Happy Holidays to everyone stopping by to read my blog. May you have a healthy and prosperous new year.

The Holiday spirit touches people in very different and often unsuspected ways. Yesterday it touched me. It was an incredibly beautiful day in the desert, about 70 degrees, with blue skies and absolutely no wind: the perfect day for a bike ride. I got on my bike and kept riding all the way from Palm Desert to Palm Springs and back again, about a 32-mile jaunt.

I was about two miles from the turn around point, cutting through the Palm Springs Airport and cruising to a stop for the traffic light where the airport exits on to Tahquitz Canyon Road. It was there I heard a high-pitched voice from behind me. "Hey," the voice said, "is that a Trek Madone?"

I was now stopped at the light and turned to look. The voice belonged to kid about 11, and I realized he must be into bicycles in a big way if he could recognized the make and model of my bike from a distance. I stopped to talk to him, and we were soon joined by his older brother, younger sister, and his mom.

Turns out the kid was visiting his mother from Boulder, Colorado, and I told him that he lives in the bicycling capital of the United States, the home of Velo News Magazine, the Slipstream Racing Team, and lots of well-known bicycle racers. He knew all that, and prouldly told me he was just starting to get into bike racing and that he loved cyclo-cross too, because, he told me, "You get to race in the snow, the mud, and the goop of winter and that was a lot of fun."

We chatted for about five minutes when I wished them all a happy holiday and pedaled off, thinking how nice it was to meet such an pleasant, focused, well spoken, and polite kid--a kid who has a passion and is pursuing it.

After riding into downtown Palm Springs and returning through the airport again, I saw another cyclist stopped with a map in his hand, and obviously trying to figure out where to go. I asked him if he needed directions. Turned out he was from Germany but spoke pretty good English and we were able to communicate.

He just arrived yesterday, had ridden from his sister's house and had no idea how to get back. But he had the address and a map, and I was able to point him in the right direction. He told me he liked my bike and asked whether it was expensive. I told him I got it for about 60 percent of the original price because it was last year's model and came painted with Discovery Team's logo and colors, and since there was no more Discovery Team, Trek had to reduce the prices on this model to clear their inventory.

He was riding a borrowed bike, but told me about the bike he rides at home in Germany. We wished each other a happy holiday and I pedaled off, through the airport, through Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage until I was back in Palm Desert.

I was daydreaming as I rode, thinking that all in all, it had been a good year and I had plenty to be thankful for. I'm not sentimental in the least, and have never been caught up in all the seasonal celebrations. But there was good cheer in the air yesterday, and it came to me on two occasions on the access road leading to and from the Palm Springs Airport.

In fact, if I had spotted Santa's sleigh making an apporach to the runway as I pedaled home through the airport, I wouldn't have been surprised at all.

The World Trade Organization Issues a Decision
On December 21 a World Trade Organization (WTO) arbitrary panel ruled that Antigua is entitled to $21 million a year from the United States, a far cry from the $3.4 billion that Antigua sought in its claim against the US regarding online gaming.

The WTO’s ruling took into account only money Antigua lost through online horse-racing wagers, instead of all online gaming. The panel chose not to account for all online wagering that takes place in the US. Instead, it only awarded Antigua compensation from online wagers that are taxed and regulated.

While that's the underlying logic to the WTO's decision, it seems the WTO simply decided to throw Antigua a bone, and a small one at that, while allowing the US to pursue their course of unfair trade practices at a bargain price. Call it a tax on ufair trade practices, or the small cost of moralistic legislation that will cause the US to stay out of step with most of the rest of the world, while prohibiting citizens like you and me to play poker with our own money from the privacy of our own homes. There's a larger cost too, the loss of billions in tax revenue and job creation that would accrue to the US if they were to regulate and tax online gaming.

Some Background on this Case
Antigua’s claim against the US is predicated on the US allowing certain forms of online wagering, such as horse race wagers, but prevents access to other forms of online gambling and therefore violates those sections of the General Agreement for Trades and Services (GATS) that cover online gambling.

Who’s Still Chasing Down the US; Who Settled Their Claims
The European Union, Japan, Canada, India, Costa Rica, and Macao joined Antigua in seeking sanctions against the US. The US settled with the EU, Japan, and Canada, but negotiations with India, Costa Rica, and Macao continue.

Letting the Fish Off the Hook
While online gaming companies urged their host countries to stand tough against the US in order to force them to reviser online gambling laws, the EU settled for smallish concessions. This let the US off the hook for much less than the amount that would be lost to the gaming industry itself as well as lost taxes to their host countries that are excluded from the US online gaming market—the largest in the world.

This Decision Can’t Be Appealed
The decision issued by the WTO arbitrary panel cannot be appealed, although the WTO must first approve the arbitrator's decision before Antigua can act, and that approval will not come until January.

WORLDWIDE REACTION TO THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION'S DECISION
Because there are so man y parties involved in this case, there are reactions from many quarters, and the issues involved in this case still comprise a very unsettled situation.

