Casino Planet Cash

Matthew Walton muses on the this week’s Champions League draw which favoured some and left others with very tough tasks to progress

When it comes to “legal stuff” and online poker, I never feel entirely comfortable offering my opinions. Or even simply reporting what the hell is going on. I mean, I think I am a decent reader and even once in a while stumble on a good ideer or response to this or that. But when it comes to commenting confidently on this particular subject, my first instinct is usually to try to change it.

The fact is, current state and federal laws regarding online poker/gambling here in the U.S. are ambiguous at best, and the process by which new laws and regulations come to be is often also mysterious for most of us. Rarely does anything seem perfectly clear, and when it does, such moments of clarity are often frustratingly fleeting. There’s always an appeal, it seems. And an appeal of the appeal. And so forth. Never mind “running it twice.” These guys appear willing and able to run it a hundred times if they have to, with the rules changing each time along the way.

This week came a couple of stories regarding some of many ongoing legal machinations, neither of which necessarily offered any further clarity for us on this subject. Or comfort. One was a ruling from the Kentucky Supreme Court on the Commonwealth’s efforts to seize 141 domains hosting online gambling sites. Sounds like that one has turned the other way once again. For now, that is. (It’s always “for now.”)

If you recall, it was back in September 2008 that we first heard that a Circuit Court judge had granted Governor Steve Beshear’s order to “seize” the domains which hosted sites allowing Kentucky residents to gamble online. Seemed like a pretty obvious usurpation of authority, as though somehow Kentucky could rule the entire interwebs and take control of sites according to its own predilections.

A hearing was held the following month, and the Circuit Court ruled in favor of Beshear et al. If the offending domains didn’t start blocking Kentucky from accessing the sites they were hosting within 30 days, the domains would be forfeited to Kentucky. A “forfeiture hearing” was then scheduled, then delayed. Then the case wound up in the court of appeals, where it was determined Kentucky wasn’t king of the internet after all.

The sucker then went to the state’s Supreme Court — an appeal of the appeal — where it has been for the last long while. Finally, this week the Supreme Court ruled that, in fact, the ruling in the Court of Appeals didn’t hold “due to the incapacity of domain names to contest their own seizure.”

In other words, the owners of the domains — who remained “anonymous registrants” and were represented by others — have to come forward and defend themselves (says the Ky. Supreme Court). So the decision in the Court of Appeals has been reversed. (Full decision here.)

The Poker Players Alliance has commented, saying it “understands the technical nature of the decision” made by the Supreme Court, and that it “remains confident that, once that issue is cured, the Supreme Court” will see the light and uphold the previous decision of the Court of Appeals to deny Kentucky the right to seize the domains. I like the choice of metaphor there — what we are looking at here is in fact an illness than needs to be “cured” before we can go forward.

Is this incurable, though? Who knows?

The other item of special note this week concerned House Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) telling PokerNews that he did not anticipate another delay would be granted for implementation of the final regulations of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006.

Another story that sounds, well, a little sick-making.

If you recall, those final regs were set to go into effect on December 1, 2009, but the feds granted six more months to consider other legislation, meaning the current deadline for U.S. banks and financial institutions to start blocking transactions with online gambling sites is now June 1, 2010.

Earlier this year, Rep. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) — one of the first authors of the legislation that ultimately became the UIGEA — decided to use his standing in the Senate to start blocking the President’s nominees to fill positions in the Treasury Department. Frank told PokerNews that Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner has said he wouldn’t allow any further delays specifically because of Kyl’s tactics.

Frank remains confident, however, that even after compliance with the UIGEA becomes mandatory in June, its standing will be tenuous. “Once it goes into effect, banks are going to raise hell,” he told PN, anticipating the banks’ subsequent complaints will lead to the UIGEA’s repeal.

As I have written about numerous times here, even if the UIGEA is an ambiguous, murky law that probably couldn’t hold up to any court challenges, its going into effect is nevertheless going to have consequences on U.S. players of online poker, knocking many out of the game due to increased difficulties getting money onto the sites.

When I appeared on Lou Krieger’s “Keep Flopping Aces” podcast last month, he asked me what I thought would happen with regard to the UIGEA during 2010. I told him my sense was that I did not feel very confident that it would be repealed this year, nor did I think any other legislation would likely be passed.

