PokerEuphoria.com


Independent Review of Alderney Gambling Control Commission Actions About Full Tilt Poker

Media Release
7th December, 2011

Alderney Gambling Control Commission launches independent review of its actions and response in relation to Full Tilt Poker

Alderney Gambling Control Commission (AGCC) has announced that it is to establish an independent, external, review of its actions and processes leading up to the suspension, and eventual revocation, of licences belonging to Vantage Limited, Filco Limited, and Oxalic Limited together trading as Full Tilt Poker (FTP). This decision has been taken in order to provide full transparency and therefore AGCC has appointed Peter Dean CBE – former Chairman of the British Gambling Commission – to conduct the review.

André Wilsenach, Executive Director, stated:

‘As soon as we became aware that there were possible irregularities in relation to FTP’s operational integrity AGCC acted to discharge fully our statutory obligations.

‘We believe we acted appropriately and fairly at all times but, following our own internal assessment and the inevitable questions that have been raised by third parties, the Commission decided that it is in the best interests of players, licence holders and AGCC itself to commission an independent review and to make the outcome public.

‘I am delighted that Peter Dean has agreed to conduct the review. He has many years of experience at the top of the British Gambling Commission and commands wide respect from operators and regulators alike. He has been asked to review fully the actions taken by AGCC in respect of FTP and to focus specifically on the appropriateness, timeliness and fairness of those actions.’

Mr Dean has been asked to present a final report and recommendations to the Commission by the end of March 2012.

ENDS

For further information, please contact Richard Jukes (Grayling) on 020 7932 1848

Notes to Editors;
1. The licences of Vantage Limited, Filco Limited, and Oxalic Limited (trading as Full Tilt Poker) (FTP) were suspended by the Alderney Gambling Control Commission on 29th June 2011, and revoked by the AGCC Commissioners on 29th September 2011.

2. The determination notice containing the decision of the Commissioners and reasons for it is available at http://www.gamblingcontrol.org/userfiles/file/Determination%20Notice%20290911.pdf

3. Scope of review: A review of the actions taken by AGCC against FTP considering AGCC’s statutory obligations, focussing specifically on the appropriateness, timeliness and fairness of the actions undertaken.

4. Peter Dean CBE
Peter Dean was Chairman of the Gaming Board for Great Britain, and subsequently the Gambling Commission, from 1998 to 2007. He was Deputy Chairman of the UK’s Monopolies and Mergers Commission from 1990 to 1997 and from 1996 to 2001 served as the Investment Ombudsman appointed by the Investment Management Regulatory Organisation (IMRO) to handle complaints against IMRO regulated companies. Before that, he was an Executive Director of the international mining company Rio Tinto Plc for over ten years. He has a legal background and is a former Chairman of the International Association of Gaming Regulators.

Play Poker Euphoria Poker.
All banks accept payments. Millions paid out.
18 & Over. Based In The USA. UIGEA Legal
Over 1,000,000 players to play against. US friendly
Scridb filter

Prefilled Pro-Poker Tweets to Lawmakers
Online poker advocates are clearly being heard on Capitol Hill. I thank every one of you for making that happen. Without our actions and determination, those who would ban online poker could have succeeded in their efforts to convince lawmakers that Americans want government bans on this activity. Fortunately, we poker enthusiasts did not give up. Instead, we rose up and told Congress that we demand our rights, showing them that millions of us are behind this!

Take Action

In less than one minute, you can send pro-poker tweets to the White House and House & Senate leadership! They all need to hear from us, so please be sure to tell your lawmakers to support your rights by sending all of the prefilled, fully editable tweets below. Simply click the links and then click “send”. It’s that easy!. Let’s all ensure that they know this liberty is being sought by millions of Americans, including you!

Democrats

Republicans [1]

Republicans [2]

To keep up the momentum, please bookmark the daily action plan and check it out each day. I update it every morning with new actions we can take to stand up for the game. These, like the one above, take just a couple of minutes to complete but really make a difference in our fight!

