Will America Allow Online Gaming by the WTO's April 3rd Deadline?

If you’ve been reading this blog, you know by now that the World Trade Organization gave the United States until April 3 to allow Antigua online gaming operators to offer Internet horse-race betting, or face the threat of retaliatory trade sanctions.

Antigua brought its case to the WTO out of concern that US policy was putting the kibosh on Antiguan efforts to grow their economy through online gaming.

Although sanctions employed by a country of 70,000 people won’t hurt the US economy at all, the WTO’s ruling might put the United States at odds with its larger trading partners, allies, and friends that permit and regulate online gambling. With the April deadline only a few days away, the US has taken no steps to avoid a showdown.

According to the Justice Department, Internet gambling is illegal — although millions of us do it — and horseracing, after all, is gambling, no matter how many exemptions are carved out for it in our own (hypocritical) laws.

Mark Mendel, the attorney representing Antigua, said “Failing to resolve the dispute would leave the United States in the embarrassing position of appearing to bully a small nation that is playing by the rules. That could damage the authority of the World Trade Organization, the global trade body that the United States worked so hard to establish. If they undermine its strength and its credibility by basically refusing to adhere to a decision, then they've kind of told the rest of the world what the WTO is really for."

While Antigua would probably not impose trade sanctions on US goods, they could refuse to enforce American patents and trademarks. This would allow Antiguan-based companies to knock-off American intellectual property, like recorded music or computer software, while gaining world wide attention for their trade war; never mind the fact that action of this sort on the part of Antigua would quickly get the attention of economic giants such as Microsoft and Time-Warner.

Although we Americans spend $70 billion per year on gaming, our government still seeks to prohibit it — which will likely prove as ineffectual as Prohibition and extremely costly too — rather than license and regulate the industry. America’s position on online gaming might even cause a problem with our British allies. The Brits, who have taken an entirely different approach to Internet gaming will begin licensing and regulating this activity in 2007. An American ban on Internet gambling will prevent British casinos from entering the US market, while driving capital from the US. A ban would also preclude Internet gaming sites, which do most of their business in the US although they are all located offshore, from access to US capital markets and from raising cash through IPOs on Wall Street.

It seems everyone is dancing to the sound of different drummers. While the US Justice Department believes the 1961 law against telephone and telegraph betting also covers the Internet, federal judges have rejected that claim. US Representative Bob Goodlatte’s (R- VA) bill proposes to end the confusion by explicitly banning Internet betting.

But a ban on Internet gaming is unenforceable, at least it is in the eyes of research firm Christiansen Capital Advisors LLC of New Gloucester, Maine, who have shown that Americans already make up one-third of the 23 million online bettors worldwide, regardless of the Justice Department's assertion that such betting is in violation of US law.

The government of Antigua denounced the Justice Department's stance along with proposed antigambling regulations, saying they would be an unfair hindrance to a small country that's counting on online wagering as a major revenue source.

Antigua brought its case against the United States to the World Trade Organization in March 2003, and won a decision stating that the United States could not forbid all forms of offshore Internet gambling. Opposition from the Justice Department notwithstanding, Congress enacted legislation in 2000 permitting Internet horse race gambling in states that allow wagering on horses.

Because legislation that exempted horseracing from the provisions of Internet wagering in place, the WTO determined that the United States could not prohibit Antigua from offering such services to American gamblers if they can be legally provided by US firms.

Antigua believes they should be able to offer online gambling of any type to American consumers, not just horse racing, even though the United States hasn't even taken steps to open horse betting to overseas competitors.

So what’s going to happen April 3rd, the date given by the WTO to the US to conform to its ruling? I don’t expect the US to make any effort to comply. When they fail to adhere to the WTO order, the cards will be in the air and the real poker game is slated to begin. Antigua can bet as big as they want to in an attempt to compel the United States to comply.

Although everyone realizes trade sanctions won’t work, Antigua can wield a bigger club if they refuse to enforce patents and trademarks. Whether they will go that far remains to be seen. But this poker game will be played out in front of the entire world, and may of us will be watching closely.

The Sound and Fury of Worlds in Collision

While attorneys general from across the nation have been urging Congress to pass legislation outlawing internet gambling, a recent poll taken by the Wall Street Journal showed 85 percent of the respondents opposed such a ban.

