Asian Poker Tour Announces 2008 Schedule

The Asian Poker Tour announced its 2008 schedule with four events beginning in the Philippines from May 27 to June 1 and followed by similar events in Macau (pictured left), Asia’s gambling capital, South Korea, and Singapore—the last leg of the Tour.

Each tournament will offer a $1 million guaranteed prize pool, along with internet qualifiers to ensure that online players can enter through affordable satellites.

The opening APT leg in Manila will feature 400 players and six days of poker. The buy-in is $2,500—but the online satellites will include an all-expenses paid trip as well as the buy-in.

Similar prices will be set for the other three events, though venues and dates for the last three events have yet to be announced. From the four events that will take place this year, the Asian Poker Tour plans to expand to a total of six events in 2009.

'Tis a Dreech Day, Lads and Lassies

Sometimes you just have to watch and wait—and even then nothing happens.

I left a small no-limit hold’em game Saturday night when my name was called for a $25-$50 limit hold’em game—yes, I know, that’s a strange limit, but the tribal gaming commission where I play won’t authorize ten-dollar chips in the poker room, and $30-$60 or $40-$80 games can’t be played with five-dollar chips!

The new game had all the makings of being very live. There were two players sitting down with more money than poker sense, and both were dedicated callers. Another opponent was a player who frequently went on tilt and threw off lots of money if he suffered what he considered a bad-beat.

My eyes saw plenty of potential dead money in this game, and I was game for my fair share. I knew it would be one of these ultra basic games. Sophisticated moves and bluffing wouldn’t work, not with two table sheriffs in the game, bound and determined to sleep well that night knowing that no one was able to steal a pot on their watch.

My plan was to sit and wait until I had big hands, and then bet into the callers, or checkraise the aggressive players, until I won a bigger pot than I had any right to expect had my opponents not been prone to toss good money after bad. I also planned to bet my good draws aggressively in order to provide some cover for those times when I’d be betting my good hands, and to build bigger pots that would keep the table sheriffs calling, based on their “in for a penny; in for a pound” playing styles.

Sounds like a good plan. At least I liked it. However, even "The Best Laid Plans O' Mice and Men Gang Aft Agley," as (pictured left) poet Robert Burns (1759-1796) said. My plans went aft agley too. I couldn’t catch a hand, and had to sit and watch big pots won by others at the table who were fortunate enough to make a decent hand or two and rake in money from the table sheriffs and another player or two who made multiple errors and displayed very obvious leaks in their games.

As for my evening, I did win two pots, which allowed me to book a two-hundred dollar loss for my stint at the table—which in a $25-$50 game is really small change. But it was frustrating—sitting watching and waiting, knowing there’s nothing I could have done differently. I couldn’t bluff; I’d have been called and lost even more money. So I just treated it for what it was: A dreech day.

Dreech is Scots Gaelic for when the sky is slate grey and the rain persists for hours and makes you want to curl up and slit your wrists. It’s not pronounced like “beach;” rather the “ch” is guttural, like you’re clearing your throat, commenting on somone's "chutzpah," or cursing in Yiddish at someone you despise.

Sometimes even when you exercise all the discipline you’re required to in order to minimize a loss, it doesn’t feel good at all—although writing about it helps.

Proposed UIGEA Regulations: Burden without Benefit?

Washington, DC—Representative Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL), chairman of the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology (pictured right) announced that his subcommittee will hold a hearing to discuss proposed regulations to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) on Wednesday, April 2, 2008 at 10:00 a.m.

This is a subcommittee to the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank, an outspoken opponent of UIGEA, who introduced the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, a bill that seeks to overturn UIGEA and legalize online gambling by establishing a system to regulate the industry.

Under Frank’s bill licensing provisions would be established to guard against the four bugaboos cited as reasons to support UIGEA: underage gambling, compulsive gambling, money laundering and fraud.

If Frank’s bill were to be enacted, online gambling operators would be licensed subject to a review of their financial condition, corporate structure, and criminal background. The bill also gives the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network authority to establish regulations and to license internet based poker and casino web sites.

The title of the hearing is Proposed UIGEA Regulations: Burden without Benefit? The title pretty much sums up this issue as far as I’m concerned.

