CNNMoney.com
Companies Economy International Corrections Pre-market Trading After-hours Trading Winners/Losers/Actives Bonds Currencies Commodities World Markets Money Magazine Real Estate Taxes Jobs Ask the Expert Money 101 Autos Mutual Funds The Help Desk Loan Center Best Places to Live Ask the Expert Ultimate Guide to Retirement Retirement Calculators Best Funds Best Places to Retire Fortune Brainstorm Tech Apple 2.0 Blog Big Tech Blog Sectors and Stocks Tech Talk Resource Guide Small Business Makeovers Questions & Answers Small Business Video 100 Best Places to Launch FSB 100 Fortune Small Business Fortune 500 Brainstorm Tech Investing Management C-Suite Rankings Main Create Portfolio Edit Portfolio Create Alerts Edit Alerts
 
Online poker alliance ups the ante for U.S. Congress
Congress is expected to begin debate Wednesday over legislation that would definitively ban online poker -- and so the Poker Players Alliance, certainly not ignorant of how to play a political hand, has released a report suggesting that such a move would "deprive the government of over $3bn in federal and state revenues," reports VNUNet. Instead of prohibition, the Alliance favors a policy of regulation and taxation, which turns out to be the route taken by "over 80 countries and jurisdictions" -- including the U.K. where online gaming is now big business. ABC News notes that the would-be tax revenue numbers are only likely to increase as online poker is projected to grow "15 percent to 20 percent a year" going forward. Large as it is already, however, one expects that pot will have to get a lot larger before U.S. anti-gaming activists think about folding.
Posted by Oliver Ryan 10:36 AM 3 Comments comment | Add a Comment

It makes no sense to ban online poker. Just tax them and let it be!!
Posted By Howard Stern, Arizona : 6:31 PM  

As an avid online player, I feel since poker is a game of skill as well as luck and my play effects no one but myself congress should completely stay out. You have the Lederer's, Ivey's, Moneymaker's speaking out against the bill, however their golden egg is on the line. The only problem I have (and I only play $1 tourney's with an occasional $2 or $3) is the random card generators used by sites such as Party Poker. It appears they favor giving new players numerous great hands at the beginning of their memberships and they decrease over time as other new players join their site. For instance, after playing about 30,000 hands over about 6 months, I've had a straight flush one time, 4 A's one time and a full house A's over K's one time. All three happen 30,000 hands ago in the first week I joined Party Poker. The odds at Party Poker are the odds of a real deck of cards. The people I have spoke with at PP/chat and other chat rooms support this claim. Because of this I only play the $1 to $3 tourney's that may last an hour or two and I still get some enjoyment without losing $2000 to $10,000 a month. It should be my decision to play.
Posted By Jeff Weathers, Dallas, NC : 7:52 PM  

I agree. The random card generators are not random. And at http://www.thewsop.com we believe Party Poker has other issues as well and we are dropping them as a recommended site.
Posted By chris marshall, los angeles, california : 4:47 PM  

To send a letter to the editor about The Browser, click hereTop of page

Got a news tip? Send it to The Browser


© 2009 Cable News Network. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2009 BigCharts.com Inc. All rights reserved. Please see our Terms of Use.
MarketWatch, the MarketWatch logo, and BigCharts are registered trademarks of MarketWatch, Inc.
Intraday data provided by Interactive Data Real-Time Services and subject to the Terms of Use.
Intraday data is at least 20-minutes delayed. All times are ET.
Historical, current end-of-day data, and splits data provided by Interactive Data Pricing and Reference Data.
Fundamental data provided by Morningstar, Inc..
SEC Filings data provided by Edgar Online Inc..
Earnings data provided by FactSet CallStreet, LLC.