homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.167.174.90
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Webmaster General
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: phranque

Webmaster General Forum

This 70 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 70 ( 1 [2] 3 > >     
Internet Gambling Legalization Bill to Be Considered by U.S. Congress
Barney Frank Says it's Time to Roll Back Gambling Ban
martinibuster

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 4:48 pm on May 5, 2009 (gmt 0)

According to this report in The New York Times [nytimes.com]:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Representative Barney Frank will unveil legislation on Wednesday to roll back a U.S. ban on online gambling, he said in a statement on Tuesday....

The Massachusetts Democrat said his legislation "will enable Americans to bet online and put an end to an inappropriate interference with their personal freedom."


 

Strapworks

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 4:10 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

What about the people who are good at gambling? Online Gaming paid for my wedding, my honeymoon, my home, and many other things. I don't quit my day job because I understand that it doesn't always go that way, but the great thing about "freedom" is the ability to choose what you want to do in life.
Firearms and Tobacco lead to more problems than gambling every could, and the government regulates it. Why can't they do the same with gambling?
I firmly believe that the current "ban" is purely based on the fact that the goverment believes it would take money away from the current lotteries that provide a lot of government (nation, state, and local) revenue.
I think its funny that people bring up the relatively few horror stories of gambling and totally overlook the horror stories of gun violence, alcohol abuse, and corruption that ruins many more lives that gambling ever could.
Tax gambling! Make money for the government and the american people!
Come on, I only see a real positive upside.
Just my two cents

buckworks

WebmasterWorld Administrator buckworks us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 4:15 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Gaming paid for

Every dollar you won is a dollar that someone else lost. Period.

No goods were produced, no services performed, it was simply a transfer from their pocket to yours, with the middleman taking a cut, of course.

There is no win/win here.

Philosopher

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 4:19 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

The UIGEA didn't stop it, all it did is push it underground. The reputable sites that are publicly traded and have lot's of oversight were forced to pull out leaving only the less reputable sites for American's to play at.

It is said it's about protecting American's from underage and compulsive gambling. What's going to offer more protection...a regulated environment that makes use of technology to restrict underage and compulsive gamblers or an underground environment with absolutely NO regulation or restrictions?

Either way online gambling is going to continue in the US. The only logical thing to do is regulate it and control it.

[edited by: Philosopher at 4:19 pm (utc) on May 6, 2009]

jsinger

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 4:45 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

What about the people who are good at gambling? Online Gaming paid for my wedding, my honeymoon, my home, and many other things.

Nothing scarier than someone who he thinks he's good at gambling. Or perhaps you mean you own an online gambling site.

Philosopher

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 4:53 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

There are absolutely people good at gambling. Look at the professional poker players. Poker is considered "gambling" but I guarantee if just about any of us were to go up against them we'd be taken to the cleaners.

Demaestro

WebmasterWorld Senior Member demaestro us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 5:37 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

You can't see people win and jump up and down like in Vegas. No way of knowing if you have any odds at all.

This doesn't apply to poker at all.

incrediBILL

WebmasterWorld Administrator incredibill us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 5:39 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Look at the professional poker players.

Yes, just look at them.

They have all sorts of endorsement deals just to keep playing.

Some of the top players still get backers to get them in the big games.

Broke broke and broke.

tangor

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 5:47 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Barney Franks and crew are already legalizing (attempting to) gambling... called the "Stimulus Package", socialization of America, and other things.

If it moves TAX it...

Fill the coffers of those who might redistribute the wealth...

Get a life, kiddies, this red herring is not about gambling (legalize or not) it is about looking like they are righting a "wrong" against the little guy, the citizen, the little ant who makes society work, and not denying their pleasure so they will continue to be buzy little workers.

Just one more thing flung out to hide the other agendas in the works.

Philosopher

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 5:53 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Of course they have endorsement deals. Baseball players, football players, actors, golfers, and anyone else in the spotlight ALL have endorsement deals. What the heck does that have to do with anything?

