I’ve never played poker before. Sure, I sat on my boyfriend’s lap in high school while he played in his friend’s basement and asked me for my advice so I could feel included, but that doesn’t count. The only gambling I’ve ever done has been on a cruise ship one time, in my room, on the TV. Blackjack. I lost ten dollars.

Why, then, am I writing an article on internet poker? Well, aside from the fact that anything the religious right is against tends to make for worthy news fodder, apparently lots of people do play it. As in millions of people, in and around the 18-35 demographic, from their homes, apartments and dorm rooms. I’m talking 11,500,000 hits on Google for “poker.” Don’t worry, there were 117,000,000 for “porn” – Americans aren’t losing their mojos over a game. (By the way -- 1,410,000,000 for “love.” Makes a girl’s heart melt.) Clearly poker is a global phenomenon. But as of a couple weeks ago, they’re not too happy.

Before I address their concerns, a word on the history of the phenomenon itself.

Online poker is relatively new, starting in 1998 with the site Planet Poker, and then hitting it big in 2001 with the introduction of other major sites, including PartyPoker, PokerStars and UltimateBet. In 2003, poker hit mainstream television, with the World Poker Tour debuting on the Travel Channel and the annual World Series of Poker on ESPN, as well as many other poker-themed shows, which ushered in a huge rise in mass popularity, both online and off. Today online poker is a game played by professionals and amateurs alike: businessmen with too much to lose, college kids with too much to gain and everyone in between who just enjoys the game.

But the honeymoon may now be over. That’s because there are some in this country who oppose the right to play and are now starting to do something about it. Whether you’re against gambling or not, whether you think it’s moral or not and whether or not you care at all, this whole debate over the legality of online poker is actually pretty interesting. And this is coming from a girl who thinks cards are way more fun to build castles with than anything else – trust me on this one and hear me out before you run off to your underage drinking binge fest.

The current controversy revolves around a bill that passed through Congress about a week ago, which makes it a crime for a bank or financial institution to transfer money to an online gambling site, essentially a ban for online poker in the US, since most sites and intermediary banking accounts will no longer transfer their money. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act is title VIII of a completely unrelated bill, the Safe Port Act and was pushed through Congress by the Republican leadership in the final minutes before the election period recess. All it needs now is Dubya’s signature on the bottom.

To clarify: online poker is not illegal. Neither are online horse-betting or online fantasy sports betting (provided the sites include some players who are really made up. Great rule. Makes sense. Actually, not at all.).  Regular online sports betting is illegal because of the 1961 Wire Act, but poker is not, according to most legal experts. Republicans, however, think it should be. Why?  According to Senator Bill Frist, the main supporter of this bill, “gambling is a serious addiction that undermines the family, dashes dreams and frays the fabric of society.” Right, Bill, gambling frays the proverbial fabric, which is why you’re against all forms of gambling, right? Oh, wait, you’re not? Horse racing’s fine? The lottery too? You mean, you specifically allowed for those in your bill? Oh…ok, well then...that doesn’t really make sense anymore. At all. Just saying.

I’m not sure I even have to mention the fact that elections are coming up in November, (Vote or Die, Bitches) or that Republicans want to hold on to their upper hand by pandering to those on the Christian right who think gambling is downright nasty, or that Frist wants to run for president to have his turn fighting the terrorists, so he has to look good for his constituents. Oh, and never fear, they’ve managed to bring the terrorists into this issue as well – can’t have a good political debate without bringing in the terrorists! The god-fearing people of www.traditionalvalues.org remind us all that, “it is also possible that terrorist groups are using gambling activities as a way of funding their murderous plots.” Yes, and it’s also possible that terrorist groups are using Cereality as a front for a training camp, as well as a perfect place to hide nuclear weapons – IT’S IN THE CEREAL, PEOPLE! Sigh. Sometimes this country just makes me giggle.

