UncleHoot
-
Content Count
624 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by UncleHoot
-
-
see above (I didn't edit quickly enough)If you have gambling losses in excess of the standard deduction, then you would itemize. If you don't then you take the standard deduction. But then taking the standard deduction would save you more taxes. -
Itemizing versus taking the standard deduction? EDIT:Ok, I'll try to explain further...If you normally take the "standard deduction", because you do not have enough itemized deductions to overcome the threshold, and then you "win" $5,000 while also "losing" $10,000, you can claim that $5,000 under your itemized deductions.So... Let's say you were $800 short of meeting the threshold, so you normally take the standard deduction. But this year, you "won" $5,000 playing poker online. Ok, so you want to offset your "winnings" by deducting your losses (up to $5,000). Now you're way up above the standard deduction threshold, so you would be taxed on the $800 that you "won", and you would owe about $200 to the federal government, if you were me.Make sense yet?You don't make a lot of sense to me. -
That's why I consider myself a Libertarian. Do whatever you want, as long as you're not bothering me and mine.Anyway, I agree with the point regarding FoF forcing their ideals on others (at least that's the end-result here). I guess what I was sympathizing with is the fact that they feel they are doing what is right.Conservatives are for personal freedom and liberty until you are doing something they don't like. -
Just for the record, my examples weren't entirely serious.Yes, losing players that win any money at any time would be taxed by their state (depending on the state), so if you lost $10,000 and won $5,000, you'd be taxed on that $5,000. Yes, that's an easy fix, perhaps, but it's something that probably needs to be fixed in 30-some states (just a guess). Additionally, on your federal taxes, you could still end up paying more taxes, even as a losing player, depending on how much money you gambled, and whether or not you itemize or take the standard deduction.I hope the US does this right, but from past experience, I know that when Congress tries to legislate something "from the ground up", it tends to fail miserably, and that's essentially what they're doing in this case, rather than passing legislation "after the fact".well ya, i meant net profit. but some states laws are actually silly enough as to say you would have to be taxed on net cashes, so theoretically you could be taxed as a losing player. from what i've read, the ppa seems to think that will be fairly easy to fix. i'm all for regulation. the influx of new players and the games loosening up will be great for everyone in my opinion. -
No, I don't know a lot about taxes (I'm not a tax professional), but I'm 41 years old, and I've been filing my own taxes for many years. I was wrong about the AMT being the culprit that caused a person to lose more in taxes than they actually profited. I don't know exactly what causes it, but that doesn't mean that something isn't causing it.One situation I used, where I made a $2,000 profit with a 2% ROI meant that I lost my entire $2,000 to the federal government and ended up owing my state a few thousand more (around $5K, iirc). My tax adjusted "net profit" became about negative $5,000.Please feel free to read the information posted by Russel Fox regarding gambling and taxes. You'll see what a ridiculous system we have in the US. Thank God PS and FT don't report tax information.http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Articles-No...ambling-tax.htmhttp://www.gambling-law-us.com/Articles-No...d-questions.htmWait.Didn't you pretty much agree in that thread that you didn't understand the basics of taxes?Generally speaking I don't trust the Government to make things better, but On-Line gaming has shown an inability to self regulate. -
Where did you get this information on taxes? And see my post from last week regarding taxing winnings. That should scare the crap out of any poker player. PLEASE DO NOT TAX WINNINGS!!! Tax my net profit only, if you must tax me at all. That's probably what you meant, but it's a HUGE distinction.I already long for the days before the UIGEA. I used to play at Party and it was a blast. The industry was doing great and law enforcement was turning a blind eye to something that may or may not have been illegal, but certainly wasn't really hurting anyone. At that time, all it would have taken was for the justice department to officially state that the wire act did not apply to online poker, and we would not be in this mess. Harrah's could have opened an online poker site and they could be raking in millions. Then Congress could have set some rules regarding age verification, and whatever other regulation that they wanted to add after the fact. Instead, they took an approach that was analogous to saying, 'Shopping on the Internet is bad and fraught with danger, therefore we're going to make sure that we protect consumers by not allowing them to use their credit cards to shop online.' Now that Congress has removed the free market aspect of this, whatever regulation they put into place will most likely further destroy what we already have. Stars and Full Tilt may not be allowed licensing. It will be a huge money-grab and everyone will want a piece of it. If it was already quasi-legal, Congress would have to squeeze their way into it, not be the gatekeepers (bouncers?) that determine who gets in and who does not. In a free market, the players could go to the site that works best for them. Eventually, the best would rise to the top. That's exactly what was happening in 2006, right up until the UIGEA forced Party and others out of the US market.Using my analogy above, wouldn't it be great if you were required to have a government license before you could