Scridb filter

The Way PokerStars Maintains Player Funds and Accounts
The corporate blog for Poker Stars released news on the way they maintain player funds and accounts. It is the most often asked question that they receive. Some of the corporate blog from Head of Corporate Communications, Eric Hollreiser is as follows:

“This has obviously been a key concern for us and our previous cash customers in the United States ever since Full Tilt Poker ceased operations leaving their player’s accounts in doubt. While legal and proprietary issues prevent us from discussing matters fully, I can shed a bit more light and clarity around how we manage player funds. First of all, ever since we began offering real-money online poker we have maintained player funds in separate accounts from operational funds. We did this as wise and conservative business strategy. It also allowed us to provide a very high level of customer service, even if customers were not always aware it was being provided. Moreover, PokerStars holds its license with the Isle of Man Gambling Supervision Commission (GSC) whose strict requirements for online gaming licensing represent the gold-standard in regulation. The GSC requires that any player-owned funds (deposits and winnings) are ring-fenced from the operating funds of the company and held securely in segregated bank accounts.

Eric Hollreiser: Head of Corporate Communications

Like any eCommerce business, PokerStars receives monies from payment processors with a delay of a few days to a few weeks. Regardless of this delay, PokerStars transfers funds on a daily basis from its operational accounts to the players’ segregated accounts. This way, while payment processors could end up not making the transfers of the processed monies into PokerStars for any reason, this risk is borne by the company, not the players. PokerStars performs this process under the scrutiny of the regulators it holds licenses from. Each day our Treasury Department reviews the player account transactions and makes sure that there is always more than enough funds in the segregated accounts to cover player balances (see chart below). As a result, any risk associated with a disruption to the player fund system–caused by a delinquent payment processor, or a bankrupt bank, or a government action–is borne by PokerStars, because funds to cover such disruptions would come out of our operating income – not player funds.

These activities are reviewed by our various regulators, particularly the Isle of Man GSC which reviews our player fund balances on a quarterly basis. And the GSC is empowered to conduct audits at virtually any time they see fit, just as they did following the events of April 15. On several occasions since the GSC has confirmed our compliance with these requirements. You can find those statements here: http://www.gov.im/gambling. In addition to the external governmental accountability, we maintain well-staffed and disciplined experts in our internal audit and compliance departments. These folks take great pride in maintaining the integrity of the PokerStars business and the safety of customer accounts.

It’s these kinds of protections that have enabled us to refund more than US$125 million to US players since April 15. Of course, no company likes to lose customers, but smart companies find ways to keep customers (current and former) happy. We’re proud of the reputation that we have maintained with players around the world as a result of our actions since April 15. As I said at the start, we are dedicated to customer service and we expect this blog to help us continue to deliver on that commitment. We look forward to serving you, hearing from you and having an ongoing dialogue.

Scridb filter

MGM Files Federal Trademark Lawsuit On Poker Domains
MGM Resorts International filed suit in the U.S. District Court in Las Vegas on Thursday against four individuals and two companies it claims have been infringing on its trademarks by registering poker website names that include the names of MGM casinos in Las Vegas. The lawsuit alleging trademark infringement was against the owners of:

  • bellagioonlinepoker.com
  • circuscircuspoker.com
  • excaliburpoker.com
  • luxorpoker.com
  • mandalaybayonlinepoker.com
  • mgmpoker.com
  • ariapoker.com

In The complaint MGM alleges that the registrants of the names intended to profit off the casinos’ “substantial fame, goodwill and consumer recognition.

“The defendants have or have had a bad faith intent to profit from their registration of the domain names,” charges the suit, which alleges the defendants have been involved in either “cybersquatting” — the use of other’s trademarks to earn a profit online — or trademark infringement, or in some cases both.

“The defendants have done nothing more than tack on the descriptive terms ‘poker’ or ‘online poker’ to each of the MGM marks to form the domain names. Accordingly, there is no question that the domain names are confusingly similar to the MGM marks,” MGM Resorts’ attorneys said in a request for a temporary restraining order that would block the defendants from using those names.