This appears to be a case of worlds in collision. When so many people oppose a proposed law, that law will probably be ineffectual at best. In fact, one needn’t go back any further than the Prohibition Era for a clear example of how a law at variance with the vast majority of public sentiment is doomed to fail.

Things are probably not as dire now as they were during prohibition. For one thing, most of the proposed legislation centers on making it difficult to move money into online gaming accounts. But with a variety of financial intermediaries, such as Neteller, located in foreign countries where none of this is illegal, clever folks should have little difficulty moving funds from one location to another.

And if it ever became against the law to play poker online, you’d have police agencies all across the country having to go after violators one by one. That’s a lot tougher than it was during prohibition, when raiding a speakeasy would usually result in 100 or more people rounded up at the same time.

I’m not expecting the local vice squad at my door anytime soon, and neither should you. So far proposed legislation by Goodlatte, Leach, and Kyl is more sound and fury than substance. Things could change, but all you’re hearing now is the echo of past legislation, soundly defeated, resonating in the halls of Congress.

The Venetian's Poker Room Slated to Open April 2

The Venetian Resort Hotel Casino on April 2, will open its new — and from advance reports — extremely elegant poker room. With more than 10,000 square feet, the room will have space for 39 table and a variety of games at all limits.

The Venetian’s poker operations will be under the direction of former Foxwoods poker executive Kathy Raymond. The room will feature a variety of high-functioning technology and a spate of large plasma TVs. Valet parking will be complimentary and I’m told that tableside dining will also be available for players. A high-stakes area will feature butler service and gourmet dining.

Given the Venetian’s high level of ambiance and Kathy Raymond’s track record at Foxwoods, I’m assuming this new room will be a big winner right from the get-go.

Taj Poker Author's Tournament

With coauthor Sheree Bykofsky and a poster advertising our book
















With Mickey Wilson of PokerMagazine.com



















Hawking books at the Taj Poker Author's Tournament






















Matt Lessinger, the king of bluffs

Taj Poker Author's Tournament a Huge Success

I spent a few days in Atlantic City’s Taj Mahal, at a poker author’s tournament, which was organized as promotional event for Secrets the Pros Won’t tell You About Winning Hold’em Poker, the new book I wrote with Sheree Bykofsky.

The event was sponsored by the Taj, along with support from Kensington Publishing Corp – Lyle Stuart Books, Poker Life Magazine, and Borders Books. But all of credit for conceptualizing this event and doing the lion’s share of the work required to make it happen was my coauthor and literary agent, Sheree Bykofsky. She put numerous hours into organizing and coordinating all of the varied tasks needed to make this a success.

All I had to do was show up. For me it was a chance to see other authors I hardly ever spend much in-person time with, such as Matt Lessinger, Greg Dinkin, Dan Kimberg, and Mike Cappelletti, and it gave me an opportunity to meet a number of authors I had only know by their work, but never met in person.

This group included Neil D. Myers, Richard Sparks, David Apostolico, Henry Stephenson, Gary Carson, Bill Burton, John Schroeder. It was also nice to see Anthony Holden, who flew in for London for this event. Fifteen years ago Holden wrote Big Deal: A Year as a Professional Poker Player. Now he’s in the midst of writing Bigger Deal, which will be a look at how poker has changed in the intervening years. I’m hoping he gives this event a mention.

Mickey Wilson, who publishes PokerMagazine.com was also on hand, and she conducted video interviews with a number of authors that I’m hoping to see on her site in the near future. In addition to the authors who played, there were approximately 215 others who took part. It was an amazing number of participants, considering that the Borgata had a competing tournament at the same time.

This event marked my first time in Atlantic City in more than five years, and it gave me a chance to play at the Borgata, which didn’t exist the last time I was in Atlantic City. I like their room. Each of the $20-$40 and $40-$80 tables are adjacent to a plasma screen TV, which is almost a necessity in mid march, during the height of the NCAA basketball tournament. The Taj, by comparison, has smaller TV screens that aren’t hi-def plasma, and are not as accessible for viewing.

But I played in both casinos, and there was sufficient overlap among players that made it impossible for me to distinguish between games at the Borgata and at the Taj. The Taj games seemed a bit looser, but I’d need more time at the tables to really draw any sort of valid conclusions about the relative difference in game offerings.