The Remote Gambling Association
Online gaming in the US is anything but neatly tied up and put aside in a box. The Remote Gambling Association, a trade association representing European internet gambling companies, plans to file a complaint against the United States for violating WTO rules by targeting foreign gaming companies while not prosecuting US online gaming operators.

The RGA said the WTO decision fails to address “…discriminatory and protectionist US practices against European and other foreign online operators in the form of selective prosecution related to trade in gambling services.”

The RGA’s Clive Hawkswood said: “How would US investors and businessmen feel if they invested in a business in the UK based on international law commitments, and then suddenly the UK not only passed new laws forcing them to shut down their business, but then tried to throw them in jail for past activities while still allowing their domestic competitors to continue on doing the same thing? That’s what is happening to our industry in the US.”

Safe and Secure internet Gambling Initiative
Jeffrey Sandman, spokesperson for The Safe and Secure internet Gambling Initiative, said the RGA’s action should encourage lawmakers to regulate internet gambling through Representative Barney Frank’s proposed internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act.

According to Sandman, “It is time for the US to end its hypocritical practices that discriminate against foreign online gambling operators, while allowing US gambling operators to accept bets for certain forms of gambling. Regulation of internet gambling should be supported as a means to resolve this trade dispute.”

Trade Law Expert, Professor Joseph Weiler
Joseph Weiler, a professor of law at New York University, commented, “What is particularly troubling is that these prosecutions for past activity are still continuing. To compound it by selecting only non-US targets is even more troubling. To clarify the situation for the future for all is one thing, but that does not seem to be the case here.”

Anti-Gambling Advocate, Representative Bob Goodlatte
"Considering that Antigua and Barbuda were asking for over $3 billion in compensation, and they were only awarded a token $21 million, this decision is a partial victory for the U.S.," said Rep. Bob Goodlatte, (R-VA), a staunch opponent of all online gaming—except, of course, for online horse race wagering. The inconsistency there stems from the fact that the horse race industry is a major contributor to Goodlatte’s campaigns. For the full story on how Rep Goodlatte’s philosophical inconsistencies, see my blog entry dated December 3, 2007.

Financial Services Roundtable
The Financial Services Round Table warned that regulations being drafted to enforce the Unlawful internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) will present major compliance obstacles unless the Bush administration clarifies its conflicting views on online betting.

Bank of America
The Bank of America said that the Government should provide a list of specific entities that banks are forbidden to take payments from. “Without a definition of what is legal,” the Bank of America stated that “financial institutions will be forced to block legitimate transactions in order to avoid the possibility of permitting an illegal transaction.”

Antigua’s Reaction
Antigua's finance minister Errol Cort described the WTO's decision as a setback for the small Caribbean nation. Antigua had sought to apply $3.4 billion in trade sanctions against the US to compensate the nation for lost revenue due to unfair trade practices, but were instead awarded $21 million by the WTO.
Still, Cort is hopeful, saying “We think that this decision, as terribly flawed as it may be, should still have the desired result of getting the US to sit down with us and seek an amicable resolution. We look forward to meeting with the U.S. delegation in the very near future.”

Read the Full WTO Decision
The full text of the WTO decision can be accessed here:

PDF version of WTO decision: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/285arb_e.pdf

When I was a kid growing up in Brooklyn, the Mafia did a ruthlessly effective job of collecting protection money from small businesses in the neighborhood. Bakers, butchers, bars, and others—they all paid their tithe to the local collector.

It was a nuisance, to be sure, but small potatoes when measured against the latest version of protection rackets: The shakedowns conducted by the US government. US Attorney Catherine L. Hanaway (pictured right), in a role befitting the boss of bosses, announced in a press release that Microsoft Corporation, Google, Inc. and Yahoo! entered into settlements with the US to resolve claims that they promoted illegal gambling. The total amount of the three settlements—or should I say shakedowns—is $31.5 million.

Running a Protection Racket: The Mafia Was Small Potatoes Compared to the Feds
While the mob’s take back in the day amounted to sums that were measured individually in the hundreds, and possibly the thousands for businesses that could afford to pay that kind of freight and didn’t have the cojones to stand up to the local mob collector. Even allowing for inflation over time, the government has raised the shakedown scheme to a level undreamed of by neighborhood capos of old.

If You Don't Have the Balls to Stand Up to Them, the Bully Will Run Right Over You
It appears that Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo are severely lacking in the cojones department too. They absolutely rolled over and submitted to the big bully, instead of standing up and saying,”C’mon, bring it. Charge me with a crime,” then watching as the US government turned tail and scarpered off, because they’ve never charged anyone with online gambling offenses except in cases that violate the wire act—and that doesn’t apply to online poker.

Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo: Groveling Like Bitches on a Leash
Microsoft paid out $21 million: $4.5 million to the United States and a $7.5 million contribution to the International Center for Missing and Exploited Children (ICMEC) to establish a fund to assist ICMEC with its national and international mission. They also agreed to provide a $9 million online, public service advertising campaign to inform and educate a target audience comprised of college level or younger people that online gambling enterprises are illegal under U.S. law. The educational—or perhaps “indoctrinational” is a better word for it—campaign will run for three years, beginning in early 2008. This settlement, based on illegal conduct that Microsoft Corporation neither contests nor admits, resolves claims that between 1997 and June 2007, Microsoft received payments from on-line gambling businesses for advertising on-line gambling.

Google got off cheap, settling out for $3 million to resolves claims that they also neither contest nor admit that they received payments from on-line gambling businesses for advertising on-line gambling between 1997 and June 2007.
The Yahoo! settlement of $7.5 million also resolves claims, which they neither contest nor admit that they received payments from on-line gambling businesses for advertising on-line gambling between 1997 and December 2007. The company has now forfeited $3 million directly to the United States. Yahoo! Also agreed to provide $4.5 million worth of online advertising for a public service advertising campaign. The campaign, to begin January 2008, will tell users that operators and participants in online or telephonic sports bookmaking and casino-type gambling activities doing business in the United States may be subject to arrest and prosecution.

These settlements involve corporate conduct the Government found in violation of the Federal Wire Wager Act, federal wagering excise tax laws and various states’ statutes and municipal laws prohibiting gambling. Unregulated commercial gambling is illegal throughout the United States.

Take My Lunch Money Mr. Schoolyard Bully, But Please, Don't Hit Me...
This, of course, is subject to challenge. Microsoft, Yahoo!, and Google simply gave their lunch money to the schoolyard bully, figuring that paying protection would keep them from a bloody nose on the way home from school.

Hanaway's Spin...
According to Hanaway, “Honest taxpayers and gambling industry personnel who do follow the law suffer from those who promote illegal online behavior.”

...And Mine
Get up, Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo! Get on your feet. What kind of wusses are you? Stop groveling. Stand up to the government and maybe you'll have the rights you deserve. If you don't stand up to them they'll take your lunch money again, and again, and again, in myriad ways, time after time, until they bleed you into abject submission or you decide that enough is enough and decide to fight back.

According to an agreement signed a few days ago, the US will provide the European Union (EU) with trade concessions in mail services and warehousing as compensation for removing gambling services from its World Trade Organization (WTO) commitment. Although the EU sought $100 billion in concessions, these accommodations fall far short of the mark.

The agreement offers new U.S. market opportunities for European companies involved in testing and analysis services, as well as in research and development, and postal and courier services.

Gambling will no longer be covered by US WTO commitments, and instead of choosing to regulate and license online gaming and garner billions in tax revenues in the process, the US will provide concessions to the EU in an amount less than $100 billion. Not a good deal from my perspective, but it satisfies those who see online gaming as morally wrong—except, of course, things like horseracing and fantasy sports, which have successfully lobbied their way through our congress and were cut out of the process.

No One Gets Off Scot Free...

The US decision to renege on treaty commitments to the WTO and close its markets to offshore internet gambling operators, meant the US had to compensate other governments that would be affected by its decision. According to WTO treaty obligations, any government harmed in this manner is entitled to negotiate compensation with the United States. The European Union, Canada, Japan, India, Australia, Costa Rica and Macao joined Antigua in requesting talks. Australia dropped its claim while Japan reached a deal.

...and Our Bad Deal Now Sets a Precedent

The agreement between the EU and the US will now play a role in ongoing negotiations between the US and China, India, Canada and other countries over the WTO issue. This includes the dispute with Antigua. A ruling on the amount of compensation due Antigua has been delayed.

A Short History of Legislative Stupidity

Last year the United States’ Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA) stopped U.S. banks and credit card companies from processing payments to online gambling businesses located offshore, closing off a growing business worth more than $12 billion. In March 2007, the World Trade Organization ruled that the US ban was illegal. The WTO ruled that although the US had the right to prevent offshore betting to protect public order and public morals, our government broke trade agreements because rules were unequally applied to American operators offering remote betting on horse and dog racing.

The WTO will soon rule on Antigua’s request to impose $3.4 billion in commercial sanctions against the US for its failure to comply with the ruling. Antigua, the smallest nation ever to win a WTO dispute, has requested an intellectual property rights waiver that would permit software, movie, and music piracy. Needless to say, this alarmed software and media companies no end, including Microsoft and Universal Pictures, and the Recording Industry Association of America.

This ruling is a blow to European online gaming companies, as firms such as PartyGaming hoped the EU might turn down a settlement in favor of fighting to restore their ability to operate in the United States.

Throw Them Under the Bus, Kick 'em to the Curb ... It's All in a Day's (Political) Work

Does this agreement sell out American couriers such as UPS and FedEx? Did the EU throw their own gaming industry under the bus? Time will tell. This complex affair could have been settled easily and simply had congress chosen to pass Representative Barney Frank’s (D-MA) bill, but leave it to politicians to continue to muck things up, and kill the goose laying a golden egg full of tax revenue in the process.

