This group runs computer servers that run gambling sites, including Poker Stars, Absolute Poker, Ultimate Bet, and Full Tilt Poker. They allowed a serious cheating event to take place at Absolute and simply did a hand slap.

I have a lot of concerns about this group that has no government oversight. I recommend to anyone not to play on Full Tilt, Poker Stars, Absolute Poker, Ultimate Bet, or any other Web site they control. They own the servers. They have root access. And yes, if you have pocket Aces ... they know you have it.

Are they a fair group? Possibly. But I don't think so. I think there are insiders who are part of that group who are making money off of hole card information.

Until our country decides to regulate Internet gambling and allows U.S. companies to participate in it, I think you should stay away from online poker sites.

You can play on ClubUBT.com, however. That site is fair, in my opinon.

[Add Comment] [Email Blogger]

Since I play poker 40 hours a week in casinos I can (and will) have lots of poker stories to share here on this blog. One recent tournament I was in was off the hook, however. It was an invitational tournament run by a casino where they invited their best (meaning “losing”) gamblers to play. I was able to play because of my video poker play at the casino. It wasn’t because of my poker play. What was particularly nice about this invitational is that the players were blackjack, baccarat, and slot players. These were not poker players, and many of them didn’t even know the basics of the game.

I had one hand where I had 9,000 in chips and the blinds were 200-400. I had pocket aces in middle position and raised to 1200 preflop. The small blind called me and we saw the flop which was 983 of different suits. The small blind bet 1600 into me. I decided to go all in with the aces. There are a number of hands where I would be way behind. If he had 99, 88, 33, 98 or another two pair then I was in pretty bad shape, but I just couldn’t fold the aces there. He thinks and calls 6,000 more. I don’t know if I’m good or not when he calls until we show our hands. He has A6 offsuit. He called my raise with an ace-high no pair. No flush draw. No pair. No nothing really. The turn came with a 5 which made me a little nervous since he picked up a possible straight with a 7, but it didn’t come and I won the hand.

There is bad play and then there’s this. It’s very, very bad.

On another hand which I was not involved in, the flop came A96. The early position person bet 400. Another person raised to 1200. The original person betting called the raise. The turn was a 6. First person checks, other person checks. River is a 2. First person checks, other person checks. Late position guy shows 99 for a full house, 9s full of sixes. Other person throws away his hand. Mister 99 says “When that 6 paired I was sure you had pocket 6s and had quads.” He was scared of 4-of-a-kind.

I ended up finishing the tournament in 6th place (out of 330 players) and won $9,000. Needless to say, if you can get into a poker tournament that’s made up of casino gamblers (not poker players), I highly recommend you do so.

[Add Comment] [Email Blogger]

I recently received this email from PokerStars online poker room where I played some $20 and $30 SitNGo tournaments...

Hello,

PokerStars has become aware of two players who were working together in our Sit & Go tournaments to the detriment of other players. You were involved in at least one tournament with these players and as a result you may have been adversely affected.

The players' accounts were closed and their funds frozen pending a thorough investigation, which is now complete. Fortunately the problem was identified quickly and they had only played in a few tournaments before the accounts were closed.

In a case such as this it is our policy to confiscate the colluders' winnings or balances and to distribute them to the players affected by their actions in as fair a way as possible. To confirm your credit, log onto your PokerStars account, go to the 'Cashier' screen and click the 'History' button. Your share will be shown "Credit Purchase", followed by the amount of the credit.

I regret that we will be unable to answer questions as to how your specific credit amount was calculated. Likewise, we are not at liberty to identify the specific games or players in question. Suffice to say that they have been barred from the site and you will not encounter them again.

The integrity of the games at PokerStars is of paramount importance to us and we will not abide cheating or collusion in our games. We work hard to police our games and prevent such instances. In the rare cases where collusion has actually occurred, we make sure that any players affected are compensated appropriately.

Thank you for your continued play here on PokerStars. Please do not hesitate to let us know any time we can be of help.

Best Regards,

Dan M.
PokerStars Support Team

Poker Stars returned $114 to my account. I was quite pleased with their security team and response.