sell on eBay? And everything you sold would have to be taxed. Oh, and a certain percentage of each transaction had to go to the local homeless shelter, and you were required to provide proof that you were indeed donating to that local shelter. And to get that license, you had to make sure that you were operating in an OSHA approved location, with the right number of bathrooms, emergency exits, fire extinguishers, etc... eBay has thrived because there is NO government involvement. I'm not saying that eBay wouldn't exist, but it sure would not exist as it does today. It would simply be a new retail space for large retailers.If online poker does become "legal" in the US, I hope to God that it has as little regulation as possible.there will likely only be 2 forms of tax. a tax on your deposit(which nearly everyone is agreeing the sites will eat), and a tax on your winnings, which you should already be paying anyway.also disagree with your point on people longing for the days of when it was "illegal". the status quo we have now can only hold for so long, and sites can only pay back customers out of there own pockets when processors are shutdown for so long, before it becomes unprofitable to serve the us market. ideally we would just have a free market with 0 regulation, but its just not possible obviously. -
Hope that helps.And while I'm at it, I don't have anything useful left to provide this conversation, and neither does anyone else.HTH? -
Growing up in a very religious family, I have a lot of sympathy for FoF. Yes, I realize that I'm probably the only one here that does, and I'm not saying that they are right (about anything), but they do have the right to voice their opinion on this and any other matter.Is gambling a sin? That's the real question here, and yeah, it certainly can be a problem, even for winning players. I know that a couple years ago, all I wanted to do was play poker online. I was literally addicted. I would get home from work, then play until I had to go to bed. Actually, I'd play until AFTER I had to go to bed. Sure, I won a little money, but losing money wasn't the problem. The problem was that I was completely neglecting just about everyone else in my life.Yes, this can be true for alcohol and lots of other things in life. It's a valid concern, and sometimes I'm glad that they are people out there reminding me. I guess where we disagree is that I believe that "Gambling can be a sin," not that it is always a sin.James 4:17 (New International Version) "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins."So, for me, if I knowingly repeat the mistakes that I've made in the past, it's a sin.Sermon over.
-
Well, in Ms. Dukes defense (ugh), she was actually replying to a Pokerstars support email, not trying to go over DN's head. But then, her open letter went beyond its original scope. So then PS clarified their actual position.So was DN running-bad on that particular day? I mean, poker players are generally really nice and personable when they are running well, but if you catch them on a bad day...Poker being popular and him endorsing a site doesn't remove his right to say his opinion. If Annie wants to bitch at him, she can, privately or publicly. If Pokerstars want to bitch at him, they will, privately. Either way, an open letter on the internet not directly at the maker at the comments but at the person who he represents asking for them to bitch at him is the work of a bit of a ****. And while what he said may have been immature, her snitching is not much higher. Just because she used big words and good structure, it still isn't much above crying and saying "Miss, that kid hurt my feelings", only what she did was purposefully very public.Either way, celebrities in bigger things than poker say big bad mean things all the time also. Poker being big doesn't stop someone being allowed to call anyone anything. -
I'm laughing at both of you guys. HTH.I have no idea what you are talking about at this point. I never provided you any strategy posts nor do I contend to play optimal strategy. As for your comments on humor, etc., I think your posts speak for themselves.Let's just agree that King Tanner is a good man with a lovely signature and that I will lose no sleep over you thinking I am smug (oops, there I go again). -
Honestly, I do have a huge fear that the government will completely screw up whatever poker legislation they may pass in the future. I can see certain ridiculous amendments appearing such as:"Well, we should limit tournament buy-in's to $50 and under, because someone could lose their life-savings in a matter of minutes.""We need to protect the existing rights of the tribal casinos, so those players that live within X miles of a tribal casino should be blocked from playing online while a poker event is scheduled at a local casino." (Like is the case with professional sports broadcasts)Then, of course, is the whole taxation issue. I don't have any idea how that will work, but it will almost certainly be awful, especially if it's handled the same way that Vegas casino's currently do it. (I think any win over $1500 has taxes taken off the top, which is ridiculous for, say, a $1500 buy-in event.)Finally, gambling laws are not determined at the Federal Level (according to The Constitution), so any federal legislation starts trampling on the rights of the individual states, and some of them will probably get upset, so there will be some goofiness as they try to appease the difficult-to-get-along-with states.If legislation passes, I expect it to be so convoluted that most of us in the US will long for the days when it was still "illegal". Congressmen will be doing everything that they can to appease the current casinos, as well as what ever other constituencies they may have. Everything seemed to be working well for us poker players, right up until the UIGEA. Thank Congress for that.
