UncleHoot
-
Content Count
624 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by UncleHoot
-
-
I was talking about poker. Geesh. Get your mind out of the gutter, dude.LOL I GET IT. JKO IS LIKE JACKING OFF. LOL YOU'RE SO CLEVER. -
So the other night, I sat down at my computer and thought I'd play with it for awhile. I wanted to poker but I can't poker as easily as I used to. Even so, I've found that I like JKo. I've found that I also like 2Jo instead of waiting all night to see a big pair. I've found that there are a lot of ways to play with it, and it's nice to see my girlfriend play with it too. Sometimes she'd prefer her pocket rockets, but I love JKo against her big pair.
-
Your post is pretty much exactly how I feel (the entire post).Another big thing to me, is that Pokerstars still has over 100K players most of the time. I get on Carbon, and there are 7500 players. During my entire online poker existence (since 2005), I've never been on a site with that few players.A lot of answers to this.... <snip> -
Yeah, the snoring beagle is just up the road from me! (ok, about 30 miles up) I'd play too, but there are a couple reasons why I don't:1. The buy-in is too high for my bankroll2. I no longer have a bankrollgot into a twitter fight with Annie a few months ago over Epic and a few other things. I see kathy Liebert also been posting and retweeting the articles about Daniel and Annie. she was a little critical of Daniel bashing Annie and then I hit the roof with about 4 tweets back at her in Daniels defense. I hear kathy may be playing the HPT event at soaring eagle, if I go I will defintely talk to her about that lol.Love Daniel's blog -
Not if you're a pervert.Pretty sure that's a screwdriver. -
I realize that I'm a homophobe, but... That picture. Barney Frank's butt is sticking up in the air, and the other guy (Barton?) is holding some kind of electric toothbrush? Is it just me, or did someone have a chuckle drawing that?
-
Is this a serious question?short answer:No, the "Wire Act" specifically prohibits it.Longer answer:I think the Wire Act only prohibits this at the State to State level. Within a state, the Federal government does not have the Constitutional authority to prohibit it (which doesn't generally stop them, however).But either way, I'm pretty sure it's not legal and/or happening at this time.
-
This whole mess is ALL about money, imho.My conspiracy theory:Pokerstars et al have been making billions. US casinos wanted to get in on the action. They realized that the chances of getting legislation passed are very slim, simply because poker players were generally happy with what they had (with some exceptions). They (Harrah's) put forth a bill that would have created a moratorium in the US until they could get their software up and running. i.e. US players would be locked out of the online poker world for several months (or more). Well, that legislation didn't end up going anywhere in Congress.New Plan: Get the Justice Department to do their dirty-work for them. Honestly, it was a beautiful plan. Use the Justice Dept to shut down the other sites, in essence creating a moratorium. This will create a backlash that will more or less force poker players to write their Congressmen about online poker. At that point, Harrah's et al can work to create a new bill that will give them the largest benefit. Harrah's comes out smelling like a rose. Congress looks good too. People will blame the Justice Dept for "Black Friday" and any grief that it caused, and who cares when "the cops" get blamed? Nobody. Oh, and Pokerstars et al will pay a hefty fine, so the government lawyers involved will all stand to make a really good paycheck as well. "Everybody wins."Of course, proving any of this would probably be about as difficult as proving who shot JFK, but I have to believe that this is the true reason we find ourselves where we are today.At the end is all about the money..Right ? -
What makes me uncomfortable with the Barton Bill..."Only residents of the U.S. would be allowed to play on licensed sites."Why??? Do we NOT want to TAKE MONEY from people all over the world? Are the new providers in US market simply too afraid that they won't be able to compete against Poker-stars (and others)?Or was this mis-stated, and it was supposed to read more like, "Residents of the U.S. would only be allowed to play on licensed sites"? The latter would certainly make more sense...
-
Honestly, I can think of a lot of good reasons to move to Canada right now that have nothing to do with poker.