One Terrific New Book; Two Terrific Upcoming Guests

Last Thursday, March 27, my guest on Keep Flopping Aces, my Internet radio show that broadcasts every Thursday night at 6 p.m. Pacific Time (9 p.m. EST) on Rounder’s Radio, was Nick Christenson, who along with Russ Fox authored the just-released book Winning Strategies for No-Limit Hold’em.

The book is incredibly well-written, which makes it easily understandable for all readers, including those players who are just beginning to make the transition form fixed-limit to no-limit cash games.

Thei authors overriding themes are that every hand tells a story, and that astute players need to base strategic decisions on stories as they unfold at the poker table. They also discuss playing styles, the immense differences between no-limit games with a capped buy-in and those that are deep-stack games, and playing small-ball poker

The other major theme is bet sizing, a topic they devote 70 pages to, and it’s well worth reading. I have no vested interest in this book, but it is a terrific addition to the poker literature and is a book that all no-limit players ought to read.

Winning Strategies for No-Limit Hold’em is one of the best poker books I’ve come across in a long time, and I highly recommend it. You can go to http://www.roundersradio.com/ and listen to my interview with Nick Christenson.

This week, April 3, my guests will be the First Lady of Poker, Linda Johnson and Jan Fisher (pictured at a press conference in Singapore a few weeks ago). There’s almost nothing the tow of them haven’t done in the poker world, playing, dealing, tournament directing, winning a WSOP bracelet, publishing a magazine, running a poker cruise business, and they’re now involved in bringing poker to Asia.

I’ve know Linda and Jan for nearly 20 years, so this should be a terrific show—with a look down memory land as well as a look into poker crystal ball for what the future holds.

Tune in. You’ll enjoy it.

"Winning Strategies for No-Limit Hold’em" author Nick Christenson on Rounder's Radio this Thursday

9 p.m. p.m.8Nick Christenson, coauthor of Winning Strategies for No-Limit Hold’em with Russ Fox, will be my guest on Keep Flopping Aces, my Internet radio show that airs on Rounder's Radio this Thursday night.

According to a review penned by Gambler's Book Store proprietor Howard Schwartz, this book a book "... could be this year’s blockbuster." According to Schwartz, Winning Strategies for No-Limit Hold’em "... focuses on some advanced concepts that few books have yet covered in depth."

These are words of high praise coming from a guy who sells more poker books in a year than anyone else, and I'm looking forward to having Nick Christenson on my show. If you get a chance, it's this Thursday night at

p.m. PST, (9 p.m. EST) and you can listen to it by pointing your browser to http://www.roundersradio.com/.

If you're unable to listen in real time, the show will be archived for later listening and available as an i-Tunes podcast.

FOUR QUEENS OF POKER TELEWEBCAST HONORS INAUGURAL INDUCTEES INTO THE WOMEN IN POKER HALL OF FAME

Phyllis Caro, The International Poker Institute (IPI), and the International Poker Education Network ("PEN), announced the "Four Queens of Poker" interactive tele-Webcast, a free event to be held as a live teleconference on Tuesday, April 1st at 6:00 PM Pacific / 9:00 PM Eastern.

This event celebrates the newly formed Women in Poker Hall of Fame and includes inaugural inductees Linda Johnson, Marsha Waggoner, Susie Isaacs and Barbara Enright.

"All of these amazing women have been my friends and colleagues for many years," said Phyllis Caro—herself an award-winning poker legend. ”I didn't want their induction into the Women in Poker Hall of Fame to be just a one-night affair. Since it's almost impossible to find them together in the same place at the same time, I figured that we could put teleconferencing and Internet technology to work to bring them all together, virtually, for an interview that can be attended and listened to live by anyone, anywhere around the world."

Those interested in attending this event can learn more, register, and even submit their questions in advance to any of the Queens by visiting:

http://www.FourQueensOfPoker.net

This free teleconference will also be audiocast live on the Web, making it possible for anyone with a telephone or Internet connection to participate in the live call.

Salomon Responds to Pam Anderson's Divorce Filing With One of His Own

Professional poker player Rick Salomon responded to estranged wife Pamela Anderson's divorce filing with one of his own. After Pam filed to have the two-month marriage annulled by reason of fraud, Salomon responded with papers that also argued that the marriage was fraudulent, although neither party specified the nature of the fraud.