MGM owns the Bellagio, Mandalay Bay, Aria, The Luxor, Circus Circus, the Excalibur and of course MGM casinos and resorts. The defendants are:

  • Shahram Kolahzadeh, believed to be a resident of Zimbabwe who allegedly registered the ariapoker name.
  • Evan Krentzman of Woodland Hills, Calif., allegedly the owner of the bellagioonlinepoker name.
  • Roberto Ciamillo of Shelby Township, Mich., allegedly the owner of the circuscircuspoker name.
  • Adam Majewski of McKinney, Texas, allegedly the owner of the excaliburpoker.com name.
  • PokerSons, an entity based in London that allegedly owns the luxorpoker.com and mgmpoker.com names.
  • RevNet, an entity in Hackensack, N.J., that allegedly owns the mandalaybayonlinepoker.com name.
Scridb filter

Poker Fights

In honor of the kickboxing match between Lex Veldhuis and Bertrand “ElkY” Grospellier, in which the former KO’ed the latter in Round 2, Mark Hoke of Short Stacked Radio and Chad Holloway of PokerNews have put together a list of fights they’d like to see in the poker world. The compilation and explanation is a bit of satire, so don’t take it too seriously. Although, it would be interesting to know who would win if they actually occurred. Some are foregone conclusions, but some would probably be pretty close.

Here’s a look at some of the top fantasy wrestling/boxing/MMA matches we’d like to see with a brief postulation as to how the action might go down. So, in no particular order:

Prahlad Friedman vs. Jeffrey Lisandro

Mark Hoke: The unforgettable ante showdown in 2006 spawns one of the nastiest beatings on the card. As the two are given their in-ring instructions by the referee, Friedman pulls a chip out of his glove. He flips it into Lisandro’s face yelling “Here’s your ante, b*itch!” Lisandro turns beet red, waits for the bell and then bull-rushes Friedman into the side of the cage, knocks him down, drops about 25 elbows into Friedman’s head and the ref stops the fight at 1:05 of the first round. Lisandro puts the chip in Friedman’s mouth and is carried out by his entourage victorious.

Chad Holloway: Prior to the match, Friedman serenades his fans with his latest rap that goes a little something like this: “Yo, yo, yo, Ima bout to beat down Jeffrey Lisandro. Fool forgot to ante up, which is why he’s about to get my size 12 up his butt.” The theatrics don’t sit well with Lisandro and he rambles across the ring before the bell sounds. He lays out Friedman, whose back is turned, with a running Lex-Luger clothesline. All the while, Lisandro never loses the fedora firmly set upon his head. Lisandro, while satisfied, is promptly disqualified.

__________________________________________________________

Phil Hellmuth vs. Antonio Esfandiari

Mark Hoke: The palpable animosity between the two finally comes to fruition. Hellmuth sends out Rocky IV style videos to the press of him training with Anderson Silva for the fight. Meanwhile, Esfandiari enjoys his prop bet with Phil Laak of taking a shot of Grey Goose every time someone asks him about the fight during the lead-up. In the best shape of his life, Hellmuth takes to the ring focused and ready. Esfandiari is carried to the ring by eight showgirls wearing a silk robe and accompanied by Sam Grizzle. The bell rings and Hellmuth looks ready for war. But Esfandiari fakes a punch and kicks Hellmuth in the junk leaving him in a curled-up heap. Antonio is disqualified but leaves the ring like a winner; arm in arm with Grizzle laughing hysterically while the chorus of boos resonates from the crowd.

Chad Holloway: The crowd waits in silence for the competitors when suddenly, POOF, a cloud of smoke appears in the middle of the ring revealing Antonio “The Magician” Esfandiari. Not a moment later, the arenas sound system kicks in and AMG’s “Bitch Better Have My Money” comes on. Hellmuth strolls down the ramps, catering to the crowd; meanwhile, Esfandiari continues to execute magic trick after magic trick in the center of the ring. The jockeying for attention and fanfare continues, with no actual fight happening. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a draw.