By way of explanation, I said hoping for either a repeal or the passage of new legislation was sort of like pulling for a poor player in a poker tourney to win. He’d need a lot of breaks just to reach the final table, then still more examples of good timing and fortuitous cards to win in the end.

Of course, using that analogy served a particular purpose for me — it enabled me to avoid speaking more particularly about things about which I have little clue.

In fact, I suspect most of us are essentially short-stacked when challenged to understand “legal stuff” and online poker.

Which of them will fall flat on their faces first?

The 2010 March Madness bracket tournament has been set and the top four No.1 seeds have been announced, that being the Kansas Jayhawks, the Kentucky Wildcats, the Duke Blue Devils and the Syracuse Orange. That being said, basketball aficionados looking to score some major winnings will wait which No.1 seed will falter first since these guys know how big underdogs pay off.

So who’ll get the boot first? Let’s start with the Duke Blue Devils. Among all of the no.1 seeds in this year’s tournament, many people are expecting Duke to have the easiest matchup, well, at least in the first round. Duke has all the materials to go deep in this tournament and since the Tar Heels won’t be playing this March, not many people think otherwise.

Next we have the Kansas Jayhawks. Kansas has one of the best defenses in college basketball as they held opponents to 63.8 points, the best average in the Big 12, the very conference the Jayhawks dominated with a 15-1 record before claiming the conference tournament championship for the seventh time. Betting against these guys is pretty much, not a good idea.

We also have the Syracuse Orange. They will slug it out against the Vermont Catamounts in the first round of the 2010 NCAA tourney. Looking back at the history of these two teams, Vermont, champions of the America East Conference, beat Syracuse 60-57 in overtime in the first round of the 2005 NCAA tournament, a stinging loss the Orange have not forgotten. And if you’re looking for an upset in the first round, this matchup can very well give you one.

Syracuse had finished the 2004-05 regular season at 24-6 and…

Heeere we go.

An intriguing game in the 2010 March Madness bracket tournament will be played on Thursday as 11^th seed Washington faces 6^th seed Marquette. This is the third straight year Marquette has been a number six seed in the NCAA tournament. Two years ago they beat 11^th seed Kentucky in the first round before losing to third-seeded Stanford in overtime in the second round. Last year, Marquette beat 11^th seed Utah State and lost to third-seeded Missouri in the second round. It is the fifth straight year the Eagles have made the tournament.

The Marquette Golden Eagles are 2-point favorites at SBG Global.

Not much was expected of Marquette this season since they lost three starters, but the Eagles really came together late in the season, winning 11 of their last 14 games. The Eagles don’t have much of a bench so the starters are a big key. Marquette had some nice wins this year over Villanova, Georgetown and Xavier so they are capable of making a little run in the NCAA tournament.

Lazar Hayward is their big scorer. He was named second team All-Big East this season. Marquette is a good shooting team, especially from long range. The Eagles averaged 72.9 points per game this season while they allowed 64.2 points per game.

The Washington Huskies, on the other hand, had what could be considered a disappointing regular season but they made up for it by winning the Pac-10 Tournament. Washington has some players who can make an impact including Quincy Pondexter who leads the team in scoring.

Marquette and Washington have met twice in history but it was a long time ago. Marquette won 75-74 in 1966 and 71-63 in 1978.

The Huskies are 6-1 ATS in their last 7 games overall but…

Heeere we go.

An intriguing game in the 2010 March Madness bracket tournament will be played on Thursday as 11^th seed Washington faces 6^th seed Marquette. This is the third straight year Marquette has been a number six seed in the NCAA tournament. Two years ago they beat 11^th seed Kentucky in the first round before losing to third-seeded Stanford in overtime in the second round. Last year, Marquette beat 11^th seed Utah State and lost to third-seeded Missouri in the second round. It is the fifth straight year the Eagles have made the tournament.

The Marquette Golden Eagles are 2-point favorites at SBG Global.