I did well in the side games but didn’t make any impact at all during the tournament. I started out OK, but then went card dead for the longest time. When I finally had to make a stand it was with a pocket pair of treys and I was called by A-6. The flop helped neither of us, but the turn paired my opponent’s six. I saw no miracle on the river and I was out somewhere around the top third of the field, though far out of the dough.

I loved this event. Poker Life is planning a story on it in a future issue, and Sheree is hoping to hold another version of this event next year, perhaps back at the Taj or maybe in Las Vegas. But that’s still to be decided.

85 Percent Oppose Congressional Efforts to Ban Online Gaming

While some politicians are making political capital by seeking an outright ban of online gaming, our closest ally, the United Kingdom recently drafted a new legislation to regulate and legalize it, which I believe is the way to go.

Recently a poll taken by the Wall Street Journal about the possible ban of internet gambling shows that the vast majority of Americans — eight-five percent, to be exact — oppose congressional efforts to ban online gaming. That’s a landslide in the polling business. Eight five percent on any single side of an issue is an overwhelming number.

The level of hypocrisy is astounding, even for Congress. While our elected officials are fighting online gaming and couching the need to ban it as a “moral issue,” they simultaneously stand in support of Indian casinos and in granting exemptions in their own legislation for horse racing and fantasy sports leagues.

This kind of legislation puts the government in position to become a decision-maker on behalf of its citizens. I(f they are given this power, what would prevent them from regulating what we can watch on TV, in the movies, or even buy at the grocery store. This is certainly not the America Thomas Jefferson envisioned. His view of liberty was a free society in which citizens have the right to make decisions that affect their lives, and are responsible for the consequences of their actions.

The “Nanny Society” that these laws seek to bring about erodes our freedom in a multitude of ways. If we were thinking systemically, we would all march in the streets until every sumptuary law (regulation on religious or moral grounds, usually taken to mean “victimless crimes” involving consenting adults) on the books has been overturned. But I’ll settle for attacking the symptoms right here and right now, and so should you. We all need to put in the time and effort to ensure that the freedom-eroding, conduct controlling, free-will eliding legislation sponsored by Kyl, Leach and Goodlatte is never enacted into law.

You can preserve your individual freedom simply by contacting your congressmen and senators and expressing your concern about this legislation. Today it’s online gaming. Tomorrow it could be significantly worse.

Correction on Leach Legislation

Gaming attorney Chuck Humphrey sent this not to me to clarify one of my recent posts. I'm posting it here, in order to keep things as accurate as possible.

I read your blog, which says “Under Leach’s proposed legislation, such prohibitions would include placing bets at online poker sites, and other wagers made or received via the internet in jurisdictions where these bets are illegal under federal or state law.”

Unless I am missing something, that is not exactly an accurate statement. While placing bets is included in the definition of what constitutes an illegal bet, the bill does not criminalize the MAKING of bets. It does seek to block the acceptance by the online gambling websites of credit instruments of various kinds.

Any feedback from other gaming attorneys or subject matter experts in this field are always welcome....

US House panel clears anti-Internet gambling bill

The House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday March 15, approved a bill by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) that seeks to prohibit gambling establishments from accepting credit cards, checks, wire transfers, and electronic funds transfers in support of gaming transactions. The bill is aimed squarely at the $12 billion Internet gambling industry, which is located entirely offshore.

Under Leach’s proposed legislation, such prohibitions would include placing bets at online poker sites, and other wagers made or received via the internet in jurisdictions where these bets are illegal under federal or state law. Some exceptions carved out in Leach’s bill include betting on horse races, which is governed under the Interstate Horse Racing Act of 1978, and fantasy sports.

The bill now moves to the House floor for consideration.

According to Rep. Leach, "H.R. 4411 will create strong tools to help federal and state governments enforce existing gambling prohibitions. Unlike in brick-and-mortar casinos in the United States where legal protections for bettors exist and where there are some compensatory social benefit in jobs and tax revenues, Internet gambling sites principally yield only liabilities to Americans."

Leach’s words appears to be a call of sorts for legislation that would regulate online wagering. But his bill offers no regulatory solution whatsoever. Instead of regulating and taxing a growing, multi-billion dollar business, his approach seeks to eliminate it.

