On the issue of multi-accounting in order to facilitate record keeping, surely the sites could enable different accounts under the same screen name .

Just like banks offer savings and checking and others options ,why couldn't Stars and all give an option for players to be able to seperate their money accounts into cash games,tourneys or sit and go's or anything they wanted

It would certainly solve many accounting problems and be usefull for many different reasons.

I lol'd

gonna doublepost only because i enjoyed this show very much, thanks guys!

the longer, the better (heh.)

only listend up to the under age bit so far. My main comment is under age players can not be tolorated. they are excluded by laws in brick and mortor because we as a society declare before this age they are not prepared for the stress and pressure of those activities. (whether 21, 18 or some other age is the right one is not an issue here cause the law is set by people that represent us as a whole in the areas we live).

this is similar to not providing minors with cigarettes or X rated videos (at least in my country)

IMO by participating in, condoning, allowing, or even worse -facilitating that activity you are treading a fine line. I am no lawyer but it would be interesting to see a legal take on this from a child abuse stand point.

Maybe a slight overreaction cause I am a dad of an almost 11 year old...but I make no excuses for being protective of children.

Neither of us condoned underage playing. Where we disagreed was whether, despite being forbidden, it is actually cheating or not.

Cool so we can listen to next week's show before they record it!

Cool show this week.

Where can I read about the federal bill that is being discussed? What does the fed bill mean for foreign players?

Does whether or not underage play constitutes cheating really matter when such play is explicitly prohibited by the TOS? Shouldn't breaking those rules be sufficient to result in actions outlined in that document. Seems like a ban and seizure of the funds is absolutely reasonable.

I believe it matters. The difference is obviously that you are not harming the other players at your table simply due to your age, whereas you are harming the other players when you are cheating (MA'ing, colluding, account sharing etc).

This statement above doesn't in any way condone underage playing at all, but to say it is cheating is incorrect IMO. It's violating the rules of the house, not the rules of the game itself. The differentiation seems quite obvious to me.

Now, should their account be closed and the player potentially banned if caught playing underage, yes. Should the money that player won fairly at the table be confiscated - if it clearly states it in the TOS, then yes. Is that what the penalty ought to be is up for debate IMO.

Mike, I didn't say you did condone it, in fact it was quite clear you both don't, apologies if you took it as an attack on either you or Adam that was not the intention of the post.

You did however, talked about people who have admitted they did condone and in fact supported and facilitated it through backing agreements, that was what I was trying to draw out and the direction of my comments was towards the fact that people in our community do not hold dear those same standards.

I think I've heard every episode.

Never before have you two gone on so much like whiney little girls about something. Holy cow.

I agree that playing underage isn't cheating. But there should be a complete application of the penalties outlined in the TOS. This is why clear wording and consistent application of the rules is so important.

The way I see it, the T&C serve two purposes:
(1) To lay out the rules for a fair game. This is stuff like no colluding, no PTR/SharkScope, no multi-accounting to hide id, on a scalre of serious to borderline cheating.
(2) Legal matters -- after all, the T&Cs are for setting up a legal contract between pokerroom and player. Not playing underage is probably the most important one on there, as well as other responsible gaming stuff.

For poker players, we mostly care about category (1), because we want to play a fair game. For all the rest of the world, (2) is actually much more important, because that is supposed to be the safeguard against poker/gambling becoming a seedy activity.

Breaking the T&C's on the (2) matters is, in effect, a form of contract fraud, which is a criminal offense in most jurisdictions (IIRC, IANAL). No, it is obviously way over the top to press criminal charges against a teenage lying about their age on a web form (how are they otherwise supposed to get to their porn...), but strictly speaking, this is actually a more serious offense than cheating at poker.

On the DST thing: it made me miss and blind out on the Invitational that week. Last Sunday in March and October seems such a simple choice and had been in place here for 20 years or so.
So glad to hear it even bit a guy who is dealing with time zone issues for his job.

No one should be ashamed to like Hall and Oates. I was talking to my wee sister (she's 23) whilst listening to them and had this epiphany that Hall and Oates are the 80's. It's in their very DNA, their videos, their haircuts, their often tinny sound, the over wrought singing and most importantly their off kilter hooks. The syncopated woh-oh-oh's in "Out of Touch" and the Chorus of "I can't go for that" shows them at the Zenith of their powers - I feel.