-
I'm just sayin'...Normally when these things happen (and the article is very short on details), there was someone taking a rake from the game. I don't know if there was or was not, but normally that's what was happening when someone gets raided.Sure, you can argue that as long as the players knew they were paying someone to host the game in their home, then what's the problem? Touche. The Libertarian in my agrees with you, but generally the Law does not.I'm just sayin'...
-
I'll change my "in the next 5 years" to 90%, but I'm sticking with the rest. The folks at Gambling 911 are hope-mongering.Of course, if it happens, I can always claim, "Well, sometimes you hit the 4 outer on the river..." I'll be pretty happy if it's officially legal, though.
-
It's encouraging, but yeah... Normally these things happen in phases. We may get some legislation that says, "We're creating a commission to study the effects of online poker..." before the end of the year. Then once legislation is actually passed, there WILL BE a "waiting period" before it goes into effect, which will most likely be several months to a year, if not more. The purpose of the waiting period would be so that all of the B&M casinos can talk to each other and figure out how they can all make money at this. It will take time for them to make compacts, share information, etc.I will be pleasantly surprised if Americans are officially, legally allowed to play poker online before the end of 2012. I'm sticking with my earlier estimates. 10% chance this year. 30% chance next year.However, a few years from now, things could be pretty cool: TONS more fish, direct transactions from your checking account, and perhaps you could win an online satellite into your local B&M casino's weekly $200 tournament. There's a downside as well, but I'm going to be more positive today...http://www.gambling911.com/poker/online-po...end-061011.html...lol told ya!Of course I'll still believe it when I see it.
-
Yeah, well the problem there is that operating such a site in the US is (and has been) explicitly illegal. Perhaps we will have a US-only community before we have another international community (that includes the US), but either way, I'd give it a <10% chance of happening this year. <30% by the end of next year. 80% chance of happening in the next 5 years.I'd be willing to put money on it, but unfortunately, my account was closed.Void of international sites most likely. Id expect US companies to be up at some point.
-
Indeed. Why equate poker with alcohol? I mean, does anyone have a job where they drink alcohol all day for a profit? If so, I know a lot of candidates. :DThere were certainly some analogies that would have made the point better (stockbroker seems obvious*), but it's probably not like anyone was going to change that idiot's mind anyway. *JohnnyBax, one of my favorite online players, used to be a stockbroker. He's a family-man, doesn't (generally) play on Saturdays since that's the day he spends with his family, and it sounds like he truly approaches the game as a profession, certainly not an addict.the people disputing him being equally as inept and not being able to defend the case as poker = income. makes the case's perception a lot weaker. -
It doesn't sound like the government's case is all that strong. So, why are they doing this?I just keep remembering the "blackout" provision of the lame-duck bill from late last year, and who was responsible for it. Harrah's. Now, I'm not saying that Harrah's is evil, I think they just want a piece of the action, and I honestly can't blame them. The US is a few years behind the times on all of this, and Harrah's (and others) are paying the price.My guess is that this situation will develop as follows. Many of us have written our Congressmen to complain, so a little bit of action will begin to stir in Congress. One by one, other states will begin creating pacts with Nevada. These will allow their citizens to enjoy online poker with the Nevada casinos, and those states will get a share (of something). In perhaps 2 years, online poker will (for all intents and purposes), be legal in the US (I bet a couple states will still be holdouts). I'm not even sure that the federal government will need to do anything*, after all, gambling is not supposed to be regulated by the US government at all: it's an issue that was left up to the states. In fact, the Constitution actually tells the federal government to essentially "regulate commerce...among the several states", not "hinder" the interstate commerce. But of course, the federal government does all kinds of things that the Constitution never gave it the authority to do, so I guess it is possible that something could happen at that level, but ultimately, I think the next move needs to come from the states. So, bring your state representatives up to speed as well.If we had Nevada casinos operating legally right now, today, the UIGEA would fall into a completely different light, because then it's "lawful Internet gambling", but only if I'm in Nevada? In fact, I think it's going to be difficult to figure out what the UIGEA will mean once the Nevada casinos go online. I mean, if I live in Nevada, and have a bank in Michigan, they can't block the transfer of payments, so they won't be blocking any money transfers for those casinos for anyone. So, at that point, it's left up to the casino to determine who is eligible to play and who is not. Isn't that exactly what Pokerstars and Full-tilt were doing? You won't have to be physically present in Nevada in order to play. (Technologically speaking, I mean. Legally, you will have to be present, but no one will be enforcing that.) But obviously, you would need a Nevada address.