The efforts designed to outlaw online gaming appear to mirror our national effort to outlaw alcohol in an earlier era.

It was a law almost no one supported. It led to the growth of organized crime in this country. And in the end, it was simply repealed.

I’m hoping that this is not one of those lessons of history our nation is doomed to repeat.

Kyl's Attempt to Ban Internet Gaming

Latest reports say that Arizona Republican Senator Jon Kyl will try to attach his legislation S.AMDT.2953 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 to Senator Trent Lott's pending bill S.2349 Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2006.

This comes on the heels of a failed attempt to attach his amendment to a House Lobbying Reform act, but the sponsors stated that they did not want anything unrelated to their bill to be attached to the legislation.

Kyl's bill is not new. He has tried to pass bills that would ban internet gambling on numerous occasions, with no success. But now the climate may be a bit different.

The last time his bill was defeated it was due in large part to lobbying efforts by disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Kyl's strategy this time may be to attract support for his legislation as a way for his colleagues in the Senate and House to distance themselves from anything that Abramoff was involved with.

More on this as developments move forward.

Irreverent picture of the week: I wonder where they found this? 

Poker Author Challenge March 19 at the Taj in Atlantic City

I'll be at the Taj in Atlantic City next week, on March 19, to play in the first "Poker Author Challenge." If you'r going to be in Atlantic City during that time, please stop by and say "hello."

Poker Life, a hot new national poker lifestyle magazine from the publishers of Trump World, has gathered together the world’s leading poker authors for a one-day Texas Hold ‘em tournament extravaganza. “Poker Life’s ‘Poker Author Challenge’ is a unique event that lets the average player take on some of the biggest names in the game,” said Michael Jacobson, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Poker Life. “It gives everybody a chance to test their skills against poker greats and experience the action of the poker lifestyle firsthand.”

The tournament will be held on Sunday March 19th, in Atlantic City at Trump’s Taj Mahal Casino & Resort, and begins promptly at 6:15 PM in the casino’s legendary poker room. Preceding the tournament will be a special author meet-and-greet where players can speak with the experts and purchase autographed copies of the latest poker books. The featured book will be Secrets the Pros Won’t Tell You About Winning Hold’Em Poker by Lou Krieger and Sheree Bykofsky. Experts scheduled to attend include: Ashley Adams, Peter Alson, David Apostolico, Sheree Bykofsky, Mike Cappelletti, Gary Carson, Michael Craig, Greg Dinkin, Scott Harker, Anthony Holden, Susie Isaacs, Lou Krieger, Matt Lessinger, Neil D. Myers, Richard Sparks, Henry Stephenson, J. Phillip Vogel, and Kathy Watterson.

Unlike other major tournaments that cost thousands to enter, Poker Life has set the buy-in for this event at a reasonable $100 + $20. Not only will this attract more entrants—and increase the prize pool—but allow players of all levels to take part in the event. “We wanted to make sure that everybody has a chance to feel the thrill of playing against noted experts,” said Jacobson. “It’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.”

Players who would like to compete in the “Poker Author Challenge” may enter on March 19th, prior to the start of the tournament. For more information, players are encouraged to register early and to submit their name, address, and e-mail address to shereepoker@aol.com.

Another Analysis of the Goodlatte Bill

I received an email from Joshua Gardner who works for Edelman Public Relations in Washington DC. He sent it in response to one of my recent blog posts about the Goodlatte bill. Because Gardner’s email is so informative, I’m going to post it here in its entirety.

I wanted to fill you in on some new information about the recent Internet Gambling Prohibition Acts that are kicking around in Congress. Republican U.S. Representatives Bob Goodlatte and Jim Leach have introduced bills to essentially make online gambling, even poker, illegal for American Citizens. More than 70 million Americans play poker, some 23 million online.

Here is a recap of why the legislation is the wrong way to go.

The bill deputizes private-sector entities, most notably banks, to monitor our transactions.
The Leach bill directs the Treasury Department to ensure banks do not process payment for Internet gambling transactions. With respect to credit cards, this is simple enough, as credit card transactions are coded. However, with respect to Automated Clearing House transactions and electronic funds transfers, those are not coded, but the Leach bill will force banks to go to great lengths to investigate what is and isn’t an Internet gambling transaction. This will take “Know Your Customer” to a new level.