In America, if it's high profile, you have endorsement deals.

incrediBILL

WebmasterWorld Administrator incredibill us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 5:55 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

What the heck does that have to do with anything?

Because the football player probably still has the $1M he earned last week in the bank vs. the pro poker player that just lost it in a single all-in bet with a straight flush that got beat by a royal and is now back to square one.

Gambling is a vicious cycle, many have the mentality that the more they lose the more they need to win to get it all back and get ahead so they start betting bigger and bigger until it's all gone.

Seen it too often, it's quite sad really.

[edited by: incrediBILL at 5:57 pm (utc) on May 6, 2009]

BradleyT

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 6:29 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

You guys who think you can't win at gambling are being dense. Did you know there's a poker forum similar in caliber to webmasterworld? Plenty of in depth discussions, high IQ posters, posters that have been on the site for 7+ years, posters with 10-30K posts, etc.

Any single person who has posted in this thread could learn to win at poker (provided you can control your tilt issues).

the pro poker player that just lost it in a single all-in bet with a straight flush that got beat by a royal and is now back to square one.

That makes no sense. There's a part of poker known as bankroll management. You should never have more than 2-4% of your entire bankroll on the table.

incrediBILL

WebmasterWorld Administrator incredibill us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 6:55 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

That makes no sense. There's a part of poker known as bankroll management. You should never have more than 2-4% of your entire bankroll on the table.

It makes perfect sense if you just won the money during the current game, nobody mentioned bankroll, and who wouldn't risk it all on a straight flush? ;)

You guys who think you can't win at gambling are being dense.

Yup, we're dense and all those statisticians are all wrong.

Funny, those casinos just keep getting bigger and bigger while all the gamblers just keep getting broker and broker.

I play poker all the time and when the cards are going your way or you play position properly you can reap mountains of cash. When they aren't going your way you might as well get up and go home. The problem is people want to play, I watch them shovel in money all day long and continue to lose.

The fact that there are a few professional gamblers that earn a living at it mean a select few know when to get up and leave opposed to the guys I watch at the casino sitting there when I leave and they'll be there when I return another day, day after day, they don't leave and although they may be winning at one point, or have most of their money back, by the end of the day they're usually broke again.

Now imagine this type of player never has to leave the game, broke and broker.

Besides, how many hand of cards to you think you get to play before the casino has all the money?

For instance, 9 players at a table with a $100 min. buy-in no-limit hold 'em. So we start the game with $900 on the table. For this example game the house rakes $3/hand, $1 drop for the jackpot, and the dealer gets $1 tip per hand minimum. That's $5 of the collective pool gone every hand, $45 every 9 hands. The deal goes around the table 2 times and 10% of the money on the table now belongs to the house and the dealer. If you assume no additional money is added to the table, the house has the entire $900 in 180 hands, or 20 full blinds for a single table.

Obviously people come and go from the table and it's rarely the same 9 people for 20 full blinds, but the house and the dealer still collect $900 in 20 full blinds around the table in this example.

I don't care how good you are at playing poker, there is no way to refute the fact that at every table in the casino roughly $900 leaves the players pockets every 180 hands dealt so the only advantage online is you don't have to tip the dealer which puts $180 back into action adding another 45 hands for the same initial $900 placed on the table.

Yup, it makes no sense.

[edited by: incrediBILL at 7:02 pm (utc) on May 6, 2009]

jsinger

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 7:02 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

There are absolutely people good at gambling

I know a lot about people who boast of being stock market geniuses. When put to the test, almost none beat dart board portfolios for long. Most do much worse and lie about their success.

Pardon me, but I'd expect gamblers and the whole casino industry, including the criminal element, to be even more deceitful about success rates. Vegas wants to promote the myth of professional player, while they make much of their booty from brain-addled old ladies.

Demaestro

WebmasterWorld Senior Member demaestro us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 7:30 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Because the football player probably still has the $1M he earned last week in the bank vs. the pro poker player that just lost it in a single all-in bet with a straight flush that got beat by a royal and is now back to square one.

