Poker
Poker News

 Italian gaming regulators have cited 888 Holdings for violating a new law that severely restricts the way in which gaming companies can advertise their products.

In effect since January, the legislation forbids operators to advertise in such a way that would cause the “incitement to gamble or exaltation of the practice.” In other words, gambling can not be shown or marketed as being a good thing.
The country's Court of the Institute of Advertising Self-Regulation called 888 out for broadcasting an ad on television that showed a barrage of gold coins raining down on a punter who was playing a slot game, eGR reported. The Court found the ad to be misleading in that viewers may falsely believe that gambling is a way to make quick money. This, the regulators determined, could prompt certain individuals to perhaps fall victim to gambling addiction.
The ad in question clearly included statements regarding responsible gambling practices in compliance with the statute that requires the risk of addictive gambling to be prominently displayed. Despite attempting to cater their advertisement to the constraints of the new regulations, 888 may be fined for their actions. The Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (Competition Authority) are allowed to levy fines up to €500,000 for the most serious breaches of the law according to the standards set.
The whole problem with the law is that companies are not allowed to "incite" people to gamble. But inciting people to use or buy your product is the essence of advertising itself.
As explained by Giulio Coraggio, an attorney with DLA Piper, “It might be argued that such decisions are in breach of the general principle of freedom to perform business since advertising is an essential part of a business.” In other words, if a gaming company is offering the possibility of winning a huge jackpot, it should be permitted to advertise as much.
This is the first time since the law was enacted that a company has been cited for breaching the new regulations. Though its not clear what time of day the ad ran and did not accuse 888 of pandering to minors, those regulations include the airing of advertisements during times that children are most likely to be watching television or listening to the radio.
Looking at a literal interpretation of the Italian advertising statute, any online poker or gambling website that includes a banner featuring a welcome deposit bonus could be guilty of promoting an incentive to gamble, Coraggio said. He also noted that the ad legislation makes the Italian regulator the sole authority on the country's advertising regulations pertaining to gambling. As such, the AAMS can "decide on the legality of gambling ads without having any case law or precedents to rely on.”
Its good and fine to protect children from gambling advertisements and to warn players that gambling involves risk. Pointing out that a small percentage of gamblers may also cross over the line into addictive behavior if they don't or can't gamble responsibly is also crucial.
But to restrict companies from advertising their product in a responsible fashion and enforcing a ridiculous law that lacks specifics is very unfair. How can gambling be promoted and advertised without pointing out the possibility of financial gain?

 New legislation in Turkey has been proposed that aims to severely penalize both players and operators of unlicensed poker and gambling websites.

A bill before the Turkish parliament has set maximum fines of 500,000 Turkish Lira (£180,000) for players caught wagering on unlawful gaming sites. Illegal site operators and payment processors would also be subject to fines and prison sentences under the new proposal.
Media companies who accept advertising for gambling websites would not escape punishment according to the new measure. Those deemed to be responsible for running such ads may face a three-year stint in prison.
The bill calls for the Turkish Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency (BDDK) and Telecommunication Communications Agency (TİB) to oversee enforcement of regulations. The BDDK would be in charge of banning the use of debit and credit cards with unlawful operators, while blocking IPs will fall under the jurisdiction of the TİB.
Turkey banned online gambling in 2007, but has been unable to stop its proliferation, eGR reported. Operators located outside of the country continue to service the Turkish market, where players seem eager to continue frequenting online poker and gambling websites.
GVC is one gaming company that continues to be active in Turkey. The company's recent report of revenue earnings for 2012 reached €21.2 million, with a good percentage of that coming from Turkish citizens.

 Optimus Poker, a Merge Network skin, has announced that it has ceased to exist as of May 8, 2013.

The website operated under the domain OptimusPoker.eu and boasted a small customer base for the struggling United States facing network. The website operator has assured players that funds are secure and that these funds will be available for play on the Merge Gaming Network. Furthermore, the Merge Gaming Network has encouraged players to transfer to one of the flagship websites such as Carbon Poker.
The shutdown of Optimus Poker is the latest casualty in a string of losses for the Merge Gaming Network. Recently, popular sites such as Hero Poker and RPM have closed business after a relatively successful run on the Merge Network. The reasons for the shutdown of these sites have not been specified.
The Merge Gaming Network has seemingly decided to trim its business in order to facilitate easier withdrawals and minimal complications in the United States black market. It has decided to cut its rakeback program and has lost several skins in favor of flagship sites like Carbon Poker. Recently, the network has decided to increase rake for its big bet games.