*The federal government needs to update the Tax Laws regarding gambling, for reasons I've mentioned here before (let us "net" the income, please, or don't tax it at all). Short of that, let's just hope they don't start attacking us to get tax money from winning players making a few hundred bucks a year. I mean, does anyone pay "Use Tax" on their state taxes? "Yes, I bought $300 worth of stuff from Amazon last year, and I didn't pay my sales tax, so here it is." Get real.Good article from a columnist at the Chicago Sun Timeshttp://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/49...-resources.html -
-
awesome!I feel the same about the word epic. Bring back rad. -
That's my feeling too. But when, and how long long until the US is allowed to play with the rest of the world is a really good question.Ironically, I think this is all going to shake-out so that Congress ends up smelling like a rose (to the uninformed anyway). We go through the Blackout, but then in the end, Congress passes some measure to officially allow US citizens to play online, and the whole country marvels at how beautiful our representatives are, and how marvelous that they have created jobs in this time of economic crisis, yada, yada, yada...IMHO, the DOJ is in-bed with Harrah's... Maybe not directly. Perhaps more like DOJ's sister is sleeping with Harrah's brother. Expect some inbred children at some point.The state poker sites are coming online soon. A new golden age of poker is going to dawn after this bloodbath. -
Thanks! The pre-paid idea simply can't be done in the US anymore, afaik. Western Union I still haven't tried.I posted in your other thread telling you how to deposit without the hassle of driving 30 minutes each way to buy some pre-paid credit card that doesn't work. I'll post this for you again because I'm nice like that. contact stars and tell them you want to Western Union. They will give you a persons name, country, and country code (i think). Go to Walmart or any of the dozens check cashing places within 10 miles of your home, do the transaction, and email stars with the info including the fee WU charged you. Stars instantly credits your acct including the WU fee. done and done. If and when you're ready to cash out, stars will send you a paper check that you can cash at one of those check cashing places. -
-
From what I've seen/read/heard, more an more players are becoming a fan of the clock. I mean, a slow player can really hold up a game, and ruin it for everyone else. You should be given a reasonable amount of time to make a decision, and then it's over. If you don't act in time, you get folded.But that's not exactly what this is about. In this case, it's headsup, and blinds aren't going up. Even so, I don't think that the chip-leader should have all of the time in the world to make a decision. People want to go home. Do some quick math, and make a quick decision. 60 seconds should be adequate, especially if he's already spent a minute or so.So, I say calling the clock is fine. If it pisses off the other player, that's even better. It's poker, and putting the other player off his game is part of it, unless you're otherwise being obnoxious. As the shortstack, it might be the only shot, depending on how the math comes out.
-
cu in 4years DanWho, ironically, hasn't posted in 4 years. And has not been missed during the 4 years of his absence.
-
Wish I could, but as far as I can tell, it is now nearly impossible for me to make a deposit on Stars without losing my bank account. I got a letter a few weeks back, basically saying that my bank (actually a credit union) would close my account for any online gambling transactions, and that's a gamble that I'm not willing to take.Sure, I could open up another bank account strictly for gambling and see how long I could get away with it, but since I'm a casual player, that's just not gonna happen.Only in America.
Rip Alan Meltzer
in General Poker Forum
Posted
Sometimes when you listen to people's life stories they are actually really fascinating people. My first impression of Alan was, "Wow. What an odd looking guy." But as they chatted with him on HSP, I quickly liked the guy, and found out what an intriguing person he really was.When I die, I hope I will have lived my life as full as he has.