The Poker Chronicles

There was one nice victory for online poker players. Representative Jim Leach in Iowa was defeated.

I don't think it makes much difference as far as online poker is concerned. Everyone in the gaming community seems to think it will, and I hope they turn out to be correct, but I'm highly skeptical.

You are right to be skeptical. The House passed one in July to the tune of 317-93. It was perhaps the first time I've ever agreed with gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass), who said, "Prohibition didn't work for alcohol. It won't work for gambling."

BTW, I'm a Republican, but I was glad to see that little bitch Jim Leach, architect of these anti-gambling bills, crash and burn yesterday, after 15 (!) terms in the House.

The thing most people don't understand is that each of us gambles every single day. Wall Street like to talk call it "investing," but it's still gambling. The insurance industry speaks glowingly about things like family protection and taking prudent measures, but it's still gambling. If you have a mortgage, you have also purchased (and overpaid for) an embedded put option. Trying to time that refi? You're gambling.

The difference between most folks and gamblers like us is that (a) we understand that we're gambling and (b) we don't apologize for it.

I've had these very same thoughts, and hopefully everyone in the gaming community has considered the thought as well. Its going to be a long, uphill battle to get the ball rolling on pro gaming legislation. And while that may be the case, I think this election was moreso about "sticking it to the man" than turning the tide. We were saying that we won't stand for what has happened to us poker players, and in general over the course of the last two (hell, six) years. That we won't stand for the loss of freedom. Now that we've gotten that point across, we can start making that uphill trek toward getting these people to consider our cause. But at least we can say that we let our voices be heard and triumphed, and build on that momentum.

I don't think so Chad. All it will take is some corporations like Harrah's to realize that they stand to gain from online gaming (and the big casino corporations seem to be coming to that conclusion now) and grease the right wheels. We're never going to win the "you should legalize it because it infringes on our rights to do otherwise" battle. But we can buy the war.

Well put. Ever since the Bush Crime Family seized power our civil liberties have come under relentless fire. The Republican Congress, with its unholy ties to the Jesus Nazis, seemed only too willing to roll back individual freedoms further and further. If a Democratic majority does nothing else but slow that trend (reversing it seems too much to hope for given the conservative bias of the Supreme Court), this election will prove momentous.

Ohio, however, may be hopeless. The religious zealots hold too much sway for proponents of slot machines and casinos to have a prayer (no pun intended), even though gambling prohibition makes even less sense than, say, America's laws against online gaming. So places like Mounatineer in W. Va. will continue to rake in tens (maybe hundreds) of millions from Ohioans who stream across the border, and the coffers of offshore bookmakers and poker sites will continue to swell with the deposits -- and lost potential tax revenues -- of US patrons. It's all so incredibly stupid and short-sighted.

I can't see the Dems changing any of that, but at least they are less likely to make it worse.

On a somewhat related note, does the anti-smoking measure -- specifically as it pertains to bars --bother you?

unkletony: reversing it seems too much to hope for given the conservative bias of the Supreme Court

Actually, the Supreme Court is currently split right down the middle: four conservatives, four liberals, and swing voter Anthony Kennedy.

Might be a little late on this, but issue 3 failed because it was poorly written. Basically, it was a cash grab for horse track owners and two developers in Cleveland.

I was pissed because it was sold horribly to the public. If you have an issue on gambling, that is the vote- you don't pretend the issue is about scholarships or learning, because it isn't.

I am a poker player, Bush sucks and I wish we had rooms other than lame smokey Vegas Nights and that stupid tent. However, when you thell the public the issue is "education" and they get in the booth and see it is about slot machines and Cleveland developers- they will revolt. I think they did.

Market the issue by saying "do you really want to drive to Detroit to gamble?". And screw the slots (although I know it was just an initial volley). Then we could see if the public really wants it.

"...it's either me or the Bible, and I've updated my opinions in the last couple millennia and don't contradict myself once every three sentences"

Matt,

I read your blog often. I buy things through the links on your site. I have contacted you more than once concerning rakeback and I was planning on choosing you as my FT affiliate now that Party is down and I need to give my rake to some other site. However, in one sentence you have led me to reconsider.

You have a right to your opinion. But I do expect the people I trust (for rakeback, news and advice on poker, etc) to be more respectful of differing, perfectly defensible beliefs.

I also expect them to not peddle misinformation. Saying that the Bible contradicts itself "every three sentences" is a blatant lie. The historicity of the Bible stands up very well compared to all other ancient texts and it is the most coherant religious text in existence.

To dismiss the Bible is a mistake on many levels. To say that you are better than it is an egregious error that stinks of hubris. You are not a better alternative. I have witnessed you more than once confidently climb in limits only to slink back down. I have read your ridiculous assertions that you think you can "make $100/hr" 2-tabling the $100max NL games on Party. I have seen you state, with great determination, that you will not be focusing on tournaments again, only to ignore ring games and play many tournaments a short time later and vice versa. These are all off the top of my head.

Have you ever considered that without your arrogance you would be a better poker player? You would also be more likely to gain my business in the future.

Ah, the helpful critical guy syndrome. Always my favorite.

I'm going to go ahead and guess I've spent more time studying the Bible than you have, otherwise you wouldn't be so quick to defend it. And I'm respectful of many beliefs as long as they are grounded in facts and logic. The facts about the Bible show that it is a very poor book for basing decisions on.

I think you must realize that "every three sentences" was an exaggeration but it does quite literally contradict itself hundreds of times. Google around and you'll find dozens of lists. Some of them are a little too liberal with their definition of contradictions, but some are pretty reasonable.

Also you should read a book called Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why by Bart Ehrman. Ehrman has a PhD and M.Div and is a former zealot turned agnostic (but still very respectful of Christianity) by education. The book is about the history of the Bible, which he is one of the world's foremost scholars on. He and his peers put the range of words changed by copying errors (intentional or unintentional) at between 200,000 and 400,000, which are more words than there are in the entire New Testament. Even if the Bible were written by God himself (which nobody knowledgeable believes) it would be nearly useless now due to human error. For instance, the Bible states that Mary, mother of Jesus, was a Virgin, while even the Catholic Church admits that that was not what it said originally. It used a word that translates more accurately to "young girl" than "virgin". There's a pretty big difference between the two (one is a miracle, one happens hundreds of thousands of times per day) and there are literally a few hundred thousand other such inaccuracies.

The reason that I am a better decision making tool than the Bible is that nobody, especially me, claims that I'm prefect. You gave bad examples of why I'm not, but I could give plenty of good ones. There's a huge difference in the way one treats a decision making tool that they believe is infallible from one that isn't.

And unlike the Bible I use both logic and the last 2,000 years of political thought when forming my opinions. It's not arrogance that makes me say that I'm therefore a better decision maker, its education. And you obviously haven’t met very many top poker players if you think arrogance is harmful. To succeed at this game one needs a little cockiness to get through the rough times. In actuality its more education and self-confidence, but call it arrogance if you wish. It always looks that way to those who don't possess it.

If you expect me to censor myself to save a couple rakeback customers you obviously haven't read me carefully. I write what I wish to write. It's gotten me into far more trouble than losing $20 per month profit, and I expect it will get me into even more still. The only reason I didn’t delete this email instantly without response (which is what an arrogant person would do) is that you wrote it well, which tells me you must be at least reasonably intelligent. That means that perhaps you're open-minded. Perhaps you aren't and will just dismiss everyone with an opposing viewpoint, as you maybe think I have done. Of maybe, as I have actually done, you will read up on the Bible a bit before you go defending it. Then get back to me.

fun160: Only a conservative would characterize this Supreme Court as "split right down the middle."