-
Waaaaay back a long time ago, like probably last year, I was in a situation like that.I'm on BB with KQ, UTG limped. No one else in pot.Flop K55I bet, he callsTurn QI bet, he callsRiver is a blankI make a big betHe tanks for a bit, then callsHe shows AAHAHAHAHA! I've got KQ! I wi... Oh, I suck.i always seem to mess this up especially when i'm tiredwas playing a heads up match yesterday and had J5 opponent raises pre flop smallflop J 22he bets out I raise he callsturn is a 5 and with two pair i go all hoping he has AJ or something of course immediately realizing that with the two 2's on the board if he has an overpair I'm totally screwed he pauses forever calls time -finally folds maybe thinking i had a 2 or something nevertheless i must stop falling for this -
mass debating is fun.EDIT: (Say it out loud)Honestly I don't care at all about the story. It is just an interesting debate. -
I see that you've met my mom...My point is, if someone calls your mom or gf a bitch, whore, skank, fuckface etc... would you not attack them?Is it only if they say C***? I doubt it. -
QFTI might say things about someone that I would not say to their face. Geez. That's what he truly thinks about her. Maybe he should or shouldn't. The only thing "wrong" here is that someone printed something he said off the record. It's not as if he walked up to a microphone and said, "Can I have your attention please. Annie Duke is a ..." It's more akin to overhearing someone talking about you.I don't really think you scenario is analogous here. For starters, it wasn't just this issue alone that caused him to make this comment, it's his opinion of her built up through many years of interactions. Also making an offhand comment about it in a print interview(which he didn't even think was going to be published) isn't quite the same as calling someone a c*** on national television. I don't think the word is something that should be tossed around lightly, certainly not something to be said to any woman who might annoy you in life, however if someone is a scummy, evil despicable person then why shouldn't the word be used, it might not be pc but if the shoe fits then so be it. I don't know annie personally so i couldn't personally call her that, however daniel does know her very well, if he thinks she is a c*** (he certainly doesn't seem to be alone in that camp) then he is not in the wrong in saying it as far as i am concerned. Also any correlation between using that word toward one particular person and hating women is beyond preposterous to me, he despises annie duke, the use of the word is directed toward her, it has no bearing on any other woman. -
At the levels I play ($16 and $6.50), I've found that a 2.5X raise UTG can be very intimidating when the blinds get around 150-200. I don't mind raising it up with AJ and even AT UTG if I'm not pot-committing myself, and depending on the number of players remaining at the table (6 or less, hopefully). Simply fold to a big shove. Flat calls are normally in the SB or BB, so you'll still have position after the flop. In my experience, more often than not, everyone folds.Not a stupid qustion at all. In these turbos you'll often face similar situations, and the best solution is very often to just shove it in or fold. With 19-20 bbs and no antes a raise is ok, but you can easilly get away with raising it less than 4x. 4x raises OOP can be suitable for cash games where you're at least 100 bbs deep, here you risk too much of your stack with too little equity. Personally I'd make it 2.5ish@Eba12I don't like to flat a villain who opens that much and has that little behind. You should pretty much be shoving or folding here, and AJ is a bit meish to get it in with. I think AQ+ is ok.The AK hand, keep in mind that your hand isnt made yet. You obviously shouldn't mind action with 11 bbs and AK, but the optimal move should be shoving it in. You'll get a lot of meish pocket pairs that you're flipping against to fold, and you're still increasing your stack by quite a bit. It's more important to stay alive than to double up! -
C'mon, people. He didn't have to cheat. Online poker is rigged broccoli.