In my opinion, let them play. I have no interest and no need to possibly lose all of my money since I have no clue how to play, but lots of people do have an interest, lots of people do have skill and lots of people do care about what they define to be their rights, online and off. Sure, gambling is illegal in most states, and sure, there are those who are addicted, and that’s very sad for them. But online poker is not technically illegal, and most people are not addicted. Besides, the last time this country tried to ban something addictive, that didn’t turn out so well, as evidenced by the aforementioned binge-fest. It’s just a bad reason for a law. And hey, maybe there are problems with it, maybe people will get hurt by playing. The thing is, skydiving is dangerous too. Maybe they should add a skydiving ban to the Safe Ports Act. Hey, they’re connected. Really. ‘Cuz like, the sky’s a port. And all.

If people choose to play, let them. After all, as Mike McDermott says in Rounders, (that Matt Damon movie about underground poker in New York? Yeah, that one) “You can’t lose what you don’t put in the middle. But you can’t win much either.” If they choose to play, and they win, hooray for them. If they choose to play  but lose, that’s too bad, but this is a free country for all people, winners and losers alike. Regulate it, tax it, do whatever is necessary to it, but don’t ban it.

Anyway, you don’t care about my opinions, as I have nothing to do with the poker world. Fortunately, I know someone who does. But first, a few words from fellow students on the matter:

“I think pot, poker, and possibly prostitution should be legal, but don’t quote me on the third.”

“I gamble with friends on all sorts of stuff, so if you ask me, gambling should be allowed throughout society.”

“I just think gambling is the dumbest thing. It’s like making an investment in a stock that A) has a negative expected return and B) is VERY risky. Online is faceless, yes, but for every big winner there is a big loser. It’s just a waste of human resources.”

And what kind of article would this be without the slippery slope argument? “I think it is a very slippery slope when the government starts to say what we can and can not do over the net. There has to be some kind of limit to what they have control over…the internet has been for a long time free play, and once the government steps in and starts regulating the content, it is a slippery slope as to what they will do next.”

So to sum up: my friends think things starting with a “P” should be legal, what we do with friends is the marker for legal appropriateness, (binge!) gambling is dumb, loserish, and a waste of human resources, and slippery slopes lead to broken ankles. Well said, mes freres.

After all this talk from people who don’t really know the game too well, I think it’s high time we take the matter to someone who actually plays.

Moses is 21 years old, recently graduated from NYU and lives in a sweet apartment in Tribeca, Manhattan. He plays poker. And I mean, really plays poker. As a semi-professional player, he spends hours online, playing about 8-10 tables at once, analyzing the game and his own strategies, perfecting and honing his skill and teaching others how to do the same. He’s been doing this for a few years now and has reaped the benefits over time. He’s played in major high-stakes tournaments around the world and is friends with the regulars. He doesn’t intend this to be a long-term career, but for the time being it’s making him a makes him a lot of money while keeping him entertained, comfortable and close to his friends, which is a lot more than can be said for most out-of-college nine to fives.

I asked him about his thoughts on the recent ban, since he has the unique perspective of someone who has actually studied and played the game extensively.

On the bill itself, Moses had this to say: “Spending who knows how many hours convincing congressional committees to add the act into the Port Security Act when the Republicans couldn’t manage to find the time to add provisions or budgets for train and bus security really pisses me off. It basically sends the message that internet gambling is more dangerous than homeland security, which is obviously not the case.”

Still, he was able to see the other side as well. He understands the moral or precautious justification for the bill, since clearly gambling can be harmful and ruinous to some. But he also pointed out that the act will least affect its intended targets, which are those who would get hurt by the game:

“Those people who are apt to lose their mortgage or their businesses on the blackjack table will still be just as likely to lose it in Vegas, Atlantic City or at the racetrack in Monticello. Problem gamblers are problem gamblers, and while the internet certainly gives them an additional avenue to work their vice, I doubt it’s altering their stability in any real way. Thus, the people most affected by this act are recreational gamblers: predominantly, online poker players and some individuals who enjoy playing online blackjack/roulette/slots, etc.”

I asked Moses what role poker plays in his own life.