__________________________________________________________

Sammy Farha vs. Chris Moneymaker

Mark Hoke: Hearing of the fight card, Sam Farha tracks down Moneymaker who was hanging out in Tunica and calls him out in front of an entire poker room. Chris refuses but one flip of ashes from Sammy’s cigar into his lap finally gets Moneymaker to agree to the fight. As the bell sounds, Farha takes control of the first two rounds as Moneymaker is still tentative and not really into the battle. But Sammy starts to put a needle to Chris to open Round 3 saying “You owe me 1.2 million dollars, fat boy!” and slaps Moneymaker. Moneymaker finally shows some fire for the first time in the fight, taking Farha down, chokes him out and gets the win by submission. Moneymaker then does the Karate Kid nose-honk to Farha and walks out of the ring with a small grin.

Chad Holloway: Sammy Farha is not the type of man to dirty his own hands; instead, he hires none other than the muscle-bound Erik Cajelais to mop the floor with Moneymaker. Clearly intimidated; Moneymaker darts around the ring, ducking and dodging the lumbering Cajelais. Farha watches the fight from his man’s corner, eventually grabbing Moneymaker’s leg and holding him for Cajelais. Moneymaker reels around, kicks Farha, then quickly turns and delivers his patented right hook, appropriately called “The Poker Boom,” to Cajelais draw. The man goes down, Farha quickly exits the arena, and the overmatched Moneymaker emerges victorious once again.

__________________________________________________________

Greg Raymer vs. Mike “The Mouth” Matusow

Mark Hoke: Who can ever forget the 2004 “big balls” trash talk between these two? Many applied to fight Matusow on the card but Raymer shockingly insisted on getting in the ring with “The Mouth”. As the bell sounds, Matusow tries to shake Raymer’s hand but Greg silently refuses. Matusow talks up a storm circling away from Raymer until Raymer fires a right hook squarely into Matusow’s gut. An all-out brawl ensues in the center of the ring with the crowd going crazy. Time expires in the first round and both men go to their corner exhausted. Both realizing neither of them trained hard enough; they agree to simultaneously throw in the towel and the bout is ruled a draw. The crowd gives them a standing ovation as giant beach balls shower the ring.

Chad Holloway: In preparation for the fight, Matusow opted to forgo his meds, putting him in a crazy state of mind. He enters the ring seemingly unable to focus. He is mumbling, twitching, and ogling the ring girls. On the other side of the ring, Raymer is calm, cool, and collected. He signs fossils for his fans while occasionally sipping a Diet Coke. When the bell finally sounds, the two men meet in the center of the ring. Neither throws a punch; rather Matusow verbally berates his opponent as Raymer stands motionless. This continues round after round as Matusow exhausts himself. In the last round, Matusow continues to talk, voice occasionally giving out, as Raymer cocks back his left fist and delivers a haymaker seven years in the making to Matusow’s gut. The Mouth falls to the mat, and for the first time, grows silent as the wind is knocked out of him.

__________________________________________________________

Russ Hamilton vs. Howard Lederer

Mark Hoke: By the demand of the poker community, Lederer and Hamilton are captured by Dog The Bounty Hunter and rolled into the ring hooded and in handcuffs. The ring is surrounded by hundreds of poker players who are none too happy with the past conduct of either. The ring announcements are made but once Hamilton and Lederer realize they have to fight, both try to climb the cage wall to escape. But every attempt to escape is thwarted with vicious reckless attacks. The two stand back to back in the ring refusing to fight. The scene becomes a near riot until Doyle Brunson walks through the crowd of players and into the ring as the crowd chants “Doyle! Doyle!” Brunson takes the microphone, berates the two of them for ruining poker, gives them plane tickets to Antarctica and has them escorted to the airport by armed guards never to be seen again.

Chad Holloway: Desperate to restore his reputation, Lederer vows to track down Russ Hamilton and deliver the beating of a lifetime. He travels to Gulfport and finds the 1994 WSOP Main Event Champion grinding a $2-$5 No Limit game. “Hamilton!” Lederer calls from across the room. The entirety of the poker room stops and turns their attention to Lederer. “It’s time one of us goes down once and for all,” Lederer explains. “We’ve done wrong and it is time we paid. The poker world may never forgive us, but we must do . . .” Lederer continues to rant as all eyes are on him, their attention totally captured; meanwhile, Hamilton sneakily creeps about the room, placing the bewildered players’ money and chips in an old UB knapsack. He exits out a side door after he’s cleaned out the players, Lederer quits his speech and bolts for the exit, and the duo meet outside to split the loot. The losers in this match are, of course, the players.