Salomon and Anderson met during a poker session where Anderson lost $250,000. To settle the debt, Anderson proposed that she and Salomon have sex.Soon they were engaged and then married last October, following a whirlwind romance that started with a night of prostitution.

But it was all over in a hurry, and the couple had split by December. Anderson began divorce proceedings shortly thereafter.

Salomon, the son of a former vice-president at Warner Brothers, was previously married to actresses Elizabeth Daily and Shannon Doherty, and had his 15 minutes of fame starring in One Night in Paris, the famous Paris Hilton sex tape. Former Baywatch star Anderson was previously married to Tommy Lee and Kid Rock—the latter a three-month quickie.

Anderson’s been involved with poker off-and-on, and once was a spokesperson for Doyle’s Room. But her flirtations with poker seem to last only about as long as her marriages.

The over/under on a Pam Anderson marriage or poker commitment seems to be about three months.Will she turn up again at this year’s World Series of Poker, on the lookout for a high-stakes game or a new man in her life? We can only watch and wait.

Sonoma County (California) Indian Tribe Shares the Wealth With Employees

The Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians, one of Sonoma County’s largest employers with 826 employees, shared the wealth when they received a $220,831 reimbursement check from their workers compensation insurer for their superior workplace safety record.

As a sovereign nation, the Tribe has a workers compensation ordinance that mirrors the California workers comp statute. For 2005-2006 the Tribe’s claims were 75 percent less than the industry average, triggering the reimbursement.

The Tribe learned of its reimbursement just as it learned that health care costs for its employees would rise significantly beginning April 1, 2008. Smith’s benefits manager, Kim Nelson, recommended that the savings be passed on to the workers themselves to offset the higher healthcare insurance premiums, and the Tribe’s Board of Directors immediately agreed.

“We are pleased to be able to do this for our employees, including 97 employees who are Tribal Members,” said Harvey Hopkins, Chair of the Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians. “Their hard work makes our economic development programs successful, and those programs fund the education, health, and housing programs for the entire Tribe.”

With all the rancor surrounding Indian gaming in California, this kind of feel-good story shows everyone he benefits of responsible employers sharing the benefits with their employees.

University Study Proves Poker is a Game of Skill, Not Luck

While courts here and abroad have lately been deciding that poker is a “game of luck,” science has decided it’s a “game of skill,” and backed up their opinion with hard evidence to prove it. Michael DeDonno (pictured right), a doctoral student from Case Western Reserve University has evidence that supports skill over luck in poker’s age-old debate.

Based on two poker-related studies, DeDonno found that skill trumps luck, although the bigger issue of whether DeDonno’s findings will help in subsequent court challenges is still an open issue.

DeDonno and Case Western Reserve psychologist Douglas Detterman asked 41 college students to play eight games of Wilson’s Turbo Texas Hold’em, a computerized hold’em simulation. Participants were dealt a total of 200 hands each, and received two cards face down. If participants chose to play, a flop was dealt. This was repeated until the player either chose to fold on one of the subsequent wagering rounds or the hand went to a showdown on the river.

Half of the students—the majority of whom had little experience playing poker—were given charts that ranked the two-card combinations from best to the worst, and were told that professional poker players typically play about 15 percent of the hands dealt them. The other group was given some background on the history of poker, but no strategy assistance at all.

Those participants receiving strategic assistance did better than those without the strategies.

"If it had been pure luck in winning, then the strategies would not have made a difference for the two groups," said DeDonno.

DeDonno then undertook a second study. This time students played 720 hands. Groups were once again divided into those receiving strategic assistance and those who were given historical information about poker.

While all students improved their play with practice over the large number of hands, the group given strategies performed better.

He also found that students reduced the average number of hands played at the beginning (27) to 15 hands after given strategies, which improved their games and validated that "… fewer hands does result in improved performance."

According to DeDonno, using poker strategies has some real life applications in such areas as investments and buying a home where partial information is available. He also discovered that the poker simulation has applications in psychological testing for decision making and risk taking.

This is something most poker players know intuitively, never mind a good answer to players who challenge me with the “Why should I buy one of your books? I know it all already,” query.

Now, if only the courts and politicians would open their eyes and minds …

Lots of corrections on my March 11 post

Sometimes you get things wrong, and when you do--as I did in my March 11 post--clarifying the situation is the best course of action.