 After controversy over its delayed withdrawals and segregated cash tables, Lock Poker may have officially reached the bottom over its actions in the past weeks. The embattled site has been criticized by the poker community for months and it has culminated in a situation that has reached critical levels.

In its most recent controversy, Lock Poker sent emails to several players stating that withdrawals have been cancelled and that player-to-player transfer funds were no longer eligible to be withdrawn. Originally, the site required players to have a 1:1 play through requirement for transferred funds before utilizing the withdrawal functions. Violators of the service agreement policy were assessed a 15% penalty on the transfer. However, the policy was arbitrarily changed to a no withdrawal policy last week.
Lock Representative Shane stated that this new policy for transfers was “due to an influx of players abusing transfer tool solely for bulk withdrawals, negatively impacting withdrawal times for actual players.” He continued by stating that this policy was targeted at players who were withdrawing funds after a player-to-player transfer with minimal play. The representative also stated that Lock was taking this measure to prevent fake affiliates from driving down transfer values and slowing withdrawal times by purchasing large amounts of player funds.
In spite of the Lock representative’s claims, players have claimed that his statements were false and accused the site of controversial practices. A reputable poster, theJuggernaut, stated that his withdrawal of nearly five figures was cancelled even though he had raked thousands of dollars from this particular transfer. Furthermore, players have accused Lock of preventing transfers and withdrawals to benefit the site. Withdrawals and transfers would essentially lead to less money and less rake being circulated on the site.
The height of the controversy eventually led TwoPlusTwo CEO Mason Malmuth to contact Lock Representatives to address the worsening situation. After the conversation, Malmuth posted that Lock Poker officials were working towards answering all concerns and implementing new policies to facilitate withdrawals and transfers. Furthermore, Malmuth announced that TwoPlusTwo forums were banning Lock Poker advertisements until the issue was resolved to the satisfaction of the TwoPlusTwo community.
In response to angered players and Malmuth’s conversation, Lock Poker officially changed its transfer and withdrawal policy. Representative Shane Bridges stated that the site was implementing a 15% Gross Gambling Revenue policy that would require players to rake a minimum of 15% of the transferred money before cashing out the particular sum.
Despite this move to temporarily appease players, Lock Poker has lost the trust and support of its players as evidenced by the reactions on the Lock centered forum on TwoPlusTwo.
The entire situation has led poker players to call out Lock Poker professionals including celebrities such as Michael “The Grinder” Mizrachi and Annette Obrestad. In a show of solidarity, MTT professionals Chris Moorman and Paul Volpe announced that they would not be renewing their sponsorship contracts with the site. Their pictures were removed from the Lock Pro section immediately.
Some players have even taken extreme measures to call out the owner of Lock Poker, Jennifer Larson. A TwoPlusTwo thread has officially threatened to send Jennifer Larson to the Department of Justice.
Nevertheless, Lock Poker has been on a sliding mountain since its launch of the Revolution Network in the United States black market. The embattled site has been dealing with payment processing issues for several months and have angered players over these transaction policies. Most Lock Poker withdrawals were given a 10 week time table, but several players have claimed that they have been waiting months for cash outs that most likely total in the mid six figures.
The unfriendly withdrawal times have led to the creation of Lock Poker trade market. Several players have been selling funds for as low as 50c on the dollar in order to part ways with the embattled site. This poker economy was the primary reason for the recent cancellation for withdrawals. However, poker players have blamed Lock Poker for creating such a trade market given the long wait for cash outs.
In addition to the withdrawal controversy, Lock Poker recently implemented a player segregation policy at stakes higher than $100NL ($0.50/$1) in order to improve player ecology. This new policy unfortunately backfired for the site as many players did not have many tables to choose from on the site.
With United States legislation on the horizon, Lock Poker and its Revolution Network seem to be close to becoming obsolete. At one point, the Revolution Network held the top spot for United States facing online poker websites. After months of controversy, the Bovada (Bodog) online poker site has taken the top spot with Revolution slipping to second place.
Players around the world have voiced their concerns over the policies of the network and the ability to pay out respective balances. Several players have even jested by taking proposition bets on the solvency of Lock Poker.
Lock Representatives have promised to solve the underlying issues over the next month. For now, the players remain unsatisfied and cheated by the actions and policies of this embattled site.