__________________________________________________________

Jack Effel vs. Matt Savage

Mark Hoke: After Savage rules against Effel in a $65 Tuesday Night Triple Draw event at the Commerce, the war was on. Savage and Effel actually go at it for two rounds splitting each round in a hard-fought battle. But in the third round, a piece of Effel’s wrist tape comes loose and accidentally cuts Savage’s pinky. The referee rules that Effel’s tape wrap was illegal and threatens to take a penalty point from Effel. Neither Effel nor Savage can believe the ruling and appeal to the official not to take the penalty point. The ref refuses their requests but Effel and Savage will not be overruled. Both take swings at the official and drop him. The two walk out arm-in-arm and the fight is ruled a no-decision.

Chad Holloway: A match symbolic of the World Series of Poker versus the World Poker Tour, the tournaments directors of each are flanked by their respective posses. In Savage’s corner: Mike Sexton, Vince van Patten, Tony Dunst, and the Royal Flush Girls. In Effel’s: Ty Stewart, Seth Palansky, Nolan Dalla, and the Jack Link’s Beef Jerky Sasquatch. The first two rounds of the match are even, and in the third Savage accidentally knees Effel in the family jewels. The illegal blow sends Sasquatch into a frenzy and he enters the ring, winds up, and punts Savage out of the arena in a scene reminiscent to his commercial.

__________________________________________________________

Tony G vs. David “Devilfish” Ulliott

Mark Hoke: The pre-match hype for this match was incredible with trash-talking flying non-stop. As a matter of fact, it didn’t stop after the bell rang either. Despite Ulliot’s best efforts to actually land a punch, Tony G manages to completely talk smack for the entire first round while avoiding any physical contact. But come round two, Ulliot comes out for a fake handshake and catches Guoga with a roundhouse kick to the shin and stiff right uppercut. The action drops Tony G like a rock and Devilfish records a very satisfying knockout to the adulation of the crowd.

Chad Holloway: Tony G and the Devilfish are arch rivals when it comes to smack talking, so the two decide to take it a step further with an old-school boxing match at the Aussie Millions. Tony G, accompanied only by his German shepherd, Zasko, makes his way to the ring on a bike where the Devilfish is already waiting, playing the guitar and harmonica for a group of 21 year- old Australian girls in the front row. In the actual fight, the two veterans pound each other, exchanging blows, as each become bloodied and bruised. The Devilfish, known for being in a scrape or two, decides enough is enough and reaches into his trunks, pulls out his two gold knuckledusters, dons them, and delivers a punch that lands squarely on Tony G’s forehead, knocking him out and leaving an imprint that reads, “Fish.” Unfortunately for Ulliott, the ref sees the illegal knuckledusters and awards the match to Tony G.

__________________________________________________________

Viktor “Isildur1” Blom vs. Daniel “jungleman12” Cates vs. Tom “durrrr” Dwan

Mark Hoke: Millions of dollars have changed hands between these three and the first ever triple-threat MMA-style match was signed for the card. Durrrr lands the first punch on Cates and Blom laughs while making a side-bet with durrrr for 100k that he can’t knock Cates down in under a minute. Cates actually takes a dive to cost Blom the money. Infuriated, Blom goes after Cates. While Blom is trying to twist Cates like a pretzel, durrrr walks over to the side of the cage and collects a 200k side bet from Phil Ivey that he could get Blom to lose it. Jealous, Blom lets up on Cates and makes a 500k bet with Ivey that he can make durrrr eat his own toe. Ivey takes the action and Blom slams durrrr against the cage and goes to work. Durrrr tries to fight Blom off but ends up with a toe in his mouth. Refusing to submit, durrrr offers 1 million to Cates to help him beat up Blom and then give up the fight so he wins. Cates accepts and the two beat Blom down ending his evening. But then Cates turns on Dwan and clocks him with a shocking roundhouse kick knocking him out. Cates goes out to the crowd and picks up 2 million from Erick Lindgren for betting against him in the fight.