The Goodlatte bill accomplishes the same thing, but in a different way. It creates authority for the Department of Justice to go to court and seek injunctions to make financial institutions and others block such transactions, but the practical effect will be the same.

Goodlatte prohibits hyper-linking to certain web sites.
Under Goodlatte, if a particular site is found to be hyper-linking to an Internet gambling site, the ISP hosting that site is subject to notice-and-takedown requirements, presumably even if the link came through an ad server.

Goodlatte would take resources away from more important law enforcement missions such as stopping pornography and fighting terrorism and focus them on breaking up poker games.
Goodlatte wants to spend $10 million to enforce his bill’s provisions, but neglects to offer a way to get the money. There are limited funds available to Justice Department crime fighters. Do we really want to spend those resources on breaking up poker games?

Goodlatte bill’s is hypocritical in that it legalizes bets that DOJ considers illegal today under the patina of Internet gambling prohibition.
Goodlatte legalizes Interstate Internet horse bets that DOJ considers illegal today; the horse industry has consistently supported Goodlatte’s bills and have given generously to his campaign. The bill also affirmatively legalizes intra-state Internet wagers for commercial casinos, and other state-licensed entities. The bill isn’t really an Internet gambling prohibition act; it’s an Internet gambling industrial policy act.

Best,
Joshua Gardner

More About the Internet Gambling Dispute Between the USA and Antigua

A reader wrote to me regarding my recent blog entry about the World Trade Organization’s ruling on the online gambling dispute between Antigua and the USA.

He wrote: "I followed the WTO (Antigua/USA) case closely. It was not a big win for Antigua; in fact, it was a win (on points) for the USA. The WTO ruled that the USA can ban internet gambling for moral reasons, as long as they don't discriminate against Antiguan services. Because the USA currently allows some online horse racing betting, the WTO said that the USA could either legalize all such services (i.e., Antiguan horse race betting services) or ban all of them.

"If the Goodlatte bill were to ban all Internet gambling, it would NOT violate the WTO; in fact, it's one of two ways for the USA to come in to compliance with last year's ruling. The other means is for the USA to legalize offshore horse race betting."

He also suggested reading Chuck Humphrey's analysis of the WTO ruling at http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_frm/thread/212cda8f529c3d6e/bda81441bb949521?lnk=st&q=Antigua+humphrey+group%3Arec.gambling.poker&rnum=1&hl=en#bda81441bb949521.

Perhaps I was a bit overenthusiastic in my earlier take on this issue. I thought that Antigua walked away the winner, although I fully realize that even if the USA fails to comply with the WTO ruling, any sanctions imposed by Antigua will be merely symbolic, because they are such a small trading partner.

This seems to be an issue that has something for everyone, and the more you look into it, the more multifaceted it appears. If you want to get up to speed on these issues, there’s an excellent synopsis by Alan Beattie that appears in the Financial Times, and can be accessed at http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11445691/.

Regardless of how much time I spend thinking about this issue, I continue to come away convinced that attempts to outlaw internet gambling are doomed to failure regardless of whatever congressional intent may emerge as new legislation. You just can’t put a Maginot Line around the Internet. After all, the Internet, and the financial transactions that move across it, have no nationality and need no passport to cross a border.

Ted Forrest Wins National Heads-Up Poker Championship

Congratulations to Ted Forrest for winning the National Heads-Up Poker Championship this past Tuesday. Forrest beat a star-studded field that included Erik Seidel, Chad Brown, and Chris Ferguson on his way to the title. Chris "Jesus" Ferguson became a bridesmaid for the second straight year, having finished second to Phil Hellmuth last year.

Forrest, who came from behind in the best-of-three final, beat Ferguson to win the $500,000 first place prize.

Ferguson was disappointed, but had no regrets about his play, saying, “I would have absolutely loved, loved to win this. It's a very, very important championship, in my opinion. But you can't do it every year. I'm really proud of finishing second two years in a row. That's way harder than winning it once."

Forrest, who has been playing astonishingly good poker recently, was elated with his win. "The players here are all super-high caliber so it means a lot," he said.

The National Heads-Up Poker Championship will air on NBC as a ten hour series that begins on April 16th and ends in late May. Last year NBC also aired this show on their CNBC cable outlet, and if they follow suit, this show may also be viewable there too.