Not much was expected of Marquette this season since they lost three starters, but the Eagles really came together late in the season, winning 11 of their last 14 games. The Eagles don’t have much of a bench so the starters are a big key. Marquette had some nice wins this year over Villanova, Georgetown and Xavier so they are capable of making a little run in the NCAA tournament.

Lazar Hayward is their big scorer. He was named second team All-Big East this season. Marquette is a good shooting team, especially from long range. The Eagles averaged 72.9 points per game this season while they allowed 64.2 points per game.

The Washington Huskies, on the other hand, had what could be considered a disappointing regular season but they made up for it by winning the Pac-10 Tournament. Washington has some players who can make an impact including Quincy Pondexter who leads the team in scoring.

Marquette and Washington have met twice in history but it was a long time ago. Marquette won 75-74 in 1966 and 71-63 in 1978.

The Huskies are 6-1 ATS in their last 7 games overall but…

Which of them will fall flat on their faces first?

The 2010 March Madness bracket tournament has been set and the top four No.1 seeds have been announced, that being the Kansas Jayhawks, the Kentucky Wildcats, the Duke Blue Devils and the Syracuse Orange. That being said, basketball aficionados looking to score some major winnings will wait which No.1 seed will falter first since these guys know how big underdogs pay off.

So who’ll get the boot first? Let’s start with the Duke Blue Devils. Among all of the no.1 seeds in this year’s tournament, many people are expecting Duke to have the easiest matchup, well, at least in the first round. Duke has all the materials to go deep in this tournament and since the Tar Heels won’t be playing this March, not many people think otherwise.

Next we have the Kansas Jayhawks. Kansas has one of the best defenses in college basketball as they held opponents to 63.8 points, the best average in the Big 12, the very conference the Jayhawks dominated with a 15-1 record before claiming the conference tournament championship for the seventh time. Betting against these guys is pretty much, not a good idea.

We also have the Syracuse Orange. They will slug it out against the Vermont Catamounts in the first round of the 2010 NCAA tourney. Looking back at the history of these two teams, Vermont, champions of the America East Conference, beat Syracuse 60-57 in overtime in the first round of the 2005 NCAA tournament, a stinging loss the Orange have not forgotten. And if you’re looking for an upset in the first round, this matchup can very well give you one.

Syracuse had finished the 2004-05 regular season at 24-6 and…

The news of that WSOP Tournament of Champions got me looking at the schedule for this summer once again, something I hadn’t really done much since it was first announced back in December. You can check out the 2010 WSOP schedule in full here.

A few items of note here as I look over the sucker once more.

No Main Event on Fourth of July. This year Sunday, July 4 has been scheduled as an off-day for the WSOP — the Main Event this year begins on July 5. If you recall, in 2009 the Fourth of July (a Saturday) was one of the four Day Ones for the Main Event (Day 1b), and drew only 873 players, the lowest of any of the Day Ones. That helped create the fiasco that was Day 1d, when 2,809 players ended up playing while hundreds more were turned away.

Then again, it isn’t quite right to call July 4 “off-day” for the WSOP this year, as it looks as though two other events — Event No. 54, the last of the six open-field $1,000 no-limit hold’em tourneys & Event No. 56, a $2,500 NLH event — will be playing their final tables that day. And the TOC final table (also scheduled for July 4) will make three. Am glad, though, that the schedule-makers saw the problem with trying to get folks out to start a new tourney — esp. the Main Event — on the Fourth of July.

Everyone who wants to gets to play the Main Event this year. Preregistration is open for all 57 bracelet events, and those registering to play in the Main Event will find a section of the form noting how “you may request which First Day you prefer to start.” All four days are listed (7/5, 7/6, 7/7, and 7/8), and one is directed to rank the four days according to preference. “Placement in the event is not guaranteed and will be based on availability,” explains the form, meaning you don’t necessarily get your first choice. Also, if you don’t indicate a preference, “you will automatically be placed based on availability.”

Seems like not too much to ask, and a simple solution to last year’s problem. There will be those who complain about having not their first choice come July, but those complaints won’t be nearly as loud or significant as what we heard last year from those who were shut out of the Main Event.