Chad Holloway: Do any of these three know how to fight? My guess is no; nonetheless, the triple-threat match is one of the most highly anticipated on the cards, with online railbirds literally taking to the rail of boxing ring for the best view of the action. Delayed 45 minutes so the participants can place bets; Daniel “jungleman12” Cates is first to make his way to the ring carrying his newly created “World Championship” belt, followed by Dwan and Blom. The fight itself is more hype than satisfaction. This is the live fighting realm, not battle-bot fighting as in the film Real Steel, and everyone knows both Blom and Cates suck when it comes to live play. Dwan, on the other hand, is accustomed to the bright lights and fanfare and dispatches both opponents with ease, submitting Blom with a cross-faced chicken wing and knocking out Cates with diamond cutter.

Annie Duke vs. Daniel Negreanu

Mark Hoke: The main event of the evening has the crowd evenly split between Kid Poker and Duke. As the two are brought the center of the ring, Daniel giggles and offers Annie a chance to call off the fight. Annie responds with a slap to Daniel’s face and the crowd erupts. The bell sounds and Daniel refuses to throw a punch while Annie tries to tear Daniel apart. Daniel continually restrains Annie and then lets her go which only infuriates Duke even more. After two rounds of this, the crowd is getting restless due the cycle of Daniel refusing to do any serious damage. The bell sounds in the third round and Duke decides to take a different tact. She walks out to the center of the ring and stands still daring Negreanu to take a shot. Daniel just can’t bring himself to do it and asks for the microphone. He then apologizes to Duke in the middle of the ring. Duke is stunned and reaches out to shake his hand and graciously accepts his apology. Daniel takes it and then puts her in an arm bar forcing her to submit and giggles like a schoolgirl skipping out of the ring victorious.

Chad Holloway: The animosity between the last two fighter is palpable. Their bad blood goes back many years and are finally culminating in a real-life fight. No more war of words. Unfortunately for Negreanu, this is a no-win situation. Either he’ll be known as the man beaten by a woman, or the man who beat up on a woman. Negreanu realizes this and quickly hires a proxy to fight in his stead. While he’d like to bring in Joan Rivers, he knows she is too old and brittle. Instead, he brings in Melissa Rivers, Joan’s daughter, someone more Duke’s age.

Negreanu allow his crooked smile to creep across his face as the bell sounds and Rivers tears across the ring like a bat out of hell. Duke is surprised by her opponent’s speed and is unable to avoid Rivers’ kick to the abdomen. Duke keels over as Rivers grabs her hair and tosses her to the corner. Negreanu pins her arms as Rivers delivers slap after slap across Dukes chest. When all seems lost to Duke, “Hacksaw” Jim Duggan rushes into the ring in his blue speedo, carrying the American flag and his trademark 2×4. “USA, USA, USA,” the crowd chants.

“Hoooooooooooo,” Hacksaw bellows as he clobbers Rivers over the back of the head. Negreanu, clearly panicked and intimidated (he is Canadian after all), bolts up the entryway. On top, he stops and looks back at Duke and Hacksaw. “This isn’t over,” Negreanu say. “I challenge the two of you to a tag-team ladder match at the WSOP. My partner . . . fellow Canadian Bret “The Hitman” Hart.” Cue the music as Hart makes his way to the walkway and stands side by side with Negreanu.

Ok, I admit, that one got out of hand.

What wrestling/boxing/MMA matches would you like to see? Use the comments section below to let us know.

Scridb filter

Department of Justice May Testify at Online Poker Hearing

Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-NC), a ranking member of the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade, sent a letter to the Chairman of the subcommittee, Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-CA), urging her to invite authorities from various federal agencies, including the Department of Justice (DoJ), to testify at the next online poker hearing since several of those agencies are expected to oversee regulations of online gaming and poker if legislation is to be enacted at the federal level. The subcommittee, which held internet gaming hearings in October and November, has listened to witness testimony from representatives of the National Council on Problem Gambling, National Indian Gaming Association and the American Gaming Association, to name just a few. However, Butterfield is of the opinion that the subcommittee “cannot obtain informed answers about the effectiveness of gambling regulation or consumer protection if we fail to invite key federal government agencies to testify as witnesses.”