Lightweight vs. Heavyweight: Round Two

The small Caribbean nation of Antigua and Barbuda won a case in 2005 against the United States in the World Trade Organization. The dispute centered around the US prohibition on Internet gambling services offered to Americans from firms located in Antigua, and the United States was given until April 3, 2006 to bring its laws into compliance with the WTO decision.

But no legislation along these lines has been brought forth. In fact, the only legislation introduced into the Congress to date are bills sponsored by Congressmen Jim Leach (R-Iowa) and Bob Goodlatte (R-Virginia) that seek to impose additional restrictions on Internet gambling.

Antigua’s Ambassador to the World Trade Organization, Dr. John Ashe, in a letter dated February 16 to United States Trade Representative Robert (Rob) Portman, stated that both pieces of legislation are contrary to the WTO’s ruling.

Ambassador Ashe stated that, “As of today, with less than two months remaining on an 11 month and two week compliance period, to our knowledge no legislation has been introduced into the Congress that would seek to bring the United States into compliance with the recommendations. Further, your government has given no indication to Antigua and Barbuda as to how the United States intends to effect such compliance. . .”

Ambassador Ashe added that, “Antigua and Barbuda stands prepared to ensure that our people reap the benefits of this historic decision. We will use the avenues open to us at the WTO and otherwise to see that the United States complies with the decision in a timely and comprehensive manner. As always however, we encourage the United States government to engage with Antigua and Barbuda directly to craft a workable solution to our dispute that addresses the concerns of both nations.”

The climate on Capitol Hill appears completely contrary to Antigua’s hopes, especially since those opposed to Internet gambling no longer have to deal with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is facing prison time and no longer working against the anti-gambling activists.

Rep Goodlatte's bill would amend the Wire Act, a law that now makes gambling over telephone lines illegal, to include Internet gambling. Rep. Leach’s bill seeks to ban credit-card and other Internet financial transactions for betting.

Rep. Goodlatte’s bill has attracted more than 100 co-sponsors, although Internet-gambling companies opposing a ban are readying for a fight, and are much better armed than they were in 2000, when Rep. Goodlatte’s legislation was last introduced. Back then there were 1,800 Internet gambling Web sites. Internet gaming revenues were $5.7 billion in 2003 and projected to grow to $17 billion by 2009, according to a study by Christiansen Capital Advisors LLC, a firm that analyzes the gambling industry.

So while the forces line up on Capitol Hill to begin skirmishing, so do the possibilities of rematch between the small island nation of Antigua and the United States. This fight will take place at the World Trade Organization, and observers are predicating an outcome much the same as before, with Antigua receiving a favorable ruling and the WTO issuing a decision that would require the Untied States to enact legislation bringing it into compliance with their decision.

That, of course, is not remotely like the current legislative scenario, with legislation already introduced that would put the US at greater variance with the WTO decision. How that resolves itself is anyone’s guess. Right now it looks like David will beat Goliath, but whether that will be a real or pyrrhic victory remains to be seen.

When Raising or Folding is the Best Option and Calling is No Option At All

A friend of mine sent these questions to me. They’re interesting enough to answer here, and all of them deal with hands where folding or raising are better options than calling.

Question 1: I raised before the flop to open the betting from middle position. Only the big blind calls, and I have no real read on him. He bets out into me when a ragged but connected flop appears. What would you do?

Answer: I’ve got to think his bet on the flop is probably an attempt to steal the pot from you because he’s probably thinking that you raised with two big cards and were not helped by the flop at all. You can eliminate the possibility of his having flopped a set, because if he did, you wouldn’t hear from him until the turn.

While there’s always the chance the flop did hit him, it probably didn’t hit him hard enough to eliminate the possibilities of catching him if the turn pairs one of your big cards. This is one of those raise or fold scenarios, where calling is the only option that makes no sense at all. If you raise, you have to come out betting the turn regardless of what falls, so you are committing one small and one big bet to the confrontation. Folding allows you to get out with only the loss of your earlier raise. Calling only gets you a ticket to the turn, which doesn’t figure to help you.

My inclination would be to raise based on the supposition that your opponent is putting a play on you, and to come out betting the turn too. On the other hand, if he bets, you raise, and he reraises and you don’t have enough of a read on him to know whether he’s a raise-infected maniac, you’ll probably have to credit him with a real hand and fold yours.