I have to admit that when I played the Sit N Gos things didn't feel quite right. The problem is that luck is a funny thing and it's nearly impossible to determine cheating in the short term because luck can be a funny thing. It's certainly possible to flop four-of-a-kind only to lose to a straight flush or to have your pocket aces all in preflop against a lower pair lose a few times in a row.

With live poker, those who are perceptive and know what to look for may observe situations where one feels that they're being bamboozeled but again, it can be difficult to discern if it's unusual/bad play and short term variance (luck) or if there really is some underlying ulterior unfairness.

There have recently been threads on poker discussion sites regarding people playing online poker with multiple accounts. They get several accounts to themselves, laptops and "air cards." These are high-speed broadband connections which allow each computer to have a unique IP address, making it much more difficult for an online site to determine it's the same person and same location.

Given my results online, the collusion at PokerStars, and the Absolute Poker hole card scandal, I'm beginning to sour on playing online. I think some sites do their best to protect the games, but I have to wonder if it's enough sometimes.
 

[Add Comment] [Email Blogger]

Now that Iowa, New Hampshire, and Montana have voted for their potential Presidential candidate from each party, the race is becoming more defined. At this point it looks like on the Democratic side, Hillary Clintion and Barack Obama are in a close race for the nomination with John Edwards still in, but pretty far behind. On the Republican side, John McCain looks like the frontrunner with Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee somewhat close. There are a few long shots remaining on the Republican side, with Fred Thompson the most likely of that group.

Some politicians, who many see as on the fringe or extremists such as Barney Frank or Ron Paul (a current, but unlikely, Presidential hopeful in the Republican primaries) voice their opinions in favor of gambling as being a personal choice that we should be allowed to make. The Libertarian party clearly supports our rights to gamble. The Libertarian party also supports legalized marijuana so while it does have a strong and loyal following, it's still seen as too bizarre for the majority of Americans.

On the Republican side, among the leading candidates, I see no support for gambling. The three candidates are John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee.

Mitt Romney:

Hard to get a line on his leanings, but given his Mormon background it's likely he's opposed to gambling. Mormons are interesting because their doctrine advises them to abstain from many things such as coffee, alcohol, tobacco, and gambling but on the other hand they often let people live and let live. In fact, Las Vegas has a strong Mormon presence and without being much of a historian, I've been told Mormon people have profited from Vegas casinos over the years.

My guess is that he would oppose expanding gambling in any form including on the Internet. I would love to be demonstrated otherwise, however.

John McCain:

McCain has made it clear that he wants to ban all wagering on college athletics. One only has to be in a Vegas sports book during the month of March to see the immense interest in betting on college basketball. College football also generates a huge amount of betting interest.

While I've been told that McCain will even play blackjack or craps in casinos from time to time, I have to believe that he is opposed to many forms of gambling and could very possibly be instrumental in further limiting our gambling rights.

Mike Huckabee:

He's a former Baptist minister who is staunchly religious to the point where he doesn't believe in evolution. While that's a completely different argument, it goes without saying that it's an extreme viewpoint shared by primarily by a minority with a strong religious ideology. People with this type of philosophy are also often anti-gambling.

But there's no need to look at his faith. He's made it clear that he opposes Internet gambling. When asked if he was President and Congress were to pass a law to repeal the UIGEA, Huckabee affirmed that he would veto any repeal. He's as anti-gambling as it gets.

Incidentally, the Bible never really addresses gambling whatsoever. Some people mention the Roman soldiers who cast lots for Jesus clothes. There is also another reference or two that people point to gambling. The bible says to not steal, to not murder, to not use the Lord's name in vain, to not commit adultery, to not commit a homosexual act, and more. In fact, the Bible says to not do many, many things, but it never says don't gamble.

On the Democratic side, the front running candidates are Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards.

Hillary Clinton:

Hillary, as far as I can tell, has not expressed a strong interest in opposing or supporting gambling. Clinton has supported the creation of a casino in Niagra. Also, the Huffington Post, a left-leaning Web Blog reported that Clinton's campaign helped form the Nevada Business Leadership Council whose head is Jan Jones, former mayor of Las Vegas. Also, former Harrah's and Caesars execs are on the council, along with the CEO of Vegas.com.