The lawmaker from North Carolina has suggested to Bono Mack that the next gambling hearing’s witness list should include voices from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Department of the Treasury and the Federal Trade Commission, in addition to the DoJ. The legalization of online gaming would call on several federal bodies, each having different roles, Butterfield said. Currently, the DoJ is responsible for enforcing the Wire Act, which it has used in the past to treat internet gambling as illegal. The DoJ also administers the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), the statute that forbids banks and financial institutions from accepting checks, wire transfers, credit card charges and other types of payments affiliated with unlawful online wagers. The Department of the Treasury, under UIGEA, was required to establish procedures and regulations pertaining to financial institutions that would “identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit restricted transactions.”

Of the two bills currently before Congress proposing legalization of online poker, HR1174, co-authored by Representatives Barney Frank (D-MA) and John Campbell (R-CA), the Department of the Treasury would be responsible for implementing the licensing for online gambling sites. Under HR2366, Rep. Joe Barton’s (R-TX) bill, the Department of Commerce would be in charge of overseeing the tribal or state licensing of internet poker vendors. Although it hasn’t been mentioned in the current proposed bills, the Federal Trade Commission administers marketing and fair business practices and has the required e-commerce expertise needed to protect internet gamblers’ data and privacy. It is apparent that Butterfield has a point in suggesting that federal regulators need to be heard from in the debate of online gaming and poker legislation. Testimony from the DoJ would be especially compelling in light of the Black Friday indictments of the three largest poker websites that has changed the entire landscape of the online poker industry, virtually shutting down play to U.S. players and affecting, among others, the livelihood of thousands of online poker pros.

If Bono Mack concurs with Butterfield’s suggestion of inviting federal authorities to provide testimony at the next subcommittee hearing on internet gaming, which has yet to be scheduled, it will be interesting to see who from the DoJ will be called upon as a witness. Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney from the Southern District of New York who is responsible for the fraud and money laundering charges levied against PokerStars, Full Tilt and Absolute Poker, would be a compelling witness, to say the least. By labeling Full Tilt Poker a “global Ponzi scheme” a couple of months ago, Bharara has caught the attention of many business and financial industry executives who would normally not be interested in the happenings of the poker industry.

The DoJ is also currently involved in acquisition negotiations with Groupe Bernard Tapie (GBT) and Full Tilt in which GBT has agreed to purchase the shuttered poker site for $80 million after Full Tilt’s shareholders agree to forfeit the company assets to the DoJ. As part of the deal, GBT is expected to pay back non-U.S. players, while the DoJ has accepted responsibility to reimburse U.S. players with unpaid account balances who file claims for their money directly to the DoJ. In any DoJ testimony at an upcoming subcommittee gaming hearing, it is not known how much information the DoJ would provide on either the Black Friday indictments, the sale of Full Tilt to the French investment firm of GBT or the reimbursement of Full Tilt’s U.S. players. The DoJ has, in the past, shied away from making any elaborate statements or comments in such matters that are ongoing or pending, except for the “global Ponzi scheme” statement.

Butterfield’s letter to Bono Mack also mentions the problem of underage children having access to online gambling activities. In citing October 2010 research conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, the study found that more than 6% of boys in the age range of 14 to 17, approximately 530,000 adolescent boys, admitted to using an online gambling site in September of the same year. The rate for teenage girls was lower, but increasing. In addition, several U.S. newspapers have reported that gaming sites located offshore were profiting from bets placed on high school football games. And in the United Kingdom, it is known to be common for wagers to be accepted for teenage soccer matches. Butterfiled notes that these are some of the challenges faced by federal regulators in regards to the regulation of online gaming.

“If the Subcommittee is to proceed with the federal legalization and regulation of Internet gambling, it must do it right. I respectfully request that our Subcommittee seek formal comments from federal entities that would be involved with any legalized gambling regime,” Butterfield concludes, in his proposal to hear the testimony of federal agencies.