Congressman Barney Frank's (D-MA) Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, a bill that would regulate and license online gambling in the United States, has attracted Representative Ellen O. Taucher, (D-CA) as its forty-fifth cosponsor.

Congresswoman Taucher is a member of the Aviation sub-committee; the powerful Highways, Transit and Pipelines subcommittee, and chairwoman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

Here is the list of representatives supporting Congressman Frank's IGREA, a bill that would overturn the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA):

Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii)

John Larson (D-Conn.)

Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.)

Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.)

Robert Andrews (D-N.J.)

Jim McDermott (D-Wash.)

Joe Baca (D-Calif.)

James McGovern (D-Mass.)

Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.)

Charlie Melancon (D-La.)

Howard Berman (D-Calif.)

James Moran (D-Va.)

Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.)

Ron Paul (R-Texas)

Michael Capuano (D-Mass.)

Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.)

Russ Carnahan (D-Mo.)

Ciro Rodriguez (D-Texas)

Julia Carson (D-Ind.)

Steven Rothman (D-N.J.)

William Lacy Clay (D-Mo.)

Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.)

Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)

Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)

Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.)

Robert Scott (D-Va.)

William Delahunt (D-Mass.)

Adam Smith (D-Wash.)

Bob Filner (D-Calif.)

Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.)

Vito Fossella (R-N.Y.)

Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.)

Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.)

Melvin Watt (D-N.C.)

Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)

Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.)

Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.)

Robert Wexler (D-Fla.)

Michael Honda (D-Calif.)

Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.)

Steve Israel (D-N.Y.)

Albert Wynn (D-Md.)

Peter King (R-N.Y.)

Don Young (R-Alaska)

Ellen Taucher (D-Cal)

Congressman Frank continues to state the importance of US players contacting their political representatives to express their position. This is, according to Barney Frank, one of the most effective ways in which further support for this and the regulation of US online gambling can be achieved.

If your congressional representative is not on this list of cosponsors, contact his office by letter, email, phone, or through the Poker Players Alliance at http://www.pokerplayersalliance.org/ and make sure your viuews are made crystal clear to him or her.

That's the least we can do to protect our rights, and ensure that we can play poker online in the privacy of our own home.

We’re Number One—again! For the second year running, Lycos announced that “poker” was the top search engine topic during the year. Despite a year of headline grabbing activity by such tabloid-cover headline grabbers as Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, Anna Nicole Smith, Barry Bonds, Lindsay Lohan, and even Pamela Anderson, poker still generates more search activity than any other term.
I’ve read that poker’s popularity is diminishing. It’s not. While funding an online poker account is admittedly tougher with UIGEA in effect, and there’s way too much poker programming on TV that’s repetitive, uninteresting, and has weak production values, our collective interest in poker is not slowing down. The engine is running full speed ahead, and the interest in the game of poker has not abated—and doesn’t look like it will anytime soon.

So go ahead. Punch “poker” into your search engine of choice. Just to get a sense of how popular poker is, I typed “poker” into Google as I was writing this post, and 14,700,000 hits on all that’s available about poker will never be able to do it; the information overload is just too great. But if that information overload is indicative of interest in our game, it means you should always be able to find a poker game regardless of where you are located.

So stick a finger up in the air. And tell anyone who’ll listen, “We’re number One!”

As the trade dispute between Europe and the US over Internet gaming industry continues, the British Government said it favors regulation instead of prohibition.

Annette Obrestad became the youngest player ever to win the “Tournament Performance of the Year” award at the prestigious European Poker Awards in Paris.

Her achievement at the World Series of Poker Europe was recognised as “phenomenal” by Poker Europa Chief Nic Szeremeta who presented the award. She defeated a field comprising of “one of the toughest fields in poker” to win more than $2 million.

Annette beat fellow nominees Carlos Mortensen and Bruno Fitoussi. Mortensen won $3.97 million at the WPT in Las Vegas while Fitoussi took $1.2 million by finishing second in one of the most prestigious tournaments in the poker calendar, the WSOP HORSE event, also in Las Vegas.

Annette was nominated in two other categories including “Leading Lady” and “Rookie of the Year.” She narrowly missed out to Katja Thater, who also won a WSOP bracelet this year, in the “Leading Lady” category.

Only 19, and two years too young to legally enter a Las Vegas casino, Annette Obrestad is an online poker prodigy who shot to fame after winning the Main Event at the World Series of Poker Europe in London’s Leicester Square. Two months later Annette narrowly missed her first European Poker Tour win—taking second place and a $429,181 payday in Dublin.

“I am so happy to win this award. I prefer this one than rookie of the year because I was up against such great players. I am still learning so much,” she said. “There are still a lot of areas of my live game that can improve. My instincts, my ability to know what certain tells mean. But I am getting better all the time.”

UCLA’s Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society poker team beat USC's poker team in front of about 35 spectators last week. It's not quite Rose Bowl crowd on New Year's day, but it's a start.

Five players from each team played a best-of-three series of heads-up matches, and Igor Gampel, John Kennelly, and Michael Shinzaki of UCLA were victorious to guarantee victory over the Trojans.

This was the second intercollegiate poker event since the Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society was founded (see blog entries dated August 14 and October 10, 2007). In the first, Harvard beat Yale, also by a score of three matches to two.

The GPSTS plans to involve more schools in a national tournament. We’ll let you know as this story develops. In the meantime, a Bruin victory is some slight consolation for having USC kick their ass all over the football field this year.

Funeral services for Chip Reese will be held at the Palms Northwest Mortuary & Cemetery, located at 6701 N. Jones in Las Vegas, on Friday, December 7, at 2 p.m.

David "Chip" Reese was born March 28, 1951, in Dayton. He died early Tuesday morning, December 4, 2007 in Las Vegas. Reese showed signs of walking pneumonia and complained the night before of having flu like symptoms. Reese was admitted to the hospital and died during the night in his sleep.

A regular player in the "The Big Game," Reese competed at the world's highest limits. He flew below the general public’s radar, however, because he tended to eschew poker tournaments. But he entered and won the inaugural $50,000 buy-in HORSE tournament at the 2006 World Series of Poker, following a six-hour heads-up final match against Andy Bloch.

After the event, his close friend Doyle Brunson stated,” There’s really no one more deserving of this title. He's got to be one of the best all around poker players I've ever known." Brunson added, "He's also just a good man."

David “Chip” Reese, born in Dayton Ohio in 1951, is dead. Widely regarded as one of the best poker players in the world and the youngest player inducted into the Poker Hall of Fame, he died in his sleep last night, reportedly of complications due to pneumonia.
Reese won three World Series of Poker Bracelets, including the inaugural $50,000 buy-in HORSE event at the 2006 World Series of Poker. He might have won more, but preferred big money, high-stakes cash games to tournament poker.

Reese graduated from Dartmouth College with a degree in economics and was accepted into Stanford University law school. On his way out to California in 1974 Reese stopped off in Las Vegas to play poker. After winning $60,000 he decided to skip law school and play poker for a living, and when asked about his decision, he uttered the now immortal line, “Law doesn't have the same monetary incentive as poker."

R.I.P. Chip Reese 1951 – 2007.

Congressman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia (pictured right), one of the online gambling's most strident detractors, is—according to an article on Gambling Web—the recipient of $40,000 in contributions from the horse racing industry. Horse racing has cut-outs exempting it from the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA), and was also slated for exempt status in bills Goodlatte tried to push through Congress in the past.

Goodlatte has always taken the position that gambling is immoral and that online gaming should be banned. Yet he takes money from the horseracing industry in return for an exception from current and proposed legislation dealing with online gaming.

So is Goodlatte a principled politician who happens to have a blind eye when it comes to the ponies, or is he simply whoring himself out for a few bucks added to his campaign coffers?

Can You Really Buy a Congressman for as Little as $40,000?

The answer is pretty clear if you follow the money. I’d love to hear Representative Goodlatte attempt to justify his position, and explain in any sort of convincing manner why online gaming ought to be illegal and subject to prosecution, with the exception of horseracing.

He Won't Respond to Me

But I don’t think I’ll hear from him. Last year I challenged him to a freezeout poker game, with the money to go to charity as a way of demonstrating that poker is a game of skill, not luck. I never received a response from either Mr. Goodlatte or his staff. I certainly don’t expect see him try to extricate himself from the corner he so illogically painted himself into this time. After all, how can one purport to be morally opposed to gambling while taking money from the horseracing industry in exchange for granting exemptions to that very industry?

I’ve noticed something lately, and although it’s certainly no secret, it’s been a very low-key affair. But online poke rooms, many of which abandoned the US market in the wake of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act’s (UIGEA) passage in October 2006, are beginning to advertise once again in poker publications that distribute primarily in the United States.

While there are no grand announcements, and no TV advertising thus far, ads for online poker rooms are beginning to appear in print media. As editor of Poker Player Newspaper, I'm in a position to know. I’ve received more than a few emails recently from online sites inquiring about advertising, and asking that we send them a media kit and rate card.

Not all online poker sites plan on returning anytime soon. The publicly traded online rooms are probably going to eschew the American market until UIGEA is either reversed, held in abeyance, or a new law to regulate online gaming is enacted. But many of the privately held companies, without the listing restrictions that publicly traded firms must adhere to, can ignore UIGEA if they so choose.

They are beyond the reach of US law, though I’d suggest that any online rooms deciding to re-enter the US market ought to warn their senior staff about the dangers of getting on a plane that happens to land in the United States.

Funding accounts are still difficult, especially if you intend to play for relatively large stakes and need to make deposits that exceed, say, $500 per day. But where there’s a will, there’s a way, and in the case of online poker, the old adage, “Follow the money!” is still valid.