Robert Woolley, who blogs as Poker Grump, had this to say after reading my blog

"I saw your recent blog post about the iMEGA case. I think you got quite a bit wrong, factually. I put up a rather extensive and no-holds-barred critique at my blog, see http://pokergrump.blogspot.com/2008/03/lies-and-confusion-about-imega-case.html. If you care to reply to my criticisms, I’d be happy to post whatever you have to say, or put up a pointer back to your blog if you would prefer to post about it there."

He wasn’t the only one to contact me regarding my mischaracterizing Judge Mary L. Cooper, of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, as a “Supreme Court Justice.” Dunno what I was thinking, but I got it wrong, and I’d like to thank everybody who caught that error and took the time to notify me about it for keeping me on track.

Poker Grump had a lot to say about the spin iMEGA put on Judge Cooper’s decision. Here’s some of it:

"The first--and quite possibly last--major decision about the case was issued on March 4. You can read it here: http://www.imega.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/imega-v-gonzales-et-al_3608.pdf. Here's the Reader's Digest condensed version: The government attempted to have the case dismissed first because, it said, iMEGA had no legal "standing" to bring the suit. To oversimplify, in order to bring a lawsuit attempting to prevent enforcement of a criminal statute, you have to show that you are actually in potential danger of being prosecuted under it. iMEGA defeated the government's argument on this point; the judge found that the association did, in fact, have sufficient standing to challenge the law, because "a plain reading of the UIGEA reveals that its prohibitions could easily apply to the to the actions of the plaintiff's member businesses.

"But that was the end of their victories. The government next argued that even if iMEGA had standing, every one of their claims was legally invalid, to the point that they didn't even need to have a trial to determine any disputed facts. The judge agreed with them down the line, on every item; every claim that iMEGA made about the alleged unconstitutionality or unenforceability of the statute was shot down decisively.

"It's important, I think, to note the legal standard in play: For a motion to dismiss at this early point, the judge is required to assume that all of the facts claimed in the plaintiff's suit are actually true. The legal question is, essentially, "Even if everything the plaintiff says is true, can they possibly win on the legal arguments?" Her answer was no. The case has been dismissed. iMEGA's press release says that they plan an appeal, but I'd lay 10:1 against an appeal being successful, after reading the district court's decision. The claims iMEGA makes are just horribly weak and implausible.

"(I suppose I have to add the disclaimer that I think the UIGEA is stupid and bad public policy. But that doesn't mean that it's unconstitutional, or that any lawsuit brought against it should, by rights, prevail, if the suit is based on bad legal arguments, as this one was.)

"Now let's look at the incredible PR spin job that iMEGA does with this whopping defeat: http://www.imega.org/2008/03/07/court-grants-imega-standing-to-challenge-flawed-online-gaming-law/. First, they say that they "applaud" the decision. Well, that's interesting, since they LOST. Their attorney spouts the nonsense that the standing portion of the decision is a "major victory." Hogwash. Standing is not that difficult to establish. And it's a purely pyrrhic victory if, after having standing acknowledged, you lose on every one of the merits of your case before you even get to trial.

"iMEGA's press release next quotes their lead attorney, Eric Bernstein, as saying, 'Judge Cooper’s ruling holds that, even with the passage of UIGEA, online gambling is only illegal in states where a statute specifically says it is.'

"No, it doesn't. First, we need to make clear what it means when a judge "holds" something or other. That word means not that the judge made some offhand comment in the text of the decision, but that a question was squarely put to and decided by the court. Court decisions can be reduced to three parts: "findings" (where there are disputed facts, the judge decides which ones to accept and reject), "holdings" (substantive decision on the disputes as to the meaning or application of law), and "dicta" (everything else). There is simply no holding in this case anything like what Mr. Bernstein claims.

"As far as I can find, the closest the court came to any such statement is as a presumption (based on a plain reading of the statute) while making another point entirely, about whether the plaintiff's First Amendment rights of free expression are hindered by the UIGEA: "The plaintiff has not identified, and the Court does not discern, any 'communicative element' inherent in the only conduct criminalized by UIGEA--the taking of another's money.... Also, as UIGEA only has potential application if a bet or wager is otherwise unlawful where initiated or received, the plaintiff cannot claim any First Amendment protections for conduct--in accepting the funds for that bet or wager--that essentially facilitates another's criminal act." (Emphasis added.)

