One would think that a man in his 80′s would stop going places where he might get his ass kicked. But when that man is Amarillo Slim, one would be wrong.

According to the Houston Chronicle, Mr. Preston was attempting to meet someone who owed him $3,000. The debtor was going to give him a four-wheeler as collateral, but he was beat down – broken jaw, hand, and thumb – and robbed instead. Evidently he had $8,000 in cash on him, which is always handy when meeting someone in a dark field, and he was wearing an $85,000 ring.

Amarillo Police Lt. Jim McKenny said, “That would not be that unusual for him to have that kind of money.” (But when going to collect a debt from people who are giving you a four-wheeler instead of cash? Okay, I’ll stop.) The lieutenant also said, “I think it probably has to do with the clientele and people he tends to hand with in the gambling circles.”

Hope Slim is feeling better, but I also hope he gets in with a better crowd, sooner rather than later. Remember this gem from 2006? Or this news from 2007?

This has been out for a few weeks now, but I’m reading it for the first time … found via Pauly, who also let us know about John Caldwell’s unexpected-at-this-moment-in-time-but-not-surprising departure as editor in chief of PokerNews. I know most of you don’t really care about “Shecky’s” business, but you should, because he has been instrumental in shaping how you get to follow tournaments on the internet … and though I’ve had my beefs with PN’s claims of being the “independent” source of poker news (they recently changed that to “#1″), overall, PokerNews, under Caldwell’s leadership, developed into something that arguably made the game far more enjoyable for players and their friends … and isn’t that what all of this is about — the pursuit of better poker?

Before he left, Caldwell assembled a panel of informed and influential peeps in the poker world to hear their thoughts on key poker issues. The panel included Bluff editor-in-chief Matt Parvis, big-name agent Brian Balsbaugh, WSOP Commish Jeffrey Pollack, Pauly, PokerDB founder and AP/UB scandal-solver Nat Arem, top-notch tourney director and Commerce Casino poker room honcho Matt Savage, and high-stakes pro and Team PokerStars guy Barry Greenstein and asked them all the following questions:

1. You’ve been sent back in time to Jan 1, 2003. If you could, what one thing that could be attributed to poker’s “boom” would you prevent or change?
2. Will we ever again see a regularly occurring, brick-and-mortar cash game that is bigger than the biggest games found online?
3. Will 2009 bring a formal regulation of online poker at the United States federal level?
4. What group within the poker world do you believe to be most affected by the global financial crisis?
5. If you could enact one change to the 2009 WSOP – what would it be?
6. Compared to the 2008 WSOP Main Event, will there be more or fewer participants in this year’s Main Event, and why?
7. Will poker grow overall in 2009? If so, what area is likely to show the greatest growth?
8. If there was one change that you would like to see specifically made to the online game or by major online sites in the coming year, what would it be?
   
9. Could a brand new online poker room storm to life in 2009 and somehow capture a major share of that market?
10. Can you think of something that doesn’t really exist in the poker world today that will be a given five years from now?

… is literally out the door. I’m guessing 1000+ entries.

Claymation poker violence via TiltKontrolle:

PokerStars won the battle of patch warfare by signing up 6 of the November Nine (and booking the win via Peter Eastgate, giving them four of the past six WSOP main event champs) … and now, apparently the fight grows, as word has it that PokerStars is forbidding its players from appearing on Poker After Dark — making the show that much closer to a full-on Full Tilt infomercial.

Personally, I’m having a hard time thinking of PokerStars players who’ve appeared on the show. But regardless, I think that means fewer special episodes — like there will definitely be no “Recent WSOP Main Event Champs Week”.

A look at the non-poker media’s take on the Kentucky case as it moves through The System:

From the subscription newsletter blog Daily Online Examiner …

By Wendy Davis, Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Kentucky’s Move To Kill Online Gambling Squashed — For Now

In a closely watched case, an appellate court in Kentucky rebuffed the state governor’s attempts to shut down online gambling. But, while the case attracted attention from a wide range of outside groups who made all sorts of lofty constitutional arguments, the judges ended up deciding the case on a technicality.

The court ruled 2-1 that the government couldn’t confiscate domain names of 141 out-of-state gambling sites because the 1974 forfeiture law only applied to gambling “devices,” like roulette wheels.

“It stretches credulity to conclude that a series of numbers, or Internet address, can be said to constitute a ‘machine or any mechanical or other device,’ ” judge Michelle Keller wrote.

The dispute started late last summer, when the state hired a law firm to bring proceedings against online gambling companies. At the time, Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear made no secret of his protectionist motives. He said he wanted to shutter the gambling sites as part of an effort to preserve horse racing, which he termed the state’s signature industry.

