Kentucky Court Grants Continuance in Governor's Effort to Seize 141 Internet Gaming Domain Names

The Franklin County, Kentucky, Circuit Court today granted a continuance in the case brought by Governor Steve Beshear (pictured right) that sought to seize 141 Internet gambling domain names, including all of the popular poker sites where you play.

John Pappas, executive director of the poker grassroots advocacy group Poker Players Alliance (PPA), issued this statement following Court’s granting a continuance in the case.

“The Poker Players Alliance is pleased that the court decided to allow for a full review of this case, including arguments from both sides. Until this point, the state and its hired gun class-action attorneys have acted in an ex parte fashion—only presenting one side of the argument to the court. The continuance granted today will ensure all the cards are on the table and allow the current owners of the domain names of the 141 websites to retain ownership in the interim.

“The PPA believes that a thorough review of the facts of the case will result in a favorable outcome for the thousands of Kentucky residents who play online poker.

“We will continue to communicate our position with Governor Beshear and other state elected officials through our grassroots network, and we look forward to working with them and other interested parties as this case moves forward.”

The PPA is a national organization with a membership of more than one million; 13,000 members reside in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

There’s more to come on this issue—much more, in fact—and I’ll report on it as developments occur.

Poker Players Alliance Weighs In on Kentucky's Seizure of Gaming Website Domain Names

John Pappas (pictured right) , executive director of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nation-wide and more than 13,000 members in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, issued the following statement about Kentucky's seizure of Internet gambling website domain names:

“The Poker Players Alliance is outraged at the actions taken by Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear and the Franklin County Circuit Court to seize the domain names of Internet gambling websites. We believe this action not only unduly restricts the freedom of Kentucky residents to play games of skill, such as poker, online, but sets a precedent for censorship of the Internet by force.

“Many of Governor Beshear’s arguments – that online poker is illegal, unregulated and without a mechanism to capture tax revenue – are false. Online poker is not illegal under Kentucky law, is regulated in its home jurisdiction and the Commonwealth of Kentucky chose not to license and regulate poker websites.

“If the Governor truly wants to implement tighter regulations, taxation mechanisms and consumer protections on Internet gambling, the PPA suggests he publicly support federal legislation by U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, H.R. 2460, which would achieve those goals

“Poker is a game of skill, a true American pastime and has a proud heritage in Kentucky. Simply because the game has evolved into the 21st Century, it should not be treated as suspect activity. Forcefully and secretly seizing control of websites that offer online poker games is not a sound public policy or a sound legal solution.”

Kentucky Court Orders Seizure of 141 Internet Gaming Domain Names

According to a report by GamingIntelligenceGroup.com, the Commonwealth of Kentucky secured a court order for the seizure and forfeiture of 141 internet domain names “…used to promote illegal gambling within the state.”

The court found probable cause to believe the domain names were used in connection with illegal gambling within Kentucky, and found sufficient basis to order their seizure.

Among the 141 names are absolutepoker.com, bugsyclub.com, cakepoker.com, doylesroom.com, fulltiltpoker.com, pokerstars.com, pokertime.com, royalvegas.com, truepoker.com, ultimatebet.com, and microgaming.com.

The full list of names can be found at http://gamingintelligencegroup.com/gig/content/view/1389/2/.

Since all of these sites are located offshore, we’ll see what happens next.

Laying Down Top Pair, Top Kicker in No-Limit Hold'em

Still the most common error I see players making in no-limit hold’em cash games is a willingness to go all-in with top pair, top kicker. Even though this error occurs for the most part in no-limit hold’em games with a restricted buy in, it’s often still a bad decision.

Unless your opponent is a gutsy player with a terrific read on you, most players who push all-in under conditions other than being very short-stacked and an all-in bet does not really represent a lot of money, that opponent usually has a hand that beats top pair.

If it’s frequently wrong to call an all-in bet with top pair, top kicker in a restricted buy in game, imagine how big an error it is when a player calls off all his money in a game where there’s no restriction on the size of the buy-in, and both players are fairly deep stacked. While you will get bluffed with top pair, top kicker every now and then, most of the time you call a very big bet you are second best with little hope, or in a situation where you are drawing and the pot odds don’t compensate for the odds against completing your hand—thus making this play a long-term loser.

