The Motley Fool is a very well respected financial source.  People take it seriously.  So it’s great to see it do a pro-poker piece.  But the article is even better than that because it relies on a study done by the guys who wrote Freakonomics and are top notch economists and scholars.  So what did the study and article conclude?  Just that poker is, empirically, a game of skill.  But read the link cause there is much much more in it.  The pro-poker pieces are beginning to pour in from legitimate sources (NYT, WSJ, CNN, etc.).  Momentum is building in the public!

Just popping in to pass on some goods news from the California scene.  In the void the federal government created with Black Friday, here comes the land of dreams to fill some of the hole.  At least one state Senator is pushing the California online poker bill up the legislative agenda.  Still no guarantees that it passes soon, if at all.  But if you live in Cali, may make sense not to move to Canada just yet.

In a tad of good news, which we all need these days, Absolute Poker (and Ultimate Bet) announced that they have reached an agreement with the Department of Justice that will permit them to return funds to players whose accounts have been frozen.  In the words of Absolute Poker itself:  “Absolute Poker has reached an agreement with the United States Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”).  Under the agreement, the US Attorney’s Office has agreed to provide all necessary assurances that third parties may work with Absolute Poker to facilitate the return of funds, currently held by third party processors, to players located in the US. This provision is an important step to returning US player funds.”

Let’s hope this is a small step in the path to some truly great news in the coming months.

I love thinking about unintended consequences of actions.  Killing online poker is not good.  But some good may come from it.  People are hooked on poker.  It’s embedded in us more so than it has been than, say, 1860.  So where to play?  Especially if you live in an area that does not have local legal casinos?  Charity poker again.  I predict a boom in charity poker tournaments.  And perhaps some sort of charity cash game (maybe a fixed buy-in like a tourney but whoever after a fixed period of time has the most chips — but not all of them — gets a big prize.  And you can walk away earlier for smaller prizes).  This seems to be a win-win.  Charities get more money.  People get to play.  And the bars/restaurants that host the games get revenue.  Mark my words.  Take it to the bank.  Bet on it.  Charity poker will boom in the next 6 months.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder testified today at a Department of Justice hearing held by the House Judiciary Committee.  Basically, he punted on all major issues.  But it was nice to see that he testified that there is at least some skill in poker.  Better yet, it was great to hear multiple members of the Congress bombard him with pointed questions.  Let’s keep up the PPA’s push and persuade even more Congresspeople to push the internet poker agenda.  Public enemy #1 was killed.  Time to kill poker enemy #1.

Seems like there are a lot of great articles being written these days.  Check out this one from the LA Times about confusion in poker law generally and the hypocrisy of the federal government in its action.  (The author slips in a discussion of how the federal quagmire may be an opening for California to start an intrastate system.)  Hopefully, you enjoy this article too.

A nice article posted on CNN about small-time poker players, and one in particular that is doing something about the present situation.  Check it out.

I’ve posted on this before (I think) years ago, and certainly thought about it after living in NYC for decades, but rather than reinvent the wheel I’ve decided in these troubling times simply to pass on another bloggers post.  At the end of the piece he questions why the SDNY is pursuing the action and not the jurisdictions in which state law specifically outlaws online poker.  I cannot be certain – only US Attorney General Holder knows the answer – but I would harbor a guess that the SDNY took action for a variety of reasons, including that Manhattan is the home of numerous large banks that have been hampered by the UIGEA’s requirements, the SDNY often takes the lead in pursuing advanced financial fraud, and NY federal law (precisely because of the first two reasons) is more developed than most jurisdictions on financial issues.  One other point about the post.  The allegations include bank fraud (i.e., lying to the banks about what the companies did) as opposed to admitting it was poker-related.  This is a significant distinction as proving poker is a game of skill will not remove the bank fraud allegations.  In other words, the sites still could be shut down.  Well, at least Absolute Poker.

Remember that World Trade Organization case from not too long ago that Antigua brought against the U.S. (and, by the way, won, though it had no practical effect)?  Well, it is rearing its head again and could be a boon to poker players around the world, and especially in the U.S.  Absolute Poker is based in Antigua, a tiny Caribbean nation that gets a significant portion of its gross national product from online poker/gaming.  It has long alleged that the U.S.’s anti-online poker stance when contrasted with it allowing online horse-betting and live poker is protectionist.  In perhaps one of my favorite quotations of all time, the Antiguan government’s legal advisor said “It’s as if Antigua would put Americans in jail for selling pineapples.”  How can anyone argue with that logic?  Unfortunately, many Americans are not against pineapples for moral reasons.  So here we are.

Anyway, all this is well and good, but the legal system pretty much played itself out with the original case and failure of the international community to stand up to the U.S.  But, just maybe, if Antigua can make enough noise again, and, just maybe, if the U.S.’s current stance ends up having a significant effect on the pocket books of larger countries via reduced rake from decreased play (think Britain), just maybe enough pressure will be exerted on the U.S. that it will alter its stance.  If you asked me whether I would bet on this happening my answer would be that you better be laying me some serious pot odds — more than it takes to draw to a one-outer on the river.  But in the game of life, and with nothing for me to lose at this point, I’ll take those odds cause it’s all I’ve got.  In the immortal words of Jim Carrey — “So you’re telling me there’s a chance… *YEAH!*”

Straight from the Government’s mouth:  This “Office expects the companies to return the money that U.S. players entrusted to them.”  Check out the “good” news here.