As news of the court showdown spread, a wide range of groups questioned whether one state could legally reach beyond its borders to claim jurisdiction over sites with a global reach. Outside parties — ranging from trade organizations like the Interactive Gaming Council and the Internet Commerce Association to civil rights groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and ACLU — weighed in on behalf of the Web sites.

The groups argued the law was unconstitutional for a host of reasons, including that Kentucky had no right to block sites visited by a worldwide audience.

While the appeals court dodged those issues for now, they’re bound to recur. If Kentucky rewrites its laws to specifically include domain names, the court will again be faced with determining how far one state can go to police the Web.

See what others are saying on the Online Examiner blog.

I guess it kinda depends how you look at it. Some might say a 66-33 percent victory is pretty dominating. Others might see winning by just one vote as a tiny margin of error.

The PPA just put out a statement, regarding actions yesterday in Kentucky that shows the Governor has no intention of backing down on his desire to seize control of 141 gambling-related internet domains located outside of Kentucky, and America for that matter. Yee-haw! I’m tellin’ ya … it’s off to the Supreme Court we go on the way-bigger-than-poker issues in play here.

(Anyone wanna agree on a bet over the internet and transfer funds via PayPal?)

Though I’m not totally sure, I think Kentucky higher courts work like volleyball, or tennis after deuce. If you can win two points in a row, you win outright. The state of Kentucky won the first case, and had we lost our first appeal, we’d be dead. But we won … so now it’s their serve, and if we win that — the appeal to the appeal — I think then they can go no higher (can someone confirm this?). But if they win, then we can appeal to the state Supreme Court, yadda yadda.

Anyhow, John Pappas taunting Kentucky gov. Steve Beshear — reminding him he has an election in the not-too-distant future, and a plausibly disgruntled citizenry to answer to:

PPA Statement on Commonwealth of Kentucky Appeal of Domain Name Seizure Ruling

WASHINGTON, DC. (January 21, 2009) – John Pappas, executive director of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide, today issued the following statement regarding the appeal filed by the Commonwealth of Kentucky in light of yesterday’s ruling by the state court of appeals overturning a lower court decision allowing the Commonwealth to seize Internet gambling domain names.

“Kentucky residents should be outraged that the Commonwealth is investing another minute of time and another dollar of scarce resources in this quixotic case. The appeals court’s sound rejection of the Commonwealth’s case should have ended this legal debacle in its tracks. Unfortunately, the Governor and the hired-gun attorneys want to drag their ultimate defeat to another venue at the expense of Internet freedom and the rights of law-abiding Kentucky poker players.”

A copy of the Commonwealth’s appeal can be found at www.pokerplayersalliance.org.

BTW, for those in need of a lexicographic refresher, here’s a definition of “quixotic”.

Pete Campana, esq.

We clearly have our first finalist for Best Poker Lawyers ’09: Pete Campana of Williamsport, PA, successfully defended two clients caught up in an undercover police investigation into a $1/$2 NL game held in a garage (a dealer and a garage operator) on the grounds that they couldn’t have been engaged in any sort of gambling under Pennsylvania law — because poker is a game of skill.

Click here to read the complete ruling. (via PPA-premium.)

But in a nutshell, what Campana convinced successfully convinced the courts:

Commonwealth and Defendant both agree the controlling issue is whether Texas Hold’em poker is “unlawful gambling” under the Crimes Code.

… the controlling sub-issue is whether Texas Hold’em is a game of skill or chance, or, if both, does skill trump chance or vice-versa. Simply, if chance predominates, Texas Hold’em is gambling. If skill predominated, it is not gambling.

… Pennsylvania courts have not specifically addressed the issue … Our courts have found that poker is gambling within the context of the Liquor Code.

… With the advent of internet poker and tournament poker has come a spate of very intrusive law review analyses of gambling law and poker.

… Using the predominance test, in conjunction with analyzing skill versus chance using the four prong dominant factor test, it is apparent that skill predominates over chance in Texas Hold’em poker.

… Skill comes with varying degrees of competence, but that is the case with any competition involving skill.

The academic studies and experts generally agree that a player must be skillful to be successful at poker. At the outset, chance is equally distributed among the players. But the outcome is eventually determined by skill. Successful players must possess intellectual and psychological skills. They must know the rules and the mathematical odds. The must know how to read their opponents “tells” and styles. They must know when to hold and fold and raise. They must know how to manage their money.

This court finds that Texas Hold’em poker is a game where skill predominates over chance. Thus, it is not “unlawful gambling” under the Pennsylvania Crimes Code.

The UIGEA regulations have gone into effect! Poker is declared a game of skill in the US! Plus, shocking confessions from the APCW, GPWA, and Lou Fabiano of CAP about the Cardspike investigation!