Speculate much? Many NFL players go broke on bad business deals, so what?

Last year, a Texas Billionaire lost over $15 million in 3 days of heads up poker against Phil Ivy.... not online.

The net worth of the top 10 poker players is well documented, have a look. While you are at it, I suggest you check out some of Daniel N's homes.... all paid for... all gorgeous, all paid for by playing poker.

People who back top poker players do so as an investment, they do so because betting on a pro to win is a good bet. Pros don't accept backing because they need the money, they do it maximize wins and minimize loses, which is what poker playing is all about.

Do you think it is a coincidence that the top guys consistently make the money in tournaments? What, are they the luckiest guys in the vegas? Poker is a skill game.

pro poker player that just lost it in a single all-in bet with a straight flush that got beat by a royal

Odds of getting a Royal Flush 1 in 649,740

Odds of getting a Straight Flush 1 in 72,193.33

You do the math but the odds of you losing with a straight flush is astronomical. Not a good reason to warn against poker.... but most if not all casinos have what is called a "bat beat" jackpot. If you loose with 4 of a kind then you win the jackpot, they go as high as $20,000 for a qualifying bad beat hand.

Regardless, you can only play what you have on the table, you don't get a straight flush then pull out your checkbook and buy more chips, when a hand starts, if you have $40,000 in chips then that is all you can loose on that hand.

Bill, I am not trying to convince you to play, I am trying to convince you I have the right to play.

[edited by: Demaestro at 7:33 pm (utc) on May 6, 2009]

Demaestro

WebmasterWorld Senior Member demaestro us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 7:42 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

I know a lot about people who boast of being stock market geniuses. When put to the test, almost none beat dart board portfolios for long. Most do much worse and lie about their success.

So what are you saying? That no-one makes money on the stock market? Are you suggesting that we restrict online trading in the USA as well?

What is your point?

People lie about skill level and income, how insightful.

I guess when you put it that way online gambling and stock trading should be abolished. (insert heavy sarcasm)

BradleyT

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 8:48 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

I don't care how good you are at playing poker, there is no way to refute the fact that at every table in the casino roughly $900 leaves the players pockets every 180 hands dealt so the only advantage online is you don't have to tip the dealer which puts $180 back into action adding another 45 hands for the same initial $900 placed on the table.

Yup, it makes no sense.

Why would I refute that? That's pretty accurate and those 180 hands would take about 6 hours to play at a B&M casino. So each of the 10 people at the table are paying $15/hr for their seat.

But we're getting way off the original topic. If someone would like to start a foo thread I'd love to discuss it more there.

[edited by: BradleyT at 8:49 pm (utc) on May 6, 2009]

jsinger

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 9:08 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

People who back top poker players do so as an investment, they do so because betting on a pro to win is a good bet.

I wouldn't assume that. There are many motivations. Mel Brook's film/musical "The Producers" which has some factual basis and the 1933 film "42nd Street" depict Broadway "Angels" with motives that have nothing to do with profit. (sex and excitement)

I've known people who bragged of buying an interest in a racehorse. They did no research and lost everything like almost all thoroughbred partnership investors. But at cocktail parties they got to tell everyone they owned a race horse.

My point: Not every economic activity (backing poker pros, broadway shows or race horses) can be explained in terms of profit motivation. And yes, people lie about their motivations and success rate... and some people believe them.

Does any poker pro admit he gambles because he has a mental defect?

online stock trading should be abolished

I'm not saying online stock trading which started in the late 90s dot com bubble peak should be illegal despite many using it as a casino. Unlike casinos, there are offsetting benefits. However most investors would have been better off without the cheap and instant ability to flip stocks on a whim, much to their financial detriment according to academic studies of trader success.

incrediBILL

WebmasterWorld Administrator incredibill us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 9:51 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

You do the math but the odds of you losing with a straight flush is astronomical.

Yes, I know, that's how I won a jackpot paying poker last summer.