It’s nice to see that some of the firms that departed our shores are now screwing up the courage to return to the US market. Welcome home!

According to a report in the Las Vegas Sun, the Nevada Gaming Control Board is ready to release a study by the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) that measures how many Nevadans gamble online and their attitudes toward legal Internet gambling. They hope this study will be viewed as another step toward the legalization and regulation of online gaming.

The survey, commissioned by the Nevada Gaming Control Board, is intended to inform lawmakers about the pros and cons of regulating online gaming—a business considered illegal by the Department of Justice and the current administration.

Nevada approved legislation in 2003 to allow regulators to study whether Internet gambling could be regulated. Since 2003, technology that locates and identifies online players through satellite signals, as well as procedures supporting online background checks, has been developed.

“It's historically been the policy of the state of Nevada to regulate gaming so that we can protect patrons and make sure they get paid when they win,” said Las Vegas gaming attorney Tony Cabot. He also pointed out that the UNLV study may show sufficient gambling dollars going offshore to warrant state efforts to tap into that revenue.

This is belated, to be sure, but I awakened this morning thinking about Thanksgiving and all the things, big and small, that I’m thankful for. One thing I tend to take for granted, but really shouldn’t, is the weather. And if the price is a lot of snowbirds who clog the roads in the Coachella Valley every winter, it’s a small price to pay.

Yesterday we had 16 people—family, friends, and neighbors—for Thanksgiving dinner, and because we live in a warm climate, we were able to eat outdoors. It was a gorgeous day, and I wore shorts and was barefoot—we’re not really formal at my house—and thought how fortunate I was to live where I do, and not have to suffer real winters unless I choose to go to the snow.

I’m also thankful that my commute to work is no further than a jaunt to a home office, or a trip to a nearby cardroom.

All the cycling magazines that find their way to my door are filled with articles this time of year about maintaining fitness by cycling indoors on a trainer or on rollers, because the weather is too harsh in most places for all but the most dedicated to want to ride on the roads. But not here. If I ride mid-day, I can usually get by in a short-sleeved cycling jersey and shorts. If I decide to ride early, when it’s a lot colder, all I need do is add arm and leg warmers and maybe a vest over my jersey and I’m good to go.

The sun is shining here as it usually does. The temperature is in the low 70s, and I’m stuffed full of turkey and all the fixings. And for all of this, I’m thankful.

Experts testified before the House Committee on the Judiciary last week, calling for the U.S. to reverse policies related to Internet gambling and arguing that prohibition of Internet gambling activities violates the American principles of personal freedom and individual liberty.

They explained how the ban on Internet gambling violates U.S. treaty obligations with other countries and exposes U.S. businesses to potential criminal retaliation overseas. Additionally, Internet verification software technology was described that successfully protects against underage and compulsive gambling, further eliminating the rationale for banning online gambling activity.

"Today's hearing made clear the arguments why Congress needs to reverse its current policies related to Internet gambling," said Jeffrey Sandman, spokesman for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative.
Expert testimony at the hearing was provided by Representative Shelley Berkley (D-NV), professional poker player Annie Duke, New York University Law School professor Joseph Weiler and Michael Colopy, a representative of Aristotle Inc., a leading provider of verification services for child protection online.

Reversing U.S. Policies on Internet Gambling
Representative Shelley Berkeley (pictured far right) provided testimony on the need for Congress to change its policies related to Internet gambling and protect the million of Americans that continue to gamble online despite passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA).

"According to Berkeley "The UIGEA actually made things even more confusing by targeting the financial sector rather than gamblers, and further memorializing the carve-out for horseracing. Although some Internet gaming executives have been arrested and some of the more reputable operators have stopped doing business in the U.S., an estimated 10 million Americans are still wagering online on poker alone, and they are doing so without the benefit of the protections afforded by effective regulatory oversight...I applaud this committee for attempting to lay the groundwork for a legislative solution that ideally would legalize online gaming, subject it to some sort of regulation, and protect underage and problem gamblers."

Preserving American Freedoms
Professional poker player Annie Duke (pictured right) testified that Americans deserve the right to determine whether to gamble online without government intrusion.

"What's at stake here is the right of individual Americans to do what they want in the privacy of their homes without the intrusion of the government," said Duke. "This country was among the first to embrace the idea that there should be distinct limits on the ability of the government to control or direct the private affairs of its citizens. More than any other value, America is supposed to be about freedom. Except where one's actions directly harm another person's life, liberty or property, our government is supposed to leave citizenry alone. Examples of Congress straying from this principle are legion, but few are as egregious as The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006."

Duke hammered these points home during her appearance on Keep Flopping Aces, the internet radio show that Amy Calistri and I host each Thursday night at 9 p.m. EST. You can listen to this show in the http://www.holdemradio.com/ archives, or by downloading it as an i-Tunes podcast.

Resolving the WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
Joseph Weiler, a professor of law at the New York University School of Law and an expert in the law of the WTO, provided testimony that the U.S. is in violation of its WTO trade agreements around Internet gambling and should seek to bring itself into compliance.