No confirmation or details … but we are hearing our investigative internet detective robots are telling us that a room in Phil Gordon’s hometown of El Paso was robbed over the weekend or last week. More info as and if any comes in.

Without a doubt, as the poker bill gets argued in Texas this year, citizen safety will be a key issue. It’s just not right that police/hired guns aren’t allowed to protect a group of people gathering to play a game. Remember, to get this thing really going, we need a few hundred more emails reminding joe.straus@house.state.tx.us, jose.menendez@house.state.tx.us, tx@pokerplayersalliance.org, and Legalizeit@pokerati.com that you whole-heartedly support efforts to legitimize and protect the game of poker in Texas, and see it as a matter of sensible, responsible governance.

A three judge Kentucky Court of Appeals panel ruled today in a 2-1 decision that the state’s attempt to seize 141 internet gambling domain names could not take place. More details can be found at Poker News Daily and the full decision on the Poker Players Alliance website. It’s expected for the state of Kentucky to file an appeal, which would move the matter to the Kentucky Supreme Court, in the very near future. More news as it becomes available.

… from all the poker and politics to watch a poker player talk about politics America’s future:

Bluff Magazine has those dates listed for the 2009 WSOP, similiar to last year’s schedule. However, there are no tournaments listed yet, expect that to be known shortly.

A new political season/era is about to kick off. The PPA seems to have things moving in the right direction on the federal/online front and are kinda busy in Kentucky. So Pokerati is taking it upon itself to move things forward in our beloved homeland of Texas, where we have a very real chance of finally legitimizing Texas Hold’em.

Right now, it’s time to build up the pot …

In 2007 (the Texas Lege meets bi-annually), we sent hundreds of emails, and they had a great impact. So this year, as the 81st Texas Legislative Session gets underway, we want to start early making sure the poker playing minority are indeed a priority … or at least on the VIP guest list as all the other important stuff (health care, education, jobs, etc.) gets bumpin’.

The Texas House has a new Speaker, Joe Straus (R-San Antonio), and by all accounts, he may be more open minded about the game we love than his predecessor. Meanwhile, Rep. Jose Mendendez (D-San Antonio) has filed HB 222, which is essentially the same poker bill as last time (one that engaged readers like you had a say in crafting) … a lot of the right pieces are in place. We have more information than last time and generally more favorable table conditions. It’s on us, though, literally, because like who else is gonna do it, to kick it all in to gear. That’s how things work in politics — or so I’ve begun to see.

What you can do, at this stage, is simply send emails as a concerned, patriotic Texas citizen. Even if you’re not from the great state that hates little more than losing to Oklahoma, it would help your friends here to let a few important people know how much you would love coming here with fully legal poker as an option. We need to show the people in Austin that we are driven to this call to action not just by our Texas-size love of poker and personal freedoms, but also because we strongly believe this is a matter of sensible government — recognizing that this bill brings jobs, security, tax benefits, and other goodness to each and all of us.

Cool? You down? Then be sure to spend a few minutes of click-time today or tomorrow to mail new Speaker Straus, Rep. Menendez, and the PPA too. Let them know this issue is important to you. And though I may regret this request, feel free to CC me if you’re so inclined, as I’d like to take a pulse on what really matters to poker-loving Texans and Texas-loving pokerers.

The email addresses to hit:

joe.straus@house.state.tx.us
jose.menendez@house.state.tx.us
tx@pokerplayersalliance.org
Legalizeit@pokerati.com

Your emails really do make a difference, especially when part of a coordinated effort. At least that’s what I’ve come to believe … and hey, I’m practically a political sophomore now! I’ll have some talking points up later. Regular readers pretty much know them already — I know I trust you all to make the case. In the meantime, seriously, let’s do this. It’s like top-pair-top-kicker with the nut-flush draw and a gutshot — booh-yah! — and from early position the best move we could make is to lead out.

The “Poker Meltdown” at Turning Stone is underway, and our boy Tom Schneider is doing the live broadcast now. Couldn’t tell you anything about the competitors, but that somehow is the point.

Not to criticize, but I couldn’t bring myself to even think about paying for it when the site wanted me to sign up and officially register before even telling me how much I’d be paying and what I’d be paying for. And, of course, any website that hasn’t figured that out probably also hasn’t figured out what got under ESPN’s live-broadcast skin starting back in 2006 …

Yep, there is indeed a link out there showing this live broadcast for free. And though I usually like to put the readers first when it comes to linking, I’m not going to share it with you — sorry, dick move, I know … but that would be kinda like showing someone a back door to a club where your friend’s band is playing, thereby dodging the cover. But I will give you a glimpse below of what you’re missing: