|
Pokerstars is an online poker site. Pokerstrategy is an educational training site. They are not the same site. The TSL3 is sponsored by pokerstrategy.com. |
Yeah I know what your saying, but you also have to look at how sudden this is and how reliable pokerstars and fulltilt have been over the past decade. There was no reason to believe that something like this would happen. Yes there was the UIGEA and it was a bit sketchy, but it has been years since it was introduced and nothing has happened so it didn't seem like the US was going to actually enforce it. Couple that with a few senators/congressmen trying to get a bill passed to make online poker legal and regulate it, which has been making slow but consistent progress over the past year or two, and it seemed more like the UIGEA was just a place holder to keep the companies in line while the US could agree on a way to legalize and regulate it.
Then we wake up one day and the FBI has seized all accounts with the three top corporations in the US and all of us have no idea what the fuck just happened.
EDIT: gotunks summed it up pretty concisely. I just felt the need to elaborate. I'm confident most poker players would agree as well that we felt ps/ftp was as safe or safer than most banks.
|
On April 16 2011 14:20 ShadowDrgn wrote: Plus it can be a pain to constantly deposit/withdraw, especially in the US.
You're limited to one withdrawal per day and you can't withdraw until 48 hours after your last deposit so you wouldn't really be able hop your funds around at all unless you only played one or two days of the week (at least for Pokerstars, I'd assume policies are uniform or at least vastly similar).
|
On April 16 2011 03:56 where wrote:oh what the fuck is this. The government is that desperate for money that they are trying to steal from online gambling sites? What about those mortgage backed securities, CDOs and those other institutionalized gambling forms? Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, AIG too difficult of targets? Do we really need an online gaming lobby? "How a big US bank laundered billions from Mexico's murderous drug gangs" http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangsIs Wachovia "too profitable to fail"? Or is it because the drug cartels have organized weaponry and might fight back, unlike online poker players?
....Wachovia did fail.....
|
On April 16 2011 14:14 PJA wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 13:42 Hurricane wrote:On April 16 2011 13:21 UniversalSnip wrote:On April 16 2011 13:03 GoTuNk! wrote:On April 16 2011 12:55 UniversalSnip wrote: Those of you who had more than 10k tied up in online poker sites: what the fuck were you thinking? I know players who refuse to use those sites at all because they view them as insecure and prone to corruption. If you somehow get your money back for god's sakes take the lesson and don't keep so much liquid there. Its quite simple. For starters, most good regs started with 50-200 bucks and turned them into 10k or more. 2nd, poker is a high variance game and you need a big bankroll compared to the stake you play to avoid ruin when you run bad (and you are a long term winning player). Also, the higher u play, the lower ur edge/higher variance, so you need even more bi's relative to the stake. For example, a simple br management (some people use more agressive/less agressive bankroll management, but this kinda standard): stake / bank roll required nl10 - 200 bucks nl25 - 600 bucks nl50 - 1250 bucks nl100 - 3k nl200 - 10k nl600 - 60k nl1k - 100k micromanage your money. There should not be so many people with large amounts of cash just sitting in their system, it's simply insane to trust them with your money. It is not insane to trust a company that has been around for over a decade doing international business and handles at the very minimum thousands of transactions per day. It is insane to play high stakes without the proper bank roll because then it is truly gambling. That said there are not a ton of people that play as a living playing high stakes. On April 16 2011 13:41 ammeL wrote: So does this mean anyone who was under 21 and used PokerStars or AbsolutePoker would get fined 250,000?
Or does this just mean anyone who had money on an account just loses all that?
The legal gambling age in US is 18. We don't know what's going to happen to our money until we have more information. Most of us are planning for the worst though. He's not saying play high stakes without the proper bankroll. He's saying have the majority of your bankroll in a bank, and have, say, 5 buyins on FTP. Note: don't shoot the messenger kthx. Just clarifying on what I thought ought to be his obvious implication, rather than your assumption that he meant don't play with a legit bankroll.
if you want to make any kind of money in poker you need to play with 40+ buy ins at midstakes, and even more at high stakes.
|
only down 12 grand, not too shabby.
|
Really shitty situation. Lots of panic, speculation and misguided conclusions. Going to wait a bit, let the dust settle and not make any rash decisions. Hopefully this will become more clear in the next few days.