I guess the overriding truth of this situation—and all of poker—is that you have to be willing to err at the extremes, to be sure you are making the right play most of the time in the more commonly encountered situations. In other words, you have to be willing to lay down top pair even though you know your opponent will bluff you out of some hands every now and then.

If you need some rationale for doing so besides the old pot odds versus odds-against-making-your-hand mathematical logic, the very fact that you will lay down good hands makes your opponent more willing to make plays at you, and when you are the Big Kahuna—as you most assuredly will be—then you can come over the top with almost complete assurance that you'll take all of his chips.

Taking your opponent's entire stack—especially when it’s a big one—more than overcomes a whole host of occasions when you lay down top pair, top kicker (or even two pair) to a big raise. In no-limit you don’t have to win many hands to be a winner. You just have to win the big ones.

Rep. Barney Frank Moves to Clarify Lawful Internet Gambling Activities

Representative Barney Frank (D-MA), who chairs the House Committee on Financial Services, introduced the Payments System Protection Act of 2008 earlier today. This legislation would direct the Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System, in consultation with the Attorney General, to create a formal process to define what types of online gambling are unlawful.

Frank's legislation would make it possible for the U.S. financial services industry to comply with the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or UIGEA.

To deal with concerns voiced by the financial services industry about the ambiguity of UIGEA, this bill would require federal regulators to appoint a special Administrative Law Judge to define unlawful Internet gambling activities and conduct an economic impact study on the costs of compliance.

Concerns about the proposed rules to implement UIGEA were previously raised at a congressional hearing on April 2, 2008. At the hearing, representatives of the Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System acknowledged the challenges U.S. financial institutions will face in attempting to comply with UIGEA.

“Chairman Frank is doing the right thing by saying it is unfair to burden US financial service companies with the job of the Internet gambling police at a time when their undivided attention ought to be on the economy,” said Jeffrey Sandman, spokesperson for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative. “The reality is that UIGEA is dangerous to the payments system and unlikely to stop anyone from using the Internet to play poker, bet on horses, or engage in other types of wagering.”

Earlier this year, Reps. Frank and Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced the first version of the Payments System Protection Act (H.R. 5767), which attempted to stop the U.S. government from developing regulations to implement UIGEA. Ultimately, the bill, along with an amendment offered by Rep. Peter King (R-NY), was defeated in the House Committee on Financial Services.

Let’s hope this one fares better.

Worldwide Online Poker Market Grows 25 Percent

In a recently released report, Poker Scout found that the worldwide online poker market grew 25 percent in the past year.

With players from 118 countries participating in the World Series of Poker, it’s clear that poker is now a world game—not just an American one.

PokerStars Grows 72 Percent

Pokerscout reports that industry leader PokerStars grew an astonishing 72 percent from the same time last year. While they have continued to invest in expanding their global reach, they have also benefited from remaining in the United States after the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA).

Party Poker, which was the big kahuna prior to UIGEA, pulled out of the US and Poker Stars grew in their absence. Online poker is unique in that the product and customers are one and the same. The name of the game is liquidity, and regardless of marketing, technology, or anything else, if you don’t have the customer base you won’t attract many players. People want an online site with a variety of games 24/7, and the tendency is for the rich to get richer and the smaller rooms to struggle over crumbs left behind.

Full Tilt Posts 54 Percent Gain

Full Tilt Poker grew 54 percent over the past year. Like Poker Stars, they are growing internationally, but benefited by continuing to serve US-based customers following UIGEA’s passage.

iPoker: We're Number 3

The iPoker Network is in third place after growing 53 percent over the past year, and they are now ahead of Party Poker.

Cake Poker Posts 89 Percent Gain

Cake Poker grew an amazing 89 percent and is currently the tenth largest network in the world, just behind Ultimate Bet.

The Big Losers: Party Poker, Absolute Poker, Bodog

The big losers were Party Poker and Absolute Poker. Party lost much of their customer base upon their withdrawal from the us market, and plans a (much needed) major revamp of their software in the next few months.

Absolute dropped 29 percent in the past 12 months—a result of the superuser scandal that took place. Once it was proven that certain folks had access to other players’ cards, customer left in droves, haven’t come back, and probably won’t.

Bodog is also going backwards, dropping 28 percent over the past 12 months, probably a function of payout issues that have bedeviled them, along with the fact that sites with high liquidity tend to increase their liquidity, as players flock to the action, leaving the other sites to dry up and blow away.