The 70's stuff is fine too but they were aping the music of their heroes, their white-Phillie soul is fine but generic. It was the 80's where they really hit their stride and found their look. John Oates had the best tash in pop for a long time....mabe he still has the best tash in pop...no easy feet to hang on to that title in such a competitive industry.

The 80's were a tacky, cheesy affair, but hopeful, optimistic and aspirant...now we all know the world sucks and that flourescent socks (one pink one green) with slip on shoes ain't cool. Hall and Oates managed to seem cheap but actually when you pull their music apart...those dudes can write proper tunes, many of which stand the test of time. Are they better than The Fall - no of course not, are they better than Pearl Jam?
**** yea. If you were to be stuck on a Desert Island would you want the Complete Works of Radiohead or Hall and Oates? Anyone who chooses the former would kill themselves within the month anyone choosing the latter would be rescued within the week.

Someone told me they were gay a few years back and i never had it confirmed - does anyone know? I think i want them to be gay...and in love, together...tash to mullet, like it should be.

Cost of living increase would mean 1972 $10,000 to 2011 is $52,679.43 http://www.aier.org/research/workshe...ing-calculator

I don't think it should be changed. But I think you guys are nutty. Last week you complained about Onyx Cup and about them calling it the "elite" players series. I like now how they have big highroller events, particularly for the WSOP. In sports, like racing, there are many different "classes" or levels or play. I am fine with that.

I've only listened to half way through or so I think but I found Pokerstar Steves comments about player count quite interesting.
So if there's 200k playing on PS, that's including play money AND everyone sitting at more than one table? Or is it excluding play money? I don't think he answered that part of the question.

Also, does anyone know how FTP counts their numbers? I'd assume it's the same way but if it isn't then they'd be a lot closer to PS then I've always thought (in terms of player count).

So if some rich billionaire from China with little or no racing experience wanted to enter himself into the highest 'class' of race, the people runnning the race would let them? Don't think so.

Any drooler that can come up with $200K is going to be permitted to register for the Onyx Cup. That doesn't make that person an elite player. Like Daniel said on Monday, it's not a tournament series for 'elite' poker players, it's a tournament series for 'rich' poker players. Big difference

They can do whatever they like, but just be honest with your audience about what it really is, which is a made-for-TV exhiibition for their team pros and the select few very wealthy people who want to play with them.

mike is taking a hammer to the tank on behalf of full tilt.

didnt you guys have barry g on to discuss this?

Nice broadcast
Listening from Amsterdam The Netherlands

Nice PokerCast and thanks for reading my well, hopefully in its entirety. If any of you guys want to ask me questions I'd be glad to answer them in my well. I agree with Mike 100%. It's against the TOS and is frowned upon, but is far from cheating. You don't gain any EV directly from being underage. More underage players are -EV than they are +EV. Multi accounting in the same tournament, and collusion are what we really need to be worried about. Playing underage is bad and I in no way condone it like I've said multiple times, but it's far lesser than these crimes. Collusion and MA directly steal money out of the player's pocket.

I'd rather keep the moral debates out of my well, though. My situation was a lot different than most underage kids and don't think throwing gobbo under the bus for backing me is anything but ridiculous. This was during a time where EVERYONE was playing underage, and it wasn't a big deal at all. It's only become a really bad offense in the last year or two, although it has always been against TOS. It's not like gobbo was influencing a minor to gamble. I'm sure if he didn't back me someone else would have.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/61...-well-1006381/

I can imagine that once regulation is effected, if a minor were to lose a substantial amount, a poker site may be forced to return the money.

That would make playing underage a freeroll on the other players' wallets.

I can't imagine how they could be forced if their rules are clear in black and white, and they follow the guidelines set up by the regulatory boards for confirming age of players.

If a site is found to be willfully allowing players they know are underage to play at their tables then the site would be 100% responsible.

The only way the underage players opponents would ever lose out is if the site actually took money that a player won from an underage player to return it them which would never happen. The site would always assume the financial burden of any refund.

If its not cheating then why would you break a rule in the tos?

Think ouside the box here. Cheating is cheating. Breaking any rule is cheating.

When I speed in my car and dont get caught I cheated "the rules".

Right and wrong of the rules is another subject...to the point of nausea.