"If a non-attorney read this and said that it was a "holding" of the court that the UIGEA only prohibited conduct that was already illegal under relevant state law, I could easily dismiss it as a misunderstanding. But Mr. Bernstein knows full well how to distinguish a court's holdings from its incidental statements. What he claims as the former is unarguably the latter. In short, he is lying through his teeth."

It’s probably worth reading Poker Grump’s entire post. Though spins, like beauty, are probably found in the eye of the beholder, I’m thankful for Woolley’s note to me to correct my factual error and for his interpretation of what transpired in that case. Thanks, too, to everyone else who also emailed me with corrections.

Congressman Calls for US to Provide Details of WTO Internet Gambling Settlement

Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) called for the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to disclose trade concessions made to foreign trading partners without Congressional approval.

DeFazio’s inquiry raises the possibility of Congressional intervention to void new market access commitments granted by USTR to the European Union and other complainants as compensation for a United States trade violation regarding Internet gambling.

In a letter circulated to all members of Congress last week, DeFazio encouraged his colleagues to join him in calling for the USTR to provide a copy of the concession agreement between the United States and the European Union.

The USTR recently rejected a Freedom of Information Act request for the same document, claiming that it was classified for national security reasons. “There is a concern that the USTR may have been ambitious in its use of a ‘national security’ classification to avoid any publicity of which new business sectors are to be subject to the GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) treaty,” said DeFazio’s March 6 letter.

Congressman DeFazio’s request suggests that the Administration’s unilateral action to attempt to resolve the WTO Internet gambling dispute is in jeopardy. “The issue will be whether the USTR abused its authority by granting new market access to the EU without first securing the consent of the trade committees in Congress,” said Nao Matsukata, formerly Director of Policy Planning for USTR Robert Zoellick. “Ultimately, this could invalidate the deal with the EU and cause various WTO Members to revisit the issue of fair compensation from the United States."

DeFazio’s request follows a contentious trade dispute over Internet gambling, in which Antigua challenged the regulation of Internet gambling in the United States. The European Union announced earlier this week that it will open an investigation into a possible international trade violation by the US on this issue, based on a Trade Barriers Regulation complaint filed by the Remote Gambling Association (RGA), an organization that represents the largest remote gambling companies in Europe.

RGA claims the US is in violation of international trade law by threatening and pursuing criminal prosecutions, forfeitures and other enforcement actions against foreign Internet gaming operators, while allowing domestic U.S. online gaming operators, primarily horse betting, to flourish.

Legislation introduced by Representative Barney Frank (D-MA), the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (H.R. 2046), would regulate Internet gambling and resolve the international trade dispute.

“Rather than paying out millions in trade concessions, which would have an adverse impact on the American economy, the US should embrace the legislative solution presented by the Frank bill, which brings the U.S. into compliance by regulating Internet gambling and creating a level playing field among domestic and foreign Internet gambling operators,” said Jeffrey Sandman, spokesperson of the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative.

He added, “Congress should have been consulted before the US agreed to these trade concessions. We hope that Mr. DeFazio’s colleagues will join him in demanding more transparency, communication, and consultation from the Administration on Internet gambling. A non-discriminatory market for Internet gambling in the United States will restore integrity to the international trading system.”

Banks Will Not be Held Liable for Failing to Stop Online Gaming Transactions

Criminal liability for banks that are unable to stop online gambling transactions was removed by a US Supreme Court Judge in a decision that is unlikely to be appealed. This came about when an independent trade organization, iMEGA.org, challenged the enforcement provisions of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA).

Most experts are of the opinion that the US Government will not appeal the decision that banks should be held criminally liable for something the industry insists they have no control over.

An 11-page letter drafted by the American Banking Association (ABA) and submitted to the US Treasury in December states: "ABA believes that the proposal, in large part due to the nature of the statute itself, will fail to create a practical process for intercepting prohibited conduct that maintains an efficiently functioning payments system."

The letter also said that "....UIGEA will in the end catch more banks in a compliance trap and do greater damage to the competitiveness of the American payments system, than it will stop gambling enterprises from profiting on illegal wagering."

iMEGA insisted all along that this unfunded mandate was viewed as "deputizing" the banking institutions as a means of policing online gambling, but without providing the weapons to do so.