 $5 million will be awarded in a variety of promotions to celebrate the 100 billion poker hand dealt on PokerStars, the online poker room announced Wednesday.

Players dealt into the key hand will receive a share of $1 million, with the winner taking at least $100k. The rest of the money will be distributed to the players in the hand, and players playing at the same stake when the hand was dealt.
Another $1 million will be given away in the key milestone hands that lead up to the “big one.”
In addition, $3 million in prizes will be given in a variety of special promotions covering both ring games, SNGs and tournaments. The promotions will run over the next six weeks, though specifics have yet to be announced.
The promotion is part of PokerStars’ long running “road to 100 billion,” which has been awarding cash prizes at each 5 billion hand milestone. $1m was given away for the run up to the 90th billionth, and again at the penultimate stop.
PokerStars deals 5 billion hands roughly every three months. With the 95th billion hand occurring in late February, the big 100th is expected near the end of June.
The milestone promotions have proved popular with players, causing huge traffic spikes as players play a large number of tables hoping to hit the hand. With $2 million given away, there could be unprecedented traffic as the key hand approaches.

 Online poker pros Chris Moorman and Paul Volpe, two prominent player-endorsers of beleaguered online poker site Lock Poker, have announced that they have chosen not to renew their deals with the site. Though undeclared, the decisions appear to be effective immediately, with both players already removed from the Lock Poker site.

Moorman, a prominent British pro, and Volpe, an American player, both announced their decisions via their personal Twitter feeds within the past 24 hours, reflecting the poker public’s concern over deep troubles at Lock, which have spilled over into attacks on many of the pros representing the site.
Lock’s recent troubles include cashout times exceeding five months for US-based players and close to three months for players outside the US, and the arbitrary and retroactive institution of a no-cashout policy for amounts transferred between players on the site. Lock claimed to be doing the latter to combat “money laundering” and secondary-market trading (where Lock dollars are deeply discounted), but has been unable to provide evidence of the site’s overall liquidity and security.
Moorman and Volpe were formerly members of the “Lock Pro Elite” team, which was comprised of 21 prominent players sporting Lock-logoed gear and otherwise promoting the site. A third member of the Lock Pro Elite team, Jason Young, has also been recently removed from Lock’s site, but appears on earlier versions of the webpage.
Among the pros still listed as “Elite” on the Lock Poker site are Michael “The Grinder” Mizrachi, Eric “Rizen” Lynch, Annette Obrestad (who sported Lock gear today at an EPT event), Matt Stout, Melanie Weisner, Felipe Ramos, Casey Jarzabek and Brett Jungblut. Stout and Jungblut are among a minority of pros who have commented publicly on Lock’s ongoing crisis, while others — notably including Mizrachi, Lynch and Obrestad — have offered no comment to date.
Two other players have also been removed from the “Lock Pro” lineup on the site, a second echelon of players not as widely known as those in the “Elite” grouping. Andre Diaz and Justin Cook no longer appear, in total dropping the current roster of Lock pros from 32 to 27.
 

 Phil Ivey has issued a writ against London’s Crockfords Casino, claiming that they have failed to pay him punto banco winnings totalling over $12m.

The dispute arose in August last year after the casino, based in one of the most exclusive locations in London, withheld Ivey’s winnings.
The club is owned by the Malaysian based Genting Group—a company worth tens of billions of dollars with 58,000 employees across the world.
In a statement, the legendary gambler and winner of nine WSOP bracelets explains the legal action: ”Over the years I have won and lost substantial sums at Crockfords and I have always honoured my commitments. At the time, I was given a receipt for my winnings but Crockfords subsequently withheld payment. I, therefore, feel I have no alternative but to take legal action.”
The winnings were accrued in a two day streak that saw him up £2.3m on the first day and a total of £7.3m by the second. The casino at first assured him that he would be paid, but then decided to carry out an internal investigation of its own.
No evidence of collusion or other cheating has been suggested by the company which went into great detail in its investigation, examining the “shoe” from where the cards were dealt and all other equipment in the room.
Some suspicion was raised by Ivey’s companion at the time, a “beautiful Oriental female friend,” according to one mainstream report last August. However, the casino has not published any accusations against Ivey and has returned his original £1m stake.
Phil has recently put his name behind a new venture, “IveyPoker,” recruiting a long string of professionals to “teach the world how to play better.” The world is still waiting for a launch date.
 

 A number of players on Winner Poker, a skin on the iPoker network, are reporting that their accounts are now being unlocked, following a widespread investigation that lasted over a week.

The network-wide suspension of player-to-player transfers last week is understood to be related. In a statement to pokerfuse an iPoker spokesperson said that the move was temporary and “due to security concerns.”
Over the weekend, multiple players and affiliates of the Winner skin reported that their accounts had been locked due to unspecified security reasons.
As of today, multiple players report their accounts have been unlocked and can play and can cash out as normal. It remains unclear if some accounts remain affected, and some players are reportedly missing rakeback payments from the last two weeks.
Though P2P transfers on European sites are not essential due to fast deposits and withdrawals, it can be an important feature both to fund accounts at high stakes and to enable staking deals. Operators of large staking operations have contacted pokerfuse to voice their concerns that threatened their business if the transfer policy were permanent.
Various rumors in online communities as to the reasons for the investigation—including worries over money laundering, a “bot” crackdown, or an investigation into players using VPNs to play from the United States—all remain unconfirmed.

 PokerStars’ parent company Rational Group filed a lawsuit in New Jersey Monday against the owner of Atlantic Club Casino. Rational asserts that the alleged termination of their agreement to purchase the property with Rational is illegal.

According to the lawsuit, PokerStars alleges that Resorts International and other defendants are guilty of “breach of contract and bad faith” in the “purported termination” of the purchase of the troubled casino property.
Rational attorneys also filed for a temporary restraining order (TRO) in the case, blocking Resorts International from executing any other sales agreement or transaction connected to the Atlantic Club. The request for the TRO was immediately granted by Judge Raymond A. Batten.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Rational by the New Jersey law firm of Lum, Drasco and Positan, names several defendants in the action in addition to Resorts International: Eric Matejevich, Irwin Apartment Trust, Michael Frawley, RIH Acquisitions NJ LLC, and RIH Propco NJ LLC.
Late last year, Rational agreed to purchase the struggling Atlantic City casino from Resorts International Holdings, contingent upon Rational being approved to operate a casino in New Jersey. The deal was expected to protect between 1,800 and 2,000 jobs at a property that is in risk of being shuttered.
According to the lawsuit, the attempted cancellation of the deal is itself illegal. Stars’ attorneys cited the New Jersey Casino Control Act, N.J.S.A. 5:12-95.12(a) in asserting that no casino purchase in progress can be cancelled once an application for casino operator approval has begun.
The application in the name of Rational US was only recently declared complete by New Jersey regulators, leading to the assertion that the expiration-date included in the original purchase can not be enforced.
The lawsuit alleges that Resorts International’s decision to terminate, communicated on April 27, also came just one day after Resorts proposed a modest 10-day extension to the deal, in exchange for an extra $6 million payment. This would likely also be rendered as a moot proposal if the court upholds Rational’s and PokerStars’ claims.
Resorts International, according to the complaint, also asked for a $4 million termination fee regarding the purchase agreement, which when added to $11 million already paid by PokerStars would equal the complete, original $15 million sales price for the property.
In the complaint, Stars’ attorneys describe this as follows: “Should Rational comply with this demand, Rational would have paid the entire purchase price, and received exactly nothing in return.”
Rational Group’s Head of Corporate Communications, Eric Hollreiser, issued a brief statement in conjunction with the filing of the lawsuit and the obtaining of the restraining order.
According to Hollreiser, “The Rational Group (d/b/a PokerStars) today filed a lawsuit in New Jersey Superior Court seeking to restrain the sellers of the Atlantic Club Casino and Hotel from continuing to breach the purchase agreement which was entered between the Rational Group and the seller (who are led by Colony Capital LLC) in December 2012. This step has been taken to protect Rational Group’s rights and interests under the purchase agreement and reflects the Group’s desire to complete the acquisition of the Atlantic Club.”
“The Rational Group remains entirely committed to resolving this situation, and to its investment in New Jersey, while it continues to diligently work on completing the required licensing process,” the statement concludes.
An initial hearing in the matter has been scheduled before Judge Batten at 1:30 PM on May 17.