I gamble enough to know it's bad because I see people broke crying, begging for money, even people I've destroyed at a poker table asking me to stake them again, it's crazy.

Come on, admit that everyone in favor of online gambling are the affiliates which are drooling over this prospect.

Strapworks

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 11:15 pm on May 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Gaming paid for

Every dollar you won is a dollar that someone else lost. Period.

No goods were produced, no services performed, it was simply a transfer from their pocket to yours, with the middleman taking a cut, of course.

There is no win/win here.

Its called gambling for a reason.
But, you miss my point. There are many "vices" out there in the world that the government does "try" to control, why can't that also be online gambling? Why can't they tax it and use that money to help people? Why spend a ton of money trying to keep it from happening and going after those that break the rules and get nothing in return, only doing more damage!

Nothing scarier than someone who he thinks he's good at gambling. Or perhaps you mean you own an online gambling site.

Whats scary is that people (such as yourself) would rather push it under a rug and hope that it will go away rather than dealing with it. You would rather make jokes and jab at people than stepping up and asking "what can we do about this". The easy way out is just to make it illegal, just like during Prohibition. But, some people actually have the guts to step up and fight and make rules that actually solve the problem and can actually benefit everybody.

I don't think any form of online gambling should be legal unless controlled and regulated. And I do feel it should be taxed so that the large amount of money that is spent can go back to everyone in some way or another (schools, roads, special programs, paying our national defecit, etc.)

Lets pull our heads out of the ground and actually do something about it.

koan

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 12:18 am on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

Come on, admit that everyone in favor of online gambling are the affiliates which are drooling over this prospect.

Actually all I'm seeing here is anti-gambling people using all kinds of logical fallacies to push their agenda.

I don't gamble, I don't have any web sites related to gambling and I don't plan on making money from it. So there.

No need to insinuate sinister agendas from people who favor freedom (albeit regulated) over prohibition (for me, that goes for other topics too), in part, practically speaking, because prohibition never worked, but mainly because the few that develop problems shouldn't be used to restrict everyone else's freedom.

It's not possible to have a reasonable discussion when the other camp just attack your motives ("you're just trying to make money from poor people") and your character ("although I have no proof, anyone who makes money from gambling is lying about it", "they have a mental defect, they just don't know") instead of actually discussing the topic at hand.

Not to mention all the other weird reasons like "you can't see people jumping when they win", "no goods are produced" that have nothing to do with the legitimacy of an activity.

I usually expect a high level of reason from this board, but some seem to fall to the reasoning level of creationists attacking evolution, nitpicking and using anecdotes to generalize and propose impossibly biased scenarios "do you prefer to eliminate gambling and have a perfect society or let it destroy our youths completely?".

What if we did exactly the same and insinuated that you guys wanted to keep it illegal simply because you have hidden agendas which invalidated anything thing you had to say? See where that goes?

Let's try to stay objective here.

tangor

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 12:25 am on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

Let's try to stay objective here.

I would be happy to be objective...however, it is the US Congress that is involved and that, dear friends, is rarely objective... particularly these days.

incrediBILL

WebmasterWorld Administrator incredibill us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 12:48 am on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

Actually all I'm seeing here is anti-gambling people using all kinds of logical fallacies to push their agenda.

If anti-gambling is directed at me you may want to re-read the thread as I admit to lots of gambling, just ask anyone that has seen me in PubCon Vegas standing for hours at the crap tables and sitting for hours at poker tables.

It's just online gambling I have issues with, that's all.

So there.
;)

[edited by: incrediBILL at 12:49 am (utc) on May 7, 2009]

BradleyT

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 12:49 am on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

And yes, people lie about their motivations and success rate... and some people believe them.

Typically if you're going to stake someone for online poker you'll look them up on one of the many tracking sites. These sites track about 95% of the tournaments and sit n goes that are played online as well as 90%+ of the higher stakes online cash games. And also there is software you can buy that tracks your own hands and everyone at the table (and hundreds of stats from all that data) and you typically need to provide that data also to get backed by someone.