The document asserts: "In other words, in the view of the drafters of the legislation, all the sophistication of the FBI, Secret Service, and other police computerized detection systems and investigative expertise devoted to fighting terrorism and financial crime are inadequate to the task of apprehending the unlawful gambling business or confiscating its revenues. ABA believes that punting this obligation to the participants in the US payment system is an unprecedented delegation of governmental responsibility with no prospect of practical success in exchange for all the burden it imposes."

The US Government, when asked to comment on the decision last week, responded that they would not be doing so.

Meanwhile, Congressman Barney Frank’s Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, which was introduced early last year, will go to a committee hearing in Congress this spring.

According to a spokesperson for Frank (pictured left), a hearing in the House Financial Services Committee had been scheduled for early April. This news comes as Congressman Jim McDermott announced the reintroduction of a taxation bill for legalized internet gambling.

Michael Waxman, of the Washington based lobby group Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative said that the legislation, which is designed to accompany Frank’s bill, is the result of a long-term plan to introduce a taxation regime that PriceWaterhouseCoopers estimates could bring in revenues of between $8 billion and $42 billion.

Waxman said: “It is a similar bill to last year’s, and McDermott has taken some of what he has learned in the last year and put it into this bill. The most important thing is that this is a powerful statement and will educate members of Congress in why regulated internet gambling is the way forward.”

An Internet Gaming Trade Dispute that Won't Go Away

The European Union will investigate possible international trade violations by the United States for discriminatory trade practices against European online gambling companies.

The European Union 's investigation follows a contentious trade dispute over Internet gambling, in which Antigua successfully challenged the regulation of Internet gambling in the United States. During the WTO dispute last year, Mandelson stated that the U.S. Congress should consider opening its market to overseas operators. “I think (US cogresman Barney Frank's proosed legisation) takes a fair-minded, common sense approach to this and we look forward to that being effective legislation,” said Mandelson in an interview with Reuters.

"The U.S. has the right to address legitimate public policy concerns relating to Internet gambling, but discrimination against E.U. companies cannot be part of the policy mix," said E.U. Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson. "We are interested in a constructive and mutually satisfactory solution to this issue."

The investigation by the E.U. is the result of a Trade Barrier Regulation complaint filed by the Remote Gambling Association (RGA), which represents the largest remote gambling companies in Europe. The RGA claims the United States is in violation of international trade law by threatening and pursuing criminal prosecutions, forfeitures and other enforcement actions against foreign Internet gambling operators, while allowing domestic U.S. online gambling operators, primarily horse betting, to flourish.

“The EU investigation only highlights the reckless manner in which the U.S. has handled its withdrawal of gaming commitments under the GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services),” said Nao Matsukata, formerly Director of Policy Planning for USTR Robert Zoellick and now a Senior Advisor for Alston & Bird, LLP. “This situation would not be possible if the United States had chosen to resolve the GATS dispute from the beginning by appropriately changing U.S. law and adopting the Frank bill."

"To move into a formal investigation reflects the E.U.’s belief that this matter is serious enough for them to put at risk the larger transatlantic relationship and other positive developments in the bilateral trade relationship,” Matsukata added.

A solution to this international trade dispute is contained in the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (H.R. 2046), introduced by Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA). This legislation would bring the United States into compliance with World Trade Organization (WTO) requirements by regulating Internet gambling and creating a level playing field among domestic and foreign Internet gambling operators.

“It is time for the U.S. to end its hypocritical practices that discriminate against foreign online gambling operators, while allowing U.S. gambling operators to accept bets for certain forms of gambling,” said Jeffrey Sandman, spokesperson for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative. “Regulating Internet gambling should be supported as a means of resolving this trade dispute, protecting consumers and ensuring that billions of dollars in taxes are collected for critical government programs.”

After the investigation, the E.U. could pursue discussions with the U.S. to find an appropriate solution to end the discrimination. If the parties cannot settle the matter themselves, the E.U. could bring a case against the U.S. to the WTO.

Mexican Riviera Cruise ... Teriffic, as Usual

I planned on blogging this past week from the Sunshine Players Group poker cruise to the Mexican Riviera, but never counted on the fact that the charge for Internet access onboard the ship was fifty-five cents per minute, and I didn’t want to spend any of our precious shore time typing away in an Internet café.

As it is, between my wife’s time on line and my need to keep abreast of the goings on at Poker Player Newspaper—I’m the editor; I had to keep in touch—we wound up spending more money for a few hour’s online time than we do back home for a month’s worth of Verizon’s high-speed fiber optic Internet service.

The cruise was terrific … as usual. This was my fourth Mexican Riviera cruise and the eleventh or twelfth cruise I’ve taken. For us, the highlight was Puerto Vallarta. Although no stranger to the area, on each of my previous visits I took some sort of water based tour—snorkeling, sail boating, that sort of thing—but this time Bob Corona, who ran the poker room on the cruise, his wife Katt, Deirdre, and I grabbed a van on the pier for a really thorough tour of the area.
Puerto Vallarta is incredibly posh, with some homes going for more than $10 million, and that’s dollars, not pesos! It looks to be a terrific place to spend a week. The old section of the city, with its cobbled streets, restaurants, clubs, shops and street life is adjacent to the beach, a long walkway filled with sand sculptures and people just laying out in the warm sun. It’s surrounded by jungle, rivers, lots to do, and judging from some of the signs posted on café bulletin boards, rentals are not all that expensive, so who knows—we might decide to head off there for a week or so sometime in the future.

It’s too bad there are no casinos in Mexico. If you could put a casino anywhere in Mexico, Puerto Vallarta, with its myriad resorts, second homes, and lots of disposable income, would be an ideal spot. And yes, I’d love to run a poker room down there.

I gave two poker seminars during the days we were at sea, which were well-attended and judging from the feedback, players liked them. It’s tough gearing a seminar for an audience when there is a wide spectrum of poker-playing experience among the group. So I included a lot of material for beginners, along with some material for advanced players too. Many of the questions centered on making the transition form fixed-limit play to no-limit, so I guess there are still a lot of players who have yet to make the jump to big-bet poker.

My poker-playing run on this trip was amazing. For the entire duration of the trip I did not have a single losing session. I won every day I played, which was every day of the entire seven-day cruise. Deirdre, who really isn’t that avid a poker player, managed to knock me out of the second tournament in fourth place. Then she proceeded to use my chips to propel herself to a second place finish. A day later I evened the score, knocking her out and winning the third and final tournament event.

How often do husband and wife knock each other out on successive days at a tournament’s final table? I don’t know, but it can’t happen all that often.

As usual, we loved our cruise. It was a great week, poker every evening and all day during the three days we were at sea, and in the process we made a lot of new friends and managed to renew a few old acquaintances too. If you opt for a poker cruise vacation, you’ll have a grand time too.

You can book a poker cruise at
Sunshine Players Group

21021 Barclay
Lake Forest, California 92630

1-949 597-1259
1-888-842-0212
Fax 1-949-206-1734

You’ll enjoy yourself if you do. I guarantee it.

The pictures:

Left ... old city, Mazatlan, which looks like it was transported from New Orleans' French Quarter.

Center ... Deirdre and I are about to go on a tour of a place where they make tequila.

Right ... Cliff diver suspended in the air, diving in Mazatlan.

Poker Cruise Today

I haven't been on a poker cruise in a long time, but we're leaving today for a seven-day Mexican Riviera cruise. It's one I've done a couple of times before, and I love it. For me it's an easy commute--just a two-hour drive from Palm Springs to Los Angeles instead of a long flight to either Florida or Seattle--where so many other cruises depart from.

We leave Los Angeles at 5:00 pm Sunday, and return 7 am Sunday morning. This cruise is run by Sunshine Poker Cruises, a relative newcomer to the cruise business. They operate a spacious non-smoking poker room accommodating 8 to 10 poker tables with a professional and friendly staff.

I'll be on hand to play and give a few poker seminars, sell and sign books, and have a grand time in the process. Ports of Call include Cabo San Lucas on Tuesday from 10:30 am to 6:00 p.m., Mazatlan on Wednesday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 pm, and Puerto Vallarta on Thursday from 8:00 am to 8 p.m.

I'll have my computer with me, so I suppose I'll post something to my blog during one or two of the days at sea, but I hope to be blissfully out of touch with most of the world for much of the week.

Ports of call and poker ... about as good as it gets.