 PokerStars’ parent company Rational Group filed a lawsuit in New Jersey Monday against the owner of Atlantic Club Casino. Rational asserts that the alleged termination of their agreement to purchase the property with Rational is illegal.

According to the lawsuit, PokerStars alleges that Resorts International and other defendants are guilty of “breach of contract and bad faith” in the “purported termination” of the purchase of the troubled casino property.
Rational attorneys also filed for a temporary restraining order (TRO) in the case, blocking Resorts International from executing any other sales agreement or transaction connected to the Atlantic Club. The request for the TRO was immediately granted by Judge Raymond A. Batten.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Rational by the New Jersey law firm of Lum, Drasco and Positan, names several defendants in the action in addition to Resorts International: Eric Matejevich, Irwin Apartment Trust, Michael Frawley, RIH Acquisitions NJ LLC, and RIH Propco NJ LLC.
Late last year, Rational agreed to purchase the struggling Atlantic City casino from Resorts International Holdings, contingent upon Rational being approved to operate a casino in New Jersey. The deal was expected to protect between 1,800 and 2,000 jobs at a property that is in risk of being shuttered.
According to the lawsuit, the attempted cancellation of the deal is itself illegal. Stars’ attorneys cited the New Jersey Casino Control Act, N.J.S.A. 5:12-95.12(a) in asserting that no casino purchase in progress can be cancelled once an application for casino operator approval has begun.
The application in the name of Rational US was only recently declared complete by New Jersey regulators, leading to the assertion that the expiration-date included in the original purchase can not be enforced.
The lawsuit alleges that Resorts International’s decision to terminate, communicated on April 27, also came just one day after Resorts proposed a modest 10-day extension to the deal, in exchange for an extra $6 million payment. This would likely also be rendered as a moot proposal if the court upholds Rational’s and PokerStars’ claims.
Resorts International, according to the complaint, also asked for a $4 million termination fee regarding the purchase agreement, which when added to $11 million already paid by PokerStars would equal the complete, original $15 million sales price for the property.
In the complaint, Stars’ attorneys describe this as follows: “Should Rational comply with this demand, Rational would have paid the entire purchase price, and received exactly nothing in return.”
Rational Group’s Head of Corporate Communications, Eric Hollreiser, issued a brief statement in conjunction with the filing of the lawsuit and the obtaining of the restraining order.
According to Hollreiser, “The Rational Group (d/b/a PokerStars) today filed a lawsuit in New Jersey Superior Court seeking to restrain the sellers of the Atlantic Club Casino and Hotel from continuing to breach the purchase agreement which was entered between the Rational Group and the seller (who are led by Colony Capital LLC) in December 2012. This step has been taken to protect Rational Group’s rights and interests under the purchase agreement and reflects the Group’s desire to complete the acquisition of the Atlantic Club.”
“The Rational Group remains entirely committed to resolving this situation, and to its investment in New Jersey, while it continues to diligently work on completing the required licensing process,” the statement concludes.
An initial hearing in the matter has been scheduled before Judge Batten at 1:30 PM on May 17.
pages: << 1 ... 68 69 70 71 72 ... 80 >>
  • 1669

  • 1816
  • 1537

  • 1543

  • 1549

  • 1546

  • Getting Started Poker in 4 steps

    Step 1 Step 2
    Step 3 Step 4