|
On April 16 2011 14:59 Stroggoz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 14:14 PJA wrote:On April 16 2011 13:42 Hurricane wrote:On April 16 2011 13:21 UniversalSnip wrote:On April 16 2011 13:03 GoTuNk! wrote:On April 16 2011 12:55 UniversalSnip wrote: Those of you who had more than 10k tied up in online poker sites: what the fuck were you thinking? I know players who refuse to use those sites at all because they view them as insecure and prone to corruption. If you somehow get your money back for god's sakes take the lesson and don't keep so much liquid there. Its quite simple. For starters, most good regs started with 50-200 bucks and turned them into 10k or more. 2nd, poker is a high variance game and you need a big bankroll compared to the stake you play to avoid ruin when you run bad (and you are a long term winning player). Also, the higher u play, the lower ur edge/higher variance, so you need even more bi's relative to the stake. For example, a simple br management (some people use more agressive/less agressive bankroll management, but this kinda standard): stake / bank roll required nl10 - 200 bucks nl25 - 600 bucks nl50 - 1250 bucks nl100 - 3k nl200 - 10k nl600 - 60k nl1k - 100k micromanage your money. There should not be so many people with large amounts of cash just sitting in their system, it's simply insane to trust them with your money. It is not insane to trust a company that has been around for over a decade doing international business and handles at the very minimum thousands of transactions per day. It is insane to play high stakes without the proper bank roll because then it is truly gambling. That said there are not a ton of people that play as a living playing high stakes. On April 16 2011 13:41 ammeL wrote: So does this mean anyone who was under 21 and used PokerStars or AbsolutePoker would get fined 250,000?
Or does this just mean anyone who had money on an account just loses all that?
The legal gambling age in US is 18. We don't know what's going to happen to our money until we have more information. Most of us are planning for the worst though. He's not saying play high stakes without the proper bankroll. He's saying have the majority of your bankroll in a bank, and have, say, 5 buyins on FTP. Note: don't shoot the messenger kthx. Just clarifying on what I thought ought to be his obvious implication, rather than your assumption that he meant don't play with a legit bankroll. if you want to make any kind of money in poker you need to play with 40+ buy ins at midstakes, and even more at high stakes.
I think you should re-read what the guy above you said, you can have 40+ buyins at midstakes, and have 5 buyins at the site, and 35 in the bank, and have your money be "safe" that being said. Anyone who says you should not have your money on pokerstars\fulltilt because of corruption\scamming\ the risk of them some how hijacking your money obviously have absolutely no clue at all what they are talking about and should be treated in a simmilar manner to someone who are deliberately trolling (e.g ignored.)
There are lots of reasons not to constantly be withdrawing/depositing. There can often be small fees\backdraws to withdrawing/depositing(hitting your rakeback etc or messing with bonuses also.) So if you have to withdraw everytime you go above 5 buyins that could easily be a problem. Secondly Most people play 5+ tables. Alot play 10+ tables, some people even play 24 tables. Good luck doing that with 5 buyins. Last but not least, for a lot of players tilt can be a huge problem, and I can easily imagine it being more tilting to lose all of your online roll in a day and having to re deposit, than losing 10% of it and just seeing a minor flucutation, even though you know the money is in the bank the psychological aspect is still present. The only reason to not have all your roll on an online poker site is because you could have the money invested elsewhere\have it making interest in a bank or whatever. But that wont amount to much unless you are playing at the realrealhigh stakes anyway (where I know most players do not have all of their bankroll online)
Pretty sure the money of the american players will get back to them somehow. If it were to not get back to them though, it would be 10000000000000% the fault of the FBI/US government, not pstars\ftp.
|
"Serves you right" is a pretty harsh attitude for a bunch of TL'ers to have. I know Fayth is a pretty good poster on TL and he commented earlier that he stands to lose $75,000. Whether they should have seen it coming or not don't you guys have any sympathy for a fellow TL'er?
It's also cool to see all these reassurances from PokerStars. Dunno whether they're genuine or just good public relations but its a damn good way of showing online gambling as legitimate and professional and not shady underground KGB associations ala Rounders.
|
The United States government worries about jobs in the United States, well they just took away thousands of peoples ability to earn money. Cool.
|
Why are people acting like the US players are never going to see the money they had on the accounts again? Seems like completely unwarranted to me, though I can see why people with several k on the sites that they now do not have access too are worried, I see a lot of people acting like it is now 100% gone. Is there something I am missing?
|
fyi (I play poker while in school for added income, like 50-70k/mo hands).
you at TL should take this very seriously, poker sites/players are a large source of money, and if you expect things like TSL to keep happening, think again in the wake of this.
|
This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On April 16 2011 15:42 Consolidate wrote: This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money.
You sound intelligent
|
On April 16 2011 15:43 mburke05 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 15:42 Consolidate wrote: This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money. You sound intelligent
You sound facetious.
Poker for money, as with all gambling, contributes nothing to society(not that that matters really) and is a waste of young people's competative talents.
The law was there for all to see -pokerstars thought the law was unenforceable, apparently they were wrong.
You took a risk not many financially responsible people would.
|
On April 16 2011 15:49 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 15:43 mburke05 wrote:On April 16 2011 15:42 Consolidate wrote: This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money. You sound intelligent You sound facetious. Poker for money, as with all gambling, contributes nothing to society(not that that matters really) and is a waste of young people's competative talents. The law was there for all to see -pokerstars thought the law was unenforceable, apparently they were wrong. You took a risk not many financially responsible people would. According to you flawed logic, starcraft is "a waste of young people's competative talents" because it "contributes nothing to society" (or as much as poker i believe) . What are you doing on this site again?
|
On April 16 2011 15:49 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 15:43 mburke05 wrote:On April 16 2011 15:42 Consolidate wrote: This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money. You sound intelligent You sound facetious. Poker for money, as with all gambling, contributes nothing to society(not that that matters really) and is a waste of young people's competative talents. The law was there for all to see -pokerstars thought the law was unenforceable, apparently they were wrong. You took a risk not many financially responsible people would.
as long as you pay taxes you contribute to society, it's kind of pointless to judge any one profession over another in terms of its contributions to society
|
On April 16 2011 15:49 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 15:43 mburke05 wrote:On April 16 2011 15:42 Consolidate wrote: This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money. You sound intelligent You sound facetious. Poker for money, as with all gambling, contributes nothing to society(not that that matters really) and is a waste of young people's competative talents. The law was there for all to see -pokerstars thought the law was unenforceable, apparently they were wrong. You took a risk not many financially responsible people would.
You sound like an unsympathetic fagt.
Gaming, web-surfing, hanging out with friends, and having fun in general contributes nothing to society. But I bet you still do all of it. fagt.
The law wasn't there for all to see, it wasn't enforced immediately, and might still be unenforceable now in court, apparently you just assume it's enforceable. Thanks Mr. Harvard law.
People always take risks. Financially responsible people take risks too. Just more socially acceptable ones (buying a home, shares). Except this wasn't trading on some no name site run underground by the KGB, fagt.
So summary: This may have cost alot of good, normal people something beyond what you can fathom because, generally speaking, you're a fagt.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On April 16 2011 15:49 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 15:43 mburke05 wrote:On April 16 2011 15:42 Consolidate wrote: This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money. You sound intelligent You sound facetious. Poker for money, as with all gambling, contributes nothing to society(not that that matters really) and is a waste of young people's competative talents. The law was there for all to see -pokerstars thought the law was unenforceable, apparently they were wrong. You took a risk not many financially responsible people would.
jesus..
|
On April 16 2011 15:56 benjammin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 15:49 Consolidate wrote:On April 16 2011 15:43 mburke05 wrote:On April 16 2011 15:42 Consolidate wrote: This is very entertaining.
I can't say I feel much sympathy for the people who might lose their money. You sound intelligent You sound facetious. Poker for money, as with all gambling, contributes nothing to society(not that that matters really) and is a waste of young people's competative talents. The law was there for all to see -pokerstars thought the law was unenforceable, apparently they were wrong. You took a risk not many financially responsible people would. as long as you pay taxes you contribute to society, it's kind of pointless to judge any one profession over another in terms of its contributions to society
What? Even ignoring opinions about poker, it's evident to anyone with half a brain that some professions contribute more to society than others.
|
Dangit now i will be evicted from my apartment and will have to move under a bridge. oh well time to sell crack now instead. whos with me? online poker poker players will take over the dope game!
|
|
|
|