The juice. Glancing at the structure sheets for this year’s events, the “juice” — that is, the amount taken out of the prize pool as “entry fees” and “for tournament staff” — appears to be the same for most of the events with just a couple of exceptions. For the $1,500 and $2,000 buy-in events, a total of 10% will be withheld this year as opposed to 9% last year.

Of course, those $1,000 events (eight total this year) also have 10% taken out, as will the Casino Employees Event No. 1 ($500 buy-in). The larger the buy-in, the lower the percentages, e.g., the $50,000 “Poker Player’s Championship” (Event No. 2) will have just 4% taken out, just like the $40K event last year. A total of 6% is taken from the prize pool for the $10,000 buy-in events, including the Main Event.

All those $1,000 events. The addition of those extra $1,000 buy-in NLH events attracted a lot of attention when the schedule was first announced. If you recall, there was one — called a “Stimulus Special” — last time around, while this time there are six. The Ladies Event (No. 22) and the Seniors Event (No. 34) also remain $1,000 buy-in events.

One might think that adding all of those low buy-in events — while still keeping the same overall total of 57 events — might have altered the WSOP landscape, class-wise. That is, are the low buy-in events taking over the schedule? Actually, no. In 2009, there were 38 events with buy-ins $2,500 or lower. In 2010, there are 37. And we’re looking at the same number of $10,000 buy-in events (10), too, plus once again a couple of biggies (the $25,000 six-handed NLH Event No. 52 & the $50K “Player’s Championship).

The clock is ticking. The other thing that TOC announcement has done is made me more aware that we’re only a little over ten weeks away from the thing kicking off, thanks to that Jack Link’s Beef Jerky countdown clock staring you right in the face on the WSOP home page.

Won’t be long. Jeez, I can almost smell the beef, water, sugar, salt, dried soy sauce, maltodextrin, fructose, monosodium glutamate, flavorings, hydrolyzed corn protein, sodium erythorbate, paprika extract, and sodium nitrate now.

The news of that WSOP Tournament of Champions got me looking at the schedule for this summer once again, something I hadn’t really done much since it was first announced back in December. You can check out the 2010 WSOP schedule in full here.

A few items of note here as I look over the sucker once more.

No Main Event on Fourth of July. This year Sunday, July 4 has been scheduled as an off-day for the WSOP — the Main Event this year begins on July 5. If you recall, in 2009 the Fourth of July (a Saturday) was one of the four Day Ones for the Main Event (Day 1b), and drew only 873 players, the lowest of any of the Day Ones. That helped create the fiasco that was Day 1d, when 2,809 players ended up playing while hundreds more were turned away.

Then again, it isn’t quite right to call July 4 “off-day” for the WSOP this year, as it looks as though two other events — Event No. 54, the last of the six open-field $1,000 no-limit hold’em tourneys & Event No. 56, a $2,500 NLH event — will be playing their final tables that day. And the TOC final table (also scheduled for July 4) will make three. Am glad, though, that the schedule-makers saw the problem with trying to get folks out to start a new tourney — esp. the Main Event — on the Fourth of July.

Everyone who wants to gets to play the Main Event this year. Preregistration is open for all 57 bracelet events, and those registering to play in the Main Event will find a section of the form noting how “you may request which First Day you prefer to start.” All four days are listed (7/5, 7/6, 7/7, and 7/8), and one is directed to rank the four days according to preference. “Placement in the event is not guaranteed and will be based on availability,” explains the form, meaning you don’t necessarily get your first choice. Also, if you don’t indicate a preference, “you will automatically be placed based on availability.”

Seems like not too much to ask, and a simple solution to last year’s problem. There will be those who complain about having not their first choice come July, but those complaints won’t be nearly as loud or significant as what we heard last year from those who were shut out of the Main Event.

The juice. Glancing at the structure sheets for this year’s events, the “juice” — that is, the amount taken out of the prize pool as “entry fees” and “for tournament staff” — appears to be the same for most of the events with just a couple of exceptions. For the $1,500 and $2,000 buy-in events, a total of 10% will be withheld this year as opposed to 9% last year.

