On-line Gaming under attack

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

Oh boy--I dont know what to make of this. Here is the link to the story.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060710/...ernet_gambling

"The House" votes Tuesday.The important thing is whether the Senate will approve it.The House of Reps passes a lot of stuff that the Senate refuses to pass.Just think how much gasoline and jet fuel will have to be wasted by people having to fly to Vegas just to bet Sports.

[timmgirvan]

Online horse betting is the exception that's in this bill! Actually, horseplayers want this because it will exempt the Industry.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

Online horse betting is the exception that's in this bill! Actually, horseplayers want this because it will exempt the Industry.

It's not good for horse players who bet off-shore. This bill would try to prevent people from betting off-shore. It would be good for the horseracing industry because it would force people to bet at TVG, Youbet, etc.

[Unbridled]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

It's not good for horse players who bet off-shore. This bill would try to prevent people from betting off-shore. It would be good for the horseracing industry because it would force people to bet at TVG, Youbet, etc.

This happening would be a good thing b/c the race tracks and industry receive no compensation from off shore betting companies, which really hurts the industry b/c millions of dollars that should be going back into the game are lost and going into the hands of those that own the off shore betting companies. its a wayward cycle.

[JJP]

Its not a good thing. Bettors should have the option of playing into a full takeout or offshore with rebates. I think for many of us, its the easiest decision in the world to make. Is it hurting tracks? Maybe, but we as bettors don't make the rules re: takeout. Like it or not, hobby or profession, its still a business.

And there are ways to get around the "provisions". Sure you can't use a credit card or Paypal, but Western Union is an option.

[Unbridled]

Originally Posted by JJP

Its not a good thing. Bettors should have the option of playing into a full takeout or offshore with rebates. I think for many of us, its the easiest decision in the world to make. Is it hurting tracks? Maybe, but we as bettors don't make the rules re: takeout. Like it or not, hobby or profession, its still a business.

And there are ways to get around the "provisions". Sure you can't use a credit card or Paypal, but Western Union is an option.

Completely understand your point and cant blame you for maximizing your dollar; there will always be ways around the rules. Tracks should try and make an effort to offer rebates and rewards for regular players (I think NYRA has started to or is in the process of doing), but its not a good trend when the offshore companies are making plenty of money off of a product and then not putting any back into it. Thats a cycle that will eventually lead to a diminished product long after me.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Truth is a lot of people won't go back to giving up the % the tracks want to take out.The tracks can put these people out of business by lowering their own take out. All this is,is a free market system.The horseracing industry charges too much takeout,and somebody else gives people a much better deal.The fact is that the horseracing industry doesn't want to compete in a free-market system.I use TVG,but that is because I am a relatively small p3/4 bettor.The p3/p4 betting requires less actual money bet/day,than win betting(money back and forth all day.)You can not expect win bettors to pay that high % all day long.We aren't gunna see people go back to that.Atleast horserace betting will still be allowed.They fail to give sportsplayers any viable options(other than Vegas etc.=retarded,and totally unrealistic.)

I read this different from you guys. I think that they are going to try to get on-line wagering banned for horse racing as well. Here is a paragraph from the article that concerns me:

"Other critics complain that the bill doesn't cover all forms of gambling. They point to exemptions they say would allow online lotteries and Internet betting on horse racing to flourish while cracking down on other kinds of sports betting, casino games and card games like poker."

"If you're going to support legislation that is supposed to 'prohibit gambling,' you should not have carve-outs," said Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the conservative Traditional Values Coalition.

"The Justice Department has taken a different view on the legality of Internet betting on horse races. In a World Trade Organization case involving Antigua, the department said online betting on horse racing remains illegal under the 1961 Wire Act despite the existence of the more recently passed Interstate Horseracing Act."

I read this as a direct attack on the on-line wagering of horse racing. I think this more serious than you guys are believing.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Come on already you blowhard(McGovern from Mass.)Repubs don't give a sht. about raising the minimum wage.Poor people can live in swamp water for all they care.Talk about the bill at hand.