And there's even a site that tracks most of the live higher buyin tournaments too.

It's kind of like doing due dillegence before buying other types of investments.

[edited by: BradleyT at 12:50 am (utc) on May 7, 2009]

BradleyT

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 1:30 am on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

By the way, the text of the bill is up.

[house.gov...]

MrHard



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 9:19 am on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

Poker is a skill game

What are you reading, an avatars facial quirks, your gut instinct about someone (supposedly) sitting across the country?

Card counting may work if the deck is staked properly.

ponyboy96

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 2:59 pm on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

I'm confused. I thought gambling was already legal. Heck, we have the biggest casino in the world on Wall St. I can even gamble from my blackberry.

rj87uk

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 3:20 pm on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

I am from the UK, I don't gamble much if at all (does the lotto count? I play that online every week). I also like to put a bet on my team online because I am pretty lazy and I wouldn't like to loose the right to bet online but I do see several people's point about it being addicting and it could cost many people their homes etc but at the same time their fault? You can just as easily go to a casino and bet your life away, drink your life away, drug your life away and so on.

A lot of what I say could be considered as naive as I don't have a lot of experience but on the whole I think you should be allowed to bet online.

BradleyT

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 3:53 pm on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

What are you reading, an avatars facial quirks, your gut instinct about someone (supposedly) sitting across the country?

Card counting may work if the deck is stacked properly.

If it weren't a skill game then why would someone like Phil Galfond put up $1,000,000 challenging anyone in Congress to a series of heads up matches? They only have to put up $1 to his $1,000,000.

Why would anyone turn that down if it was a game of luck?

Hint: it's a game of skill and Phil will destroy them provided they play a decent sample size of hands

MrHard



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 5:58 pm on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

If it weren't a skill game then why would someone like Phil Galfond put up $1,000,000 challenging anyone in Congress to a series of heads up matches? They only have to put up $1 to his $1,000,000.

If something appears to good to be true, it is. This offer was for an online game only, not in person.

With online gambling there are to many factors you can't control so there is never any way to be sure it's fair. Things can be faked and there is no way of knowing.

[edited by: MrHard at 6:14 pm (utc) on May 7, 2009]

grelmar

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 6:55 pm on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

With online gambling there are to many factors you can't control so there is never any way to be sure it's fair. Things can be faked and there is no way of knowing.

So, you're saying you know what the real odds are at a slot machine in Vegas? And that casinos never "bend" the algorithms on video slots? It might take some searching and poking, but believe me, there are plenty of instructions available on how to alter the payout percentages on slots in ways that the LV Gaming Commission can't detect.

But, at least with Vegas, there is a gaming commission. Online, in the US, there is no governing body because the whole activity is underground.

And it just doesn't stop online gambling. American politicians are great at forgetting the internet just doesn't have borders in the traditional sense. And any borders there are, are easy to circumvent.

Legalizing online gambling in the US won't have a significant impact on the amount of online gaming taking place in the US. What it will impact is how the gaming transpires.

You have 2 choices:

1. Keep prohibition in place. End result: No net drop in online gaming. And the gaming that takes place will be governed by the unscrupulous.

2. Disband prohibition and regulate. End result: No net increase in the amount of online gaming. And the operators of gaming sites will have to face some oversight.

I don't gamble (other than a lotto ticket every 3 or 4 months). I don't make money off gambling sites through affiliate programs or otherwise.

I did, however, spend 2 and 1/2 years working on the "frontlines" of the largest homeless shelter in North America. In that time I learned that gamblers will gamble. Addicts will find ways to acquire their drug of choice. The legality or lack of legality surrounding these activities have a net zero effect on the problem.

The only way to deal with problems like these is to keep it in the open, so that you can work with the people it affects without them living in fear of Johnny Law.

shortbus1662

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3907262 posted 7:28 pm on May 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

It's not the job of the federal government to tell me what I can or cannot do with my money in my own home.

That's what this should be about. Not anything else.

This 70 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 70 ( 1 [2] 3 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Webmaster General
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved