jersey, Nevada, Delaware, and (launching soon™) Pennsylvania.

In the licensed U.S. markets, there is formal oversight, collaboration, and liaison efforts between officials and land-based casinos/online operators that are carried out in accordance with state laws and regulations. Regulators such as the PGCB in Pennsylvania routinely call upon any number of licensed, trained, state-sanctioned experts during monthly meetings to provide input on a broad range of licensing, customer experience, or enforcement issues.

But even in states like Pennsylvania -- where the Board has been in place for well over a decade -- there's legitimate heat associated with opening up licensed "mini" casinos (300-750 slot terminals + 30 table games). Especially in rural/community areas that aren't prepared to deal with an influx of gamblers into their local malls or rural economies.

You can Google the Parx Mini Casino Public Hearing Timestamps for a person-by-person look at how various government entities, civic interests, and citizens haggle over the finer details of who's going to ship produce where, who's going to get a job, and which emergency personnel is going to get subsidized as a consequence of a new, licensed mini casino opening up. If you'd like to watch the video of this happening, go to the PGCB YouTube clip here and start at (34:15).
---

Without laws in place to formally allocate gambling revenues to responsible gaming, game integrity, enforcement, marketing, key employee licensing, labor, research, and other areas, the Texas poker rooms burden the general population with all the social issues that come with operating a poker room where real money is gambled/wagered/won/lost.

This while correspondingly placing said burdens on the very same emergency personnel/civic interests/citizens that (at least in Pennsylvania) are clearly communicating their need to generate revenue to acquire the necessary resources to deal with these added burdens.

-David

I don't know if the distinction is still observed, but home games were considered social and weren't raked. If raked, they were considered businesses and called house games. This was regardless of where they were held.

They're illegal in many states.

I'd think they'd be illegal in every state. They'd be illegal everywhere in Canada, I believe, and probably a lot of other countries.

Each State has sits own set of Gaming Laws. But, they all follow the same theme relating to what is being discussed ITT

1) Define what a game of chance is (poker always falls into this)

2) Worded differently in each state but each has a clause that says something like...... anyone (other than licensed casinos) that derives "Economic Benefit" from scheduling, operating , coordinating...etc etc... a game of chance is breaking the law



Texas Club owners have claimed that they DO NOT derive economic benefit from game of chance.... they derive it from renting chairs or selling memberships to a club.

Each has their own opinion and I would love to see legal poker rooms everywhere, but the above argument does not hold water for me

Owners are without question deriving economic benefit from operating a game of chance. At a minimum, unless the dealers are all volunteers, what about them. Without questions, dealers are deriving economic benefit from coordinating a game of chance.

P.S. first one to post that poker is not a game of chance will burn in hell for all eternity.


yes, they are. if not there would be a Casino on every street corner in that State


Oddly enough... where I leave in North Carolina even non-raked home games are illegal. So in NC its technically illegal to get together with friends and play poker.

It's a vague term. Most home games among friends aren't going to be raked except for something like beer and pizza.

They're not home games if they're raked...they're poker games played in private homes.

I've play pretty much exclusively home games for nearly 40 years...the only rakes I've ever had were to make up for a player who defaulted, to pay for food/drinks, or to collect for a WSOP trip. No one profited from the rake.