Question 2: This is a similar situation. I raised before the flop with three or four opponents, and the flop is a three-flush that missed me. The blinds check, and early position player bets out and I am in late middle position with A-K. What would you do?

Answer: First of all, it’s not really a similar situation. You’ve got three or four callers and that changes a lot of the dynamics. With three or four callers you have to assume that the flop will have helped someone, and you can figure there is at least one player out there who is now drawing to a flush. It may not be the nut flush, but it might be good enough to keep playing, especially if no one raises. You have a very fine line to walk. Let’s look at the possibilities:

• If a fourth suited card were to turn, you are almost assuredly dead.
  
• You might already be dead to a made flush.
  
• The flop almost surely helped someone; your A-K is no longer in the lead.
  
• If someone flopped a pair and an ace comes, giving you top pair, it might also give someone two pair (the king could accomplish that too, though it is much less likely that someone would see the flop with K-x than with A-x, so an ace is a much more dangerous card for you).

To win this pot, you have to dodge a flush, catch an ace or a king that does not give someone else two pair, and say a little prayer that someone didn’t flop a flush and have you drawing pretty close to dead.

This hand is a clear fold. There are better spots to risk your money.

Question 3: I raise from early position with A-Q and only the big blind calls. The flop is K-x-x and he bets into me. Do you call here?

Answer: Nope. I won’t call. I’ll either fold or raise. This is another one of those hands where raising or folding are a lot better options than calling.

A lot of this decision is going to be predicated on your read of your opponent as well as how you think he reads you. If you raise and are not reraised, you can assume that your opponent does not have a good king, and if you come out betting on the turn you have a good chance of seizing control of the hand and winning the pot right there.

My Latest Book: Secrets the Pros Won't Tell You About Winning Hold'em Poker

The poker boom has resulted in a publishing bonanza for poker books, although the vast majority are instructionals, aimed at providing new players with enough strategy and tactics to allow them to survive, and maybe even win, in recreational poker games. Most of these books elucidate the game at its most basic level: how is it played; what beat's what; what's a good hand to start with, to raise with, or to fold.

My newest book, Secrets the Pros Won't Tell You About Winning Hold'em Poker, coauthored by Sheree Bykofsky, was released yesterday and is available now at all the usual book outlets. If you’ve become curious about multiple layers of the game that usually reveal themselves over time and only after much study, patience, experience, and deliberation, this is the book for you.

Although the information in this book is applicable to most poker games, the examples are drawn primarily from Texas hold'em, since this is the most important and widespread poker game played today. Professional players use strategies and tactics every day that most recreational players don't even know exist. This book was created to reveal to beginners and even good players an artful understanding of the game you love. Will it improve your play? Yes. And it is unique because there's not another book on the market that takes this tack and provides as complete an insight into poker's deeper levels.

Serious players are always looking for an edge. Moreover, the newer breed of poker player, those weaned on Internet poker sites and games in college dorms, are a studious breed. They're readers, computer literate, and many spend a significant amount of time harnessing their computers' capabilities to test poker theories-quite a departure from the old, back-room image of a cigar chewing gambler who never read anything that wasn't found in the racing form.

While there is no shortage of traditional, step-by-step "how-to" books that break poker down into it's simplest elements and provide tutorial information to beginning players, there is little, if anything in the market that gets to that deeper level that comprises poker at it's most strategic and sophisticated level of understanding.

It seems clear that Poker is now, more than ever, America's National Card Game, and perhaps it may even now claim the title of American's National Game.

Secrets the Pros Won't Tell You About Winning Hold'em Poker aims to turn you into professional-level players while enjoying an easy and fun read. Each of the concepts and playing strategies in this book is discussed and organized as part of a few broad themes: "Basic Concepts and Play, "Tactics, Strategies and Ploys, "Image," "Money," "Minimal Math, "Tournament Play," "Playing," and "Growing as a Player."

Tournament Poker Returns to Binion's

Binions Horseshoe announced that it will host The American Poker Player Championship later this spring. This tournament, which features two events scheduled for most days, marks the return of tournament poker to Binion’s, the former home of the World Series of Poker.