Does that mean Hillary would support gambling? I really don't know. I think it means that Hillary is trying to court Nevada support. My gut feel is that she will rock the boat on many issues such as the war and health care, but I doubt she'd take a strong stand in favor of gambling, including Internet gambling. (My blog. My opinion. Tell me otherwise and I may post your comments here.)

John Edwards:

Anti-gambler. Co-sponsored McCain's crusade against college sports betting. It's one thing to vote for a bill (especially one tied to a Safe Port Act which everyone had to vote in favor of at the last minute such as the UIGEA) and it's another thing to co-sponsor its creation. I think John Edwards is likely the enemy of the gambler.

Barack Obama:

Has made it known that he enjoys poker for a pastime and is not ashamed of that fact. Some comments I've read on the Net say that he's a solid tight player who doesn't chase longshot draws. Obama played in a weekly poker game while in the Illinois legislature, and it appears continue to play poker from time to time even now.

Here are my grades for gambling friendly Presidential candidates: 

McCain: F

Huckabee: F

Edwards: F

Clinton: C

Obama: B+

I give Obama the nod for most-gambling-friendly.

There's little information I can get as to specific bills introduced or statements made regarding gambling support but anyone who plays poker regularly moves up a couple notches in my book. Poker is the highest echelon and most artful form of gambling. Someone who regularly plays indubitably has an open-minded and cogent sensibility.

In short, we hear from the anti-gambling politicians. We don't hear from the pro-gambling ones because it doesn't have significant passionate support from the American people.

[Add Comment] [Email Blogger]

Until a few years ago, no one thought that people would actually gamble in their underwear, save for a drunken game of Twister with some coeds at the Phi Delt house. The Internet has brought the unimaginable into the home. Want to buy socks to keep your toes warm? Go online. Want to buy fine art? Go online. Want to trade stocks, pay bills, watch porn, learn how to harvest herbs or fix a hole in the sole of one’s shoe? Go online. Want to gamble too? You got it… go online.

Gambling is intrinsic to human nature. We have survived as a species because our ancestors assessed risk vs. reward situations and the fittest ones made the best decisions. Need food? Attacking that bear is dangerous, but may be the only way to survive. Some people got the bear and the food, and some people were eaten by the bear. If the human race was inherently risk averse, we would have never survived as a species to today’s day and age. Even in today’s business climate, a far cry from hunting for bears, the well-informed risk takers are often rewarded by our economic system.

Also, as a “field” gambler, one who spends one-fifth of his life inside casinos, I’ll update on the daily grind, the roller coaster, the ups and downs, as Dickens’ may say, the best of times and the worst of times, of gambling in general. Heck, if I write about playing a poker tournament at Caesars Palace in Vegas, I’m writing on the Internet about gambling, even if it isn’t specifically gambling on the Net, it kinda is. That’s gambling in space.

Gambling on the Net is no longer in infancy, but rather in an adolescent phase. Most people with the inclination to participate in online gambling and who have the technological ability and know-how to do so, have done it at least to dabble if not more. In the fall of 2006, the USA government passed a law which was a major blow to the industry which set the industry back. Much as a one-day drop of 10% may hit the DOW, we know it will rebound, just as we know online gambling will also. My goal is to report on the rebound, the ongoing news related to online gambling, and the future opportunities and growth in this field.

Gambling, however, in the sense that I’ll primarily discuss, is related to the classic games of chance often played in a casino such as blackjack, poker, roulette, craps, bingo, sports betting, video poker, and other games. Humans desire to play these games for the same reasons that we were able to survive for many years. We’re built, we’re programmed, to take risks.

Gambling in Space connotes cyberspace, that electronic universe created by so many electrons flowing to and from along the Information Superhighway. You got Wifi, you got hi-speed, dial-up, Cable, DSL, T1’s, DS3’s, portals and hubs and networks and firewalls and emails and passwords and on and on. In that one sentence I used about 10 words that no one would have understood 20 years ago, or at least not as we understand them.

In other words, expect a lot, or expect a little, I’ll probably be somewhere in between.

Thanks for visiting.

[Add Comment] [Email Blogger]