"The U.S. bans online gambling offered by overseas operators even though it made treaty commitments to allow it and even though it allows online wagering domestically, including for horse racing," said Weiler. "We should bring our law and conduct into compliance with our international legal obligations. Our country is the trendsetter and leader in so many international arenas. Whether we like it or not, we lead by example. As our economy moves increasingly towards a high tech, knowledge based service oriented model and as we realize that our future prosperity will depend increasingly of tapping into export markets, notably the huge emerging markets such as China and India, is it really in our self interest to teach this particular example? How we would we feel if China prosecuted and imprisoned American businessman for engaging in commerce in China that the government there decided to ban despite its treaty obligations?"

Combating Compulsive and Underage Gambling
Michael Colopy, a representative of Aristotle Inc., a leading provider of verification services for child protection online, provided testimony on the opportunity to use technology and controls available on the Internet to combat compulsive and underage gambling.

"Online age and ID verification has matured as a needed solution such that any merchant may do online what is routinely done at stores every day across America," said Colopy. "In fact, as ever more efficient technologies and databases have been developed, online transactions have become in many instances faster and less risky than the visual driver's license scans that suffice for alcohol or cigarette purchases in America's neighborhood convenience stores, restaurants and bars."

Here’s my take on this: There’s not a point made here that I disagree with. It’s our money. We earned it. And if we want to spend some of it playing online poker, the government had no right to tell us what we can do in the privacy of our own homes.

As I reported on September 25, Poker player Shahram “Sean” Sheikhan, a regular on High Stakes Poker, was facing deportation to Iran because of a 1995 conviction for misdemeanor sexual battery charges that involved a 17-year-old girl. Sheikhan was in his early 20s at the time and served nine months for his offense.

Sheikhan, now 38, came to the United States when he was nine years old. He is married to an American-born woman and the couple has a young child.Pushing this case were the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE), which seeks out foreign nationals convicted of sexual crimes against children and works to get them deported.

According to Sheikhan’s lawyer, David Chesnoff, “It’s not allegations involving a child in the actual meaning of the word; it’s a legal definition,” adding, “There’s a lot of work to be done on his behalf that’s going to be done. He’s a good husband and a good father, and a lot of people have problems when they’re young that shouldn’t follow them for the rest of their lives.”

Last week Harry Gastley, a U.S. Immigrations Court Judge, ruled that the Department of Homeland Security did not provide enough proof to decide if Sheikhan committed a deportable offense. This decision halted all deportation proceedings against the Nevada poker pro, although he is not completely safe from deportation as of yet. The Department of Homeland Security has until December 17 to appeal Gastley’s decision.

Here's my take on this: While I’m no friend of Sean Sheikhan, ICE’s efforts to deport him amounted to piling on. After all, he served time for his offense. If deportation was deemed to be the thing to do, it should have been part of his original sentence. Sheikhan is no threat to repeat this kind of behavior.

He’s married, a family man, and has not repeated this kind of behavior in the nearly 20 years since his arrest and conviction.

Former Senator Alfonse D'Amato, chairman of the Poker Players' Alliance, expects online poker to be back in the United States within 18 months. He was speaking in Las Vegas at last week's Global Gaming Expo, attended by more than 28,000 industry professionals.

Other panelists at the Internet Gambling at the Crossroads session opined that sanctions by the World Trade Organization (WTO) stemming from current US policy on Internet gambling could be the major driver for legalization.

Panelists also agreed that online gaming can be regulated to prevent underage gambling and ensure player protection. With the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) banning financial transactions online and keeping reputable companies out of the marketplace, panelists were concerned about player protection in an environment dominated by unregulated.

According to Terry Lanni of MGM Mirage, existing technology can ascertain where a player lives, while verifying his age and detecting “problem gambling.” Gary Loveman stated that Harrah's is exploring the possibility of expanding its World Series of Poker brand by creating Internet gambling sites in countries where it is legal to do so.

Here’s my take on this: I agree with D’Amato. I believe that UIGEA will either be overturned, held in legal limbo, or otherwise rendered toothless, though I’d be (pleasantly) surprised if this occurred before the next presidential election.

That allows time for Representative Shelley Berkley's (D-NV) study bill (See May 25 blog entry for a full description of Berkley's bill) to be passed and a study brought back to congress that says what we all know: All the voiced concerns about online gaming can be addressed by existing technology, and that the US is losing out on billions in revenue as a result of UIGEA. It also allows a new administration in the White House to step back from positions taken by the Bush administration and set new, forward-looking policy.

Amy Calistri and I had John Pappas, of the Poker Players Alliance as a guest on our internet radio show, Keep Flopping Aces, last night. It was an incredible show, and if you are interested in a quick lesson on all of the issue confronting poker players in this country, go to the www.holdemradio.com show archives and tune in to a rebroadcast of last night's show.