Dates are May 10-24, with buy-ins ranging from $330 to $5,300. Most of the events are in the $330 to $550 range, and satellites start at $100.

Entries will be capped at 800 players. The schedule follows.

May 10, 5 p.m: free no-limit media tournament
May 11, 11 a.m: $550 no-limit hold’em
May 11, 6 p.m: $330 Omaha high-low
May 12, 11 a.m: $550 no-limit hold’em bounty event
May 12, 6 p.m: $330 with $100 rebuys no-limit hold’em
May 13, 11 a.m: $1,075 no-limit hold’em
May 13, 6 p.m: $330 pot-limit Omaha high
May 14, 11 a.m: $550 limit hold’em
May 14, 6 p.m: $330 seven-card stud
May 15, 11 a.m: $550 no-limit hold’em
May 15, 6 p.m: $330 limit hold’em
May 16, 11 a.m: $550 no-limit hold’em bounty event
May 16, 6 p.m: $330 no-limit hold’em
May 17, 11 a.m: $550 no-limit hold’em
May 17, 6 p.m: $100 with $50 rebuys no-limit hold’em satellite
May 18, 11 a.m: $550 pot-limit Omaha high
May 18, 6 p.m: $100 with $50 rebuys no-limit hold’em satellites to main event
May 19, 11 a.m: $1,075 no-limit hold’em bounty event
May 19, 6 p.m: $330 no-limit hold’em
May 20, 11 a.m. $330 no-limit ladies event
May 20, 4 p.m: $550 limit hold’em
May 21, 11 a.m: $200 with $100 rebuys no-limit hold’em satellite to main event
May 21, 4 p.m: $200 with $100 re-buys nolimit hold’em satellite to main event
May 22, 11 a.m: $5,300 no-limit hold’em championship event
May, 22, 6 p.m: $100 with $50 rebuys no-limit hold’em satellite
May 23, 2 p.m: $1,075 no-limit hold’em
May 23, 6 p.m: $100 with $50 rebuys no-limit hold’em satellite
May 24, 11 a.m: $1,075 no-limit hold’em

Lightning Strikes Twice? Justin Bonomo and Multi-Account Cheating

(The story that follows was contributed and written by poker player Haley Hintze. Thanks to Haley for a terrific job of researching and writing this story.)

Last week it was JJProdigy. This week, ZeeJustin.

Yes, it happened again.In a rapid replay of the event sequence that outed online poker whiz "JJProdigy" as a multi-account cheater, Justin Bonomo (known online as "ZeeJustin") became the latest big Internet name to fall. In each instance the basics were the same, with questionable "insider knowledge" postings on poker discussion forums tipping off third parties that something was amiss.

Ultimately, both players were found to have used multiple accounts simultaneously on Party Poker and other sites, and both players suffered hefty seizures of funds from their illicitly created accounts. However, it’s important to note that Bonomo had created not two Party Poker accounts (as withJJProdigy), but six.

For those of you who might have been cheated by ZeeJustin, here are his multiple account names:

ZeeJustin
IBLUFFUOUT69
jwilson55
vapoker58
mehsab
greenb272

As with JJProdigy, Bonomo admitted his guilt but offered a curious and logically twisted explanation for his actions. Bonomo pointed out purported software "bugs" that allowed multiple accounts to participate in games simultaneously, thereby offering precedent, if not true justification. But the real motivator, of course, was greed.

The following is quoted directly from Bonomo’s "MyStatement" explanation, which appeared on the 2+2 forums shortly after the story broke: "First of all, the accounts were NOT created solely for MTT use. They were originally created for SNG play. It got to the point where everyone knew that ZeeJustin would steal the blinds often, and everyone called him liberally. I created these accounts to erase this loose image. Everyone would be readless against me, and it was a huge advantage. These accounts all did very well in the big SNGs onPartyPoker."

Are all online games crooked? Of course not. The vast majority are as honest as anything you’ll find in your local brick-‘n’-mortar casino. Yet angle shooters come in all sizes and types… and in allvenues, too, and this is just an angle that applies particularly to online poker. Rest assured that the quick one-two punch that sent these two big Internet pokernames crashing down has virtually all of the onlinesites reevaluating --- and strengthening --- their security measures to prevent more multi-account cheating. As long as there are games, there will be cheaters. But eventually, the cheaters and their cheats are found out.