Saturday, October 21, 2006

Late thoughts on the ban

A lot of stuff going in in SoxLife right now, work, vacations, and more. Posting hasn't really been a priority.

Brief thoughts on the online poker ban:

Without question, it is a spectacular example of crass politics, idiotic policy and bad law.

It is an archetypal case of a malum prohibitum, or something illegal because the statute says so, not because it is wrong in itself. The true Holy Rollers may view it differently--the few that actually believe it rather than having latched on to it for perceived pgain that is--but not for the first time in this country's history, we've let them lead the (high) horse off the track.

This is potential armageddon for the poker blogger community.

But....

Do I really care that much?

-BEGIN RANT-

I mean seriously, if this is the main thing that is upsetting you about our current leadership, wake the fuck up.

Can you say "interpreting" the Geneva convention.

Can you say Habeas Corpus Schmabeaus Horpus?

Doesn't bother you?

How about using mass market manipulation to start a war in the wrong place?

Mission Accomplished!!!

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth?

I feel safer already.

Or even closer to your focus, how about stripping out money for port security?

Well, we can always piling on money for space age fighter planes to shoot down, well, who knows whom's threatening air force? They might be handy for taking out all those nice American F-16's we sold to Pakistan once the Islamists stage a successful coup and take over a nuclear power.)

OK this is not aimed at all of you, just those that take issue with the poker ban but support the idiots in charge otherwise.

You buy the bull, you get the horns.

-END RANT-

Oh by the way, I personally don't think the ban will be particularly effective. People want to play, and it's just not that hard to get around. US accounts will probably be forced to move around it--I don't know if FullTilt's and Stars' position is viable against sustained attack--but we'll need to use dodgier methods and put more money underground, which is a not good thing. Eventually one can hope we'll successfully get an exception for regulated, monitored online play (I see Harrah'sOnline), with tax tracking, bigger rakes and the lot.

Frankly, I've got bigger things to worry about.

Oh by the way, can someone describe to me the hand that is good enough to call a $30 raise preflop but bad enough to fold on the flop rather than put in your last $14?

6 Comments:

At Sun Oct 22, 05:14:00 PM 2006, Blogger Mark said...

Sure there are much bigger problems in Washington than a purported ban on online gambling. But this legislation causes outrage because it seems to take away freedoms while telling people how they can spend their hard-earned money.
On that hand you linked to, the only thing I can think your opponent had was a very low pocket pair that he hoped would hit.

 
At Sun Oct 22, 10:17:00 PM 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The hand that folded must have been worried about seeing an A. That being said they should have called with any two cards unless it was a misclick.

Yes lots of problems in the US gov't these days but hopefully the nov 7th election can tilt things a bit.

 
At Tue Oct 24, 12:37:00 PM 2006, Blogger PokahDave said...

It was definately Kings......

 
At Wed Oct 25, 12:58:00 PM 2006, Anonymous jprfrog said...

Check this blog for another angle on the question:



www.theagitator.com/archives/027144.php#027144

 
At Tue Oct 31, 10:21:00 PM 2006, Blogger HighOnPoker said...

Dude, I read this late, but I'm glad it did. Well said, sir. You have a unique view here, and I agree with it 100%.

 
At Thu Jan 03, 09:08:00 AM 2008, Anonymous free online poker game said...

I agree with the legislation which aims to ban credit cards as a payment method for online gambling of any sort... and i think it should be enforced worldwide – not just in America. In fact, gambling with a credit card should be banned full stop. Not just on the internet. It’s a no brainer when you consider you are placing backing the outcome of an uncertain event with somebody else’s money. Chance and credit do not mix well in my opinion, and continuing to allow it would only contribute further in negatively affecting the high levels of personal debt many citizens today find themselves in. I do however, think that the prohibition won't work; or at least it won’t be received well amongst gamblers - I mean what’s the point in banning a credit card payment made on an online poker game, for example, but continuing to allow online sports betting? Slightly hypocritical, no? I mean how can you allow someone to participate [with or without a credit card] in online horse racing betting, but not put any money on a hand of texas hold’em poker? both activities involve a large degree of chance, and neither are guaranteed to yield financial return.
What really infuriates me however, is that the minority of irresponsible gamblers [those paying with someone elses money!] have now ruined the fun of online betting for everyone else - those like me who pay with money they actually have in their bank!!
At least for the Americans there is always the free online poker games!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home