The show should be posted there within a few days, and by then you'll also be able to listen to it as an i-Tunes podcast.

In fact, if you listen to last night's show and also listen to the show from last week, which aired originally on November 8, you'll be able to hear John Pappas and Annie Duke discuss many of the same issues.

It was incredibly informative, and it all boils down to the fact that every vote counts. If you haven't registered to vote, do so now. If you have registered, be sure to vote for candidates that will protect your right to play poker in the privacy of your own home without someone else imposing their particular view of morality on you.

I'd also advise you to write to your congressional representative, or even better yet, phone them and make your feelings known.

If you go to http://www.pokerplayersalliance.org/ you'll find a list of talking points that will help when you call or write to your representative to express your opinion about online poker and your right to play it.

Next Thursday is Thanksgiving, so we'll air a rerun in our 6:00 p.m. PST time slot, but the following Thursday, November 29, we'll be back with the only woman elected to the Poker Hall of Fame, Barbara Enright. You'll be in for a treat if you tune in.

Gary Loveman, CEO of Harrah’s Entertainment, said he's looking at taking the World Series of Poker brand into the Internet poker in the U.K. and Europe. He made that comment at the Global Gaming Expo, the largest trade show of the year for the North American casino industry.

Although banks and payment processors are prohibited from handling cash transactions from US based players to and from online poker sites under the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA) that President Bush signed into law last year, Internet gambling businesses are treated differently around the world.

"If you take a look at the legal landscape in continental Europe and the United Kingdom, there are countries where it's demonstrably legal and there's absolutely no encumbrance," Loveman said. "Those are areas that are very attractive to us."

Tournament spokesman Gary Thompson said Harrah's is studying the market and legal conditions before deciding whether to continue. It would not enter the online poker market "where there are any gray areas," he said.

If Harrah’s is able to make a go of online poker in the UK and Europe, they will be poised to capture a large market share once UIGEA is repealed or legislation is passed that allows US based players full access to online poker and the cash transfers in and out of online sites that are part and parcel of the game.

Reuters news agency reported that the European Union (EU) Trade Commissioner, Peter Mandelson, told Washington that the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) is unfair to foreign firms and should be repealed.

Mandelson came to the US to negotiate compensation for the 27-nation EU following the unilateral withdrawal of the US from World Trade Organization (WTO) obligations after UIGEA was declared discriminatory.

“It's not in the interest of American consumers to have good responsible competitors in this market excluded by regulatory mechanisms,” said Mandelson. “What we need to see is a change in US legislation that removes that discrimination against EU operators.”

European gambling firms asked the EU to pursue claims of up to $100 billion in compensatory sanctions and Mandelson has indicated that he supports these claims.

"When a member of the WTO defaults on its commitments, compensation is due,' continued Mandelson. 'That's the case of online gambling."

Mandelson also met with Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) and to discuss the legislator’s proposed Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act (IGREA) that would regulate online gambling and bring the US into compliance with WTO rules.

“I think Frank takes a fair-minded, common sense approach to this and we look forward to that being effective legislation,” said Mandelson.

If you didn’t watch in real time, you need to look for a rerun of last Monday’s episode of High Stakes Poker to see an amazing hand. Patrik Antonius raised to $4,000 with As-Jd and Jamie Gold (pictured right) reraised to $14,000 with pocket kings. Antonius called. Everyone else folded.

The flop was 3s-Qd-Th. Antonius checked his gut-shot straight draw and Gold bet $15,000 with his kings. Antonius called.

The turn was a card both players had hoped for, the Kh. It gave Gold top set, while Antonius had an ace-high straight, the best possible hand.

Antonius bet $45,000. Gold, never putting Antonius on a gut-shot straight draw, moved all-in for $341,500. Antonius called without hesitation and viewers were treated to the biggest pot in the show's history: $743,800 was on the table.

Gold and Antonius decided to run the river card three times, so there was nearly a quarter-million riding on each card.

Gold was a big underdog, but on the first run-through he caught the Qh, which paired the board and Jamie’s full-house was the best hand. Gold shouted “Yes!” sounding like Marv Albert does as he escaped at least once.

The second time they ran the river card, Gold caught the 3d for another full house. Antonius sat stunned and silent, having just lost $500,000 on two cards.

By the third run-through, there weren’t many cards left for Gold to catch and Antonius’ hand held up when the 8s fell on the river, allowing him to collect one-third of the pot. Had he lost that final encounter, he would have dropped nearly three-quarters of a million on that hand. As it was, he only lost $250,000.

When the hand was over, show host A.J. Benza said drolly, "I tell you one thing: Patrik can take a punch. Imagine if that was Phil Hellmuth.”

"I think my country is wrong in trying to change the rules of the World trade Organization (WTO)," said New York Democrat Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, to local Caribbean reporters, following a meeting with Antiguan Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer. The meeting was a sidebar to a regional business conference that was attended by a number of congressional representatives. Rangel added, "Your great nation and ours will have to negotiate those differences in terms of equity and fairness."