“I love the game. I spend hours each day analyzing it, in the same way that a stock trader would spend hours analyzing corporations, potential buyouts, potential mergers, anywhere he sees underrated value. I do the same for poker.  It is a beautiful, artistic game of strategy that can be beaten and is beaten by several thousand professionals who have poured their minds into understanding subtle nuances the same way that any other professional would do in their craft.”

He continued by comparing his “craft” to other types of legal gambling available, such as the stock market.

“Why isn’t stock trading considering gambling or a vice? Like poker, it is a game of information. Like poker, there are winners and losers. The more you study, the better you’ll do. Like poker, an idiot could get lucky for a while.  But in the long term, the only winners will be the studious pros who seek an edge in whatever understated information they can find. I do the same for poker, and that’s why I win.”

I was also curious about the game itself, and asked him about the element of luck and skill. Being someone who doesn’t know the game too well, I would think however much skill there is in the game of poker, there must be even less involved with the online version, since none of the traditional “poker face” rules apply. But Moses has informed me otherwise; analyzing how people play their hands still works, even if you can’t watch them get uncomfortable in their seats. And after enough time studying the game, the odds and the psychology behind your own and other players’ actions, someone can become very skilled indeed. It is also a matter of short-term vs. long-term play. Even if in the short-term there’s always the chance of winning big on a bad hand or losing big on a great one, if you know what you’re doing, and you give it enough time long-term, you will make money.

Moses is clearly an exception to the overall rule of players who just want to make a quick buck, don’t spend time learning the game and ultimately lose a lot of money to people like him. I asked him if this ever makes him feel guilty. He said that while he rarely feels guilty playing with high-stakes players, considering he has met them and knows that they are mostly wealthy businessmen and trust fund kids who can afford to lose the money, he also feels that the people who just play occasionally online are responsible for their own losses.

“I’m not saying these people aren’t amateurs; they are. They’re destined to lose every cent they put online. But they’re still doing it consciously and actively. This [playing online] is a four step process, and if they’re too nervous, they could bail at any point. But they don’t. They WANT to gamble. Why should I feel that bad? And these stories of people losing mortgages or of honor roll college students robbing banks to pay down online gambling debts: these are the exception rather than the norm.”

As for those who are addicted to gambling, Moses says that he has been to a Gambler’s Anonymous meeting to see what these people are actually like, and he found that online or not, the game will still be played.

“It’s not just online poker; I’d say online poker is the healthier of their potential options. Unless you want to ban all gambling period, but you’d never do that because it’s too big of an industry and would cost hundreds of thousands of jobs.”

 Also, contrary to popular belief, online poker is not the most accessible thing in the world for people who just want a quick fix, or for children for that matter, which is another issue brought up by those opposed to it.

“For the past 2 years, the sites haven’t accepted credit cards, which means you’ve got to open up a third-party account with another service which you then link to your bank account by calling up your bank. The service is going to call your house and ask you security questions, and only then can you put money online and start playing. The point is it takes effort to put money online.”

60 Minutes did a study recently to see how easy it would be for children to use their parents’ credit cards to play poker online, and none of their test subjects were successful in their endeavors. I mean, sure, save the children and all that, but I’d say we should be focusing more on saving them from guns in their schools and the plight of public education in this country and the lack of health care coverage and oh so many more things than the bogey-man of internet poker.

So after all of this talk about a game, indeed a whole culture I don’t know too much about, I feel like the issues surrounding this ban reach much further than a simple game of chance. Really, why ban it? The reasons of morality and anti-terrorism provided by the Republicans just don’t do it for me. Children can’t get online. It’s not hurting anybody who is not consciously deciding to do it. It’s providing income for lots of players worldwide, who, while not necessarily providing a tangible service for others (unless you count the service of enjoyment, entertainment, and recreation, which is certainly eligible I’d say), aren’t doing any harm to anyone. All this ban is accomplishing is the creation of a ton of angry people who are losing their livelihoods (whether or not you agree with it) and a few happy Republicans in Congress.

I say, leave the game alone. Prohibition never did anybody ever good, and neither will this. Let the people play.

Comments

---

Post a Comment

Name:       Title:

Email Address:

Security Code:
Comment: (XHTML is allowed. Innapropriate material will be deleted.)