-
So... My daughter has a tumbling class. One day, she's in class, and I'm watching the kids do their routines, and the instructor announces with a wry smile, "Uh oh... Someone used the C-word." Suddenly, I'm fully alert and I'm thinking, "OMG! Seriously?""Stephanie said 'can't!'"
-
Yep, or perhaps he quite literally said "F**king c**t". "Yes, that's Eff-Star-Star-Kay..."I like doing that in PS chat sometimes... get a bad beat and simply type in something like "**** ******!!!"I find myself wondering if DN called her a farking clot and then told the mag to blot out the letters so he wouldn't be misquoted but it would drum up some good old poker controversy just the same. Seems very out of character for him to be going along all professional-like and then suddenly go Denis Leary randomly in the middle, then go right back to professional-edge. Seems much more IN character for him to pull something like the above as a prank, knowing full well that he could have some fun and get a dig on someone he doesn't like in the process. Yes, it's a slow news day in my world. Yes, this is massively overthought. Yes, I already proactively regret hitting the "Add Reply" button. -
I don't think that calling her a "dick" would have made as much sense, yet I hear women apply that word to men every day. Okay, so it's one of those things that only goes one way...sighHonestly, they both need to get over each other.
-
FYPI was JKo to the pictures in this thread. -
Out.Didn't realize my numlock was off, and mis-click raised to 2XBB (200) with QQ. Tanked, then made a bad call on flop, and lost when he flopped the nuts, and another player flopped a set. Down to ~500. AIPF next hand 33 < JJ.
-
3546 at break. :-)Seat 1: kichito32 (1306 in chips) Seat 2: Lotus014 (550 in chips) Seat 3: Walter Rosa (3780 in chips) Seat 4: i'mstoneface (3550 in chips) Seat 5: TCB07 (1540 in chips) Seat 6: BosinateR (2000 in chips) Seat 7: UncleHoot (1780 in chips) Seat 8: Canhambone (2580 in chips) Seat 9: BackHouseBar (1960 in chips) BackHouseBar: posts small blind 20kichito32: posts big blind 40*** HOLE CARDS ***Dealt to UncleHoot [Ad Qh]Lotus014: folds Walter Rosa: calls 40i'mstoneface: calls 40TCB07: folds BosinateR: calls 40UncleHoot: raises 160 to 200Canhambone: folds BackHouseBar: folds kichito32: calls 160Walter Rosa: calls 160i'mstoneface: calls 160BosinateR: folds *** FLOP *** [Td Qs Qd]kichito32: checks Walter Rosa: checks i'mstoneface: checks UncleHoot: bets 360kichito32: calls 360Walter Rosa: folds i'mstoneface: folds *** TURN *** [Td Qs Qd] [2c]kichito32: checks UncleHoot: bets 800kichito32: calls 746 and is all-inUncalled bet (54) returned to UncleHoot*** RIVER *** [Td Qs Qd 2c] [3c]*** SHOW DOWN ***kichito32: shows [Jh Qc] (three of a kind, Queens)UncleHoot: shows [Ad Qh] (three of a kind, Queens - Ace kicker)UncleHoot collected 3072 from potkichito32 finished the tournament in 1250th place*** SUMMARY ***Total pot 3072 | Rake 0 Board [Td Qs Qd 2c 3c]Seat 1: kichito32 (big blind) showed [Jh Qc] and lost with three of a kind, QueensSeat 2: Lotus014 folded before Flop (didn't bet)Seat 3: Walter Rosa folded on the FlopSeat 4: i'mstoneface folded on the FlopSeat 5: TCB07 folded before Flop (didn't bet)Seat 6: BosinateR folded before FlopSeat 7: UncleHoot showed [Ad Qh] and won (3072) with three of a kind, QueensSeat 8: Canhambone (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)Seat 9: BackHouseBar (small blind) folded before Flop
-
Seat 4: UncleHoot folded before Flop (didn't bet)Still alive!!!
Open Letter To The Commerce Casino
in General Poker Forum
Posted