Of course, those $1,000 events (eight total this year) also have 10% taken out, as will the Casino Employees Event No. 1 ($500 buy-in). The larger the buy-in, the lower the percentages, e.g., the $50,000 “Poker Player’s Championship” (Event No. 2) will have just 4% taken out, just like the $40K event last year. A total of 6% is taken from the prize pool for the $10,000 buy-in events, including the Main Event.

All those $1,000 events. The addition of those extra $1,000 buy-in NLH events attracted a lot of attention when the schedule was first announced. If you recall, there was one — called a “Stimulus Special” — last time around, while this time there are six. The Ladies Event (No. 22) and the Seniors Event (No. 34) also remain $1,000 buy-in events.

One might think that adding all of those low buy-in events — while still keeping the same overall total of 57 events — might have altered the WSOP landscape, class-wise. That is, are the low buy-in events taking over the schedule? Actually, no. In 2009, there were 38 events with buy-ins $2,500 or lower. In 2010, there are 37. And we’re looking at the same number of $10,000 buy-in events (10), too, plus once again a couple of biggies (the $25,000 six-handed NLH Event No. 52 & the $50K “Player’s Championship).

The clock is ticking. The other thing that TOC announcement has done is made me more aware that we’re only a little over ten weeks away from the thing kicking off, thanks to that Jack Link’s Beef Jerky countdown clock staring you right in the face on the WSOP home page.

Won’t be long. Jeez, I can almost smell the beef, water, sugar, salt, dried soy sauce, maltodextrin, fructose, monosodium glutamate, flavorings, hydrolyzed corn protein, sodium erythorbate, paprika extract, and sodium nitrate now.

Since it’s that obvious anyway.

Arguably the greatest three weeks in sports are upon us with the 2010 March madness bracket tournament tipping off. And of course Bodog will have everything a basketball bettor could ever need.

Yes, it’s that time of year when even the most amateur sports fan becomes an expert in basketball with the men’s NCAA tournament here. From the play-in game through the 2010 NCAA Final Four in Indianapolis, Bodog will have it all covered with basketball news, odds, contests and more.

That’s right, the road to the Final Four runs through Bodog and you won’t find any gaming site with as many basketball betting options on the NCAA tournament than those guys. They’ve been doing this for 15 years and they should already know what bettors want when it comes to the Big Dance. From odds to news to brackets, you’ll find it all at Bodog.

This year’s NCAA men’s basketball tournament appears to be one of the most wide-open tourneys in recent year, and that could be good news for those basketball bettors. While the North Carolina Tar Heels were huge favorites going into last year’s Big Dance and came home with the title, the Heels are not even in the field this year.

The Kansas Jayhawks, the Kentucky Wildcats, the Syracuse Orange and the Duke Blue Devils are your four No.1 seeds in the bracket this year, but none of those four could be considered a lock Final Four team.

Last year’s tournament was very chalk, as for the first time since seeding began, all 12 teams seeded No.3 or better made it to the Sweet 16, and three No.1 seeds reached the Elite Eight for the third straight year.

There are probably about 20 or so teams that have a real shot at…

Not bad, but probably not good enough to remind people that he was the same guy who dominated this sport for years.

The 2010 F1 season finally kicked off and the sport definitely has a lot of things going for it this year. You have a new phenom in Sebastian Vettel trying to take over the sport, you have a former double world champion in Fernando Alonso who was finally awarded with the machine that could get him back on top of Formula One, and then you have the returning Michael Schumacher who is out to prove how good he can still be at 41.

So how did Michael Schumacher’s first race back to Formula One go? Well, it wasn’t the typical Schumacher dominance we’ve been accustomed to in the past but still, a 6^th place finish at 41 years old isn’t bad, not bad at all.

That’s right, Michael Schumacher, starting 7^th in the grid, finished 6^th to kick off the season in Bahrain. That’s a good start if you ask me and if Schumi at 41 years old can still keep them good finishes coming for his new teammates from Mercedes GP, then we definitely have one intriguing season ahead for sure.

Schumi spoke a day after the 2010 Bahrain Grand Prix and he was understandably happy about the way his first race back turned out.

”Still today, a day after my comeback race, I feel extremely well,” Mercedes GP driver Michael Schumacher told his official website. ”With regards to the fitness, this race was not at all difficult for me and I was not exhausted at all. This is partly due to…”