Scridb filter

Poker Regulations For Spain
Spain is legalizing its poker market, so if you want to play poker in Spain from 2012, you need to do it with a provider registered in Spain. However, players will be subject to restrictions, the Spanish government has set strict limits. The maximum big blind is €10, so only games up to NL 1000 are allowed. In addition, you can only play with up to 100 big blinds. The maximum buy-in for tournaments is €250. Deposit restrictions limited to €600/day, €1,500/week and €3,000/month, are also likely to hit hard. These limits could hinder regular traffic flow in the mid and high stakes games.

 

Higher limits available for individual players
Luckily, limits can be raised or completely suspended. Players have to contact providers and undergo a ‘responsible play’ test. This has been developed by the regulator and apparently isn’t too difficult to pass. As soon as the test is passed, the player will get access to the new limits within 7 days. If a player asks for the limits to be raised further, an analysis is carried out of the player’s habits. If the results don’t indicate a reason not to further increase the limits, they will be raised within 3 days. If the test or analysis of playing behavior delivers a negative response, there is a 3-month waiting period before the player can apply to raise the limits again.

Spanish market isolated
Originally, much more restrictive measures were envisaged, such as a maximum buy-in of 30 big blinds in all cash games and banning certain poker variants, such as Razz. After massive protest from the Spanish poker community, the regulator has made some significant concessions. Unfortunately, the Spanish poker market will be separated from the international market. Spanish players can now only play against other players on their own .es platforms. From 2013, Spanish players may be able to play against players from other ‘trustworthy states’, such as Italy or France.

Conditions for providers
The tax levied on providers will probably be 25-30% of net income. Poker companies seeking a license in Spain will need at least one office in a state in the European Union and will also need to name a representative in Spain. The offer must be made via a Spanish domain (.es). Regulators and financial institutions must also have constant access to the provider’s server data. Gaming providers will be able to place TV and radio adverts and sponsor sporting events and teams. Numerous poker providers have already made applications, including PokerStars and Bwin. Online sports betting remains illegal.

Scridb filter

Nevada Regulator Says Online Can Be Policed
Nevada gaming regulator assured lawmakers Friday that Internet gambling can be policed with software that ferrets out cheaters and systems that identify underage and addicted players. The comments from Gaming Control Board Chairman Mark Lipparelli were aimed at fears that online wagering could spin out of control if legalized by Congress. He said his answer would be “an unconditional yes” if asked whether the gaming industry and states could deal with underage gamblers, betting addicts, money laundering and computer “poker bots” that enable players to cheat. “You can probably get away with trying to cheat a system, but you will be uncovered fairly quickly,” Lipparelli said. “The analytical tools that are being employed are very robust. You might be able to get away with it once, but you will leave big fingerprints behind.”

Lipparelli’s testimony came before a House commerce subcommittee studying online gambling in response to a bill to legalize web poker and another that would open the door to a broader array of games. Also testifying were Frank Fahrenkopf, president and chief executive of the American Gaming Association; addiction researcher Rachel Volberg of the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago; and Charles McIntyre, director of the New Hampshire lottery. McIntyre came with a specific message: If Congress legalizes online poker, states have infrastructure in place through their lotteries to claim a piece of the action. A path for the bills remains unclear. Industry officials say a poker-only bill is more likely to advance, but subcommittee chairman Mary Bono Mack, R-Calif., made clear after the hearing that nothing will move fast, if at all.

Democrats Friday urged Bono Mack to hold another hearing to probe officials from the departments of Justice, Treasury and Commerce and the Federal Trade Commission, which would likely have a role in overseeing online gaming. “For anything to continue to move, it would take more hearings, but at this point I have not said yes or no,” said Bono Mack, who told the audience at Friday’s hearing she was taking a “careful approach.”

She said it would probably be early next year before she sets the next steps, if any. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, chief sponsor of the poker bill, said “the votes are there” to pass his bill, but “if they want to have another hearing I am open to that.” Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is negotiating a separate online poker bill. Major casinos have held off backing any bill until his version emerges.

Earlier this fall, Barton and others pushed for the deficit reduction supercommittee to embrace the legalization of Internet poker before it reaches a deadline of next Wednesday. But the supercommittee remains deadlocked over issues much larger than card games and appeared unlikely Friday to come up with a solution to the debt crisis.

Scridb filter