Jeesh, everything’s so serious these days … or stupid. Either way, it’s been too long since we forgot to tell you about the latest from The Micros. It really was a funny episode a month ago. But like always, lol because it’s true!

And we have a bonus late episode — the Micros’ pitch for people to vote for them in the 2011 Bluff Readers Choice Awards, where Rose, Chase, and Tommy somehow got lumped in with all the podcast/video/live radio newsy shows (in the category The Poker Beat always dominated) and cleaned up.

Enjoy, if you haven’t already.

I wrote a blog post a week ago suggesting that Brent Beckley, who pleaded guilty on December 20th to two federal counts in the Black Friday indictments, may not be a co-operating witness for the government. This was based on a reading of the press release issued by the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (the USAO) and a comparison of what we know of Mr. Beckley’s situation with what we know of Bradley Franzen’s circumstances. Recall that Mr. Franzen pled guilty this past May to three counts associated with the same superseding indictment. Last week’s post was not based on a review of Mr. Beckley’s plea agreement, a copy of which was posted at the Association of Players, Casinos, and Webmasters’ website.

Based on a comparison of Mr. Beckley’s plea agreement with Mr. Franzen’s plea agreement, I’m even more convinced that Mr. Beckley is not a co-operator.

More…

Brent Beckley pled guilty in US federal court in Manhattan yesterday to two counts contained in the criminal indictment unveiled in April of this year (United States v. Scheinberg et al). The first count was conspiracy to engage in unlawful Internet gambling, contrary to 18 U.S.C. § 371—this is a general conspiracy provision applied to the purported UIGEA violations. The second count was conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud, contrary to 18 U.S.C. § 1349, with reference to offences under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1344. Mr. Beckley was the “director of payment processing for Absolute Poker,” according to the government’s press release. Vin Narayanan, who indicates that he has read the plea agreement, reports that federal prosecutors have recommended a sentence of between 12 and 18 months and that Mr. Beckley also agreed to forfeit $300,000 as part of his guilty plea.

One of the more intriguing parts of the US Attorney’s press release is the following sentence: “He [Mr. Beckley] is scheduled to be sentenced by United States Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on April 19, 2012, at 4:00 pm.”

Why is that interesting? Because I think it might indicate that Brent Beckley is not (or at least is not thus far) a co-operating witness for the government. I think he’s made his guilty plea to the court, thereby admitting his own involvement, but without rolling over on anyone else.

More…

Have you been thinking about buying an iPad? Do you want to help the PPA in its mission to restore your Internet poker freedoms? Well, now is your chance to kill two birds with one stone, by taking this new poker survey. Working with U.S. Gaming Survey, the PPA has created a poker specific survey to help us better understand the playing community and in turn help us better advocate for your interests in Washington DC. Once you’ve fully completed the survey, your name will be entered into a drawing for a brand new Apple iPad2. The survey is completely anonymous, and your personal information will not be shared with anyone. Click on the button below to begin the survey and help the PPA help you! The survey will remain open until December 30th noon EST. The iPad2 prize winner will be announced on January 3rd, 2012.

Yesterday, MGM Resorts International (NYSE:MGM), Boyd Gaming (NYSE:BYD), and bwin.party digital entertainment (LSE:BPTY) announced a joint venture in the United States. This as-yet-unnamed entity – to be owned 65% by bwin.party, 25% by MGM, and 10% by Boyd – would, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, ”offer poker to U.S. customers under bwin.party’s brands.”

There appear to be the usual outs for the parties if Congress doesn’t legalize Internet poker. While it may seem that these three are hitching their wagon to federal legislation (no particular surprise for Boyd and MGM), the release from bwin.party mentions the possibility of a state-by-state strategy being adopted. Unlike the federal JV, if the US goes state by state, “[t]he shareholders and shareholdings in a State NewCo may vary, depending on the state concerned and reflecting the contributions to be made by each shareholder. In addition to bwin.party, shareholders in State Newco may include MGM, Boyd and other partners.” Bwin.party seems to be leaving its options open, which is smart for them at this stage.

The various media stories also suggest that the deals are contingent on regulatory approval, i.e., sign-off from Nevada gaming regulators, who are expected to be key regulators under a federal ipoker regime. Will Nevada conclude that bwin.party is a suitable partner? It’s unclear. Bwin.party says it’s “preparing to enter into a suitability review with the Nevada Gaming Control Board in order to secure an advanced finding of suitability in anticipation of future US-facing real money poker opportunities.” Presumably it’s confident that it will succeed.

More…

As you know, the House Subcommittee for Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade held a hearing [yesterday] examining the potential regulation of Internet gambling.  The hearing entitled, “Internet Gambling: Is There a Safe Bet?” called upon a variety of witnesses to discuss how best Internet gambling can be regulated in the U.S.  Among the witnesses was Poker Player Alliance Chairman and former Senator, Alfonse D’Amato.  A complete list of witnesses and their full testimonies is available here. You can also watch the full 2 ½ hour Committee hearing on CSPAN.com here.

Meeting with members before and after the hearing, I was immensely proud to hear every lawmaker tell us that they are being contacted by poker players. The question on the lawmakers’ minds was not “if” internet poker should be regulated, but rather “how” regulation should look.

Senator D’Amato did an exceptional job and delivered impassioned remarks defending your right to play.  He urged Congress to adopt rules and regulations to ensure American consumers have a safe marketplace in which to play poker on the Internet.  In fact, when it came to consumer protections the conclusion of every witness before the Committee was that regulation was far better than the status quo.  And, more importantly, that sentiment was also expressed almost unanimously by the lawmakers who attended the hearing.  The question on the lawmakers’ minds was not “if” internet poker should be regulated, but rather “how” should regulation look.

More…

Phil Ivey recently dropped off ESPN’s admittedly subjective player rankings, The Nuts. ESPN’s was the last of such lists to still include the self-exiled Full Tilt Pro in their Top 10. (Homers.)

I found this out via PartTime Poker, which seems to be doing a pretty cool monthly bit over there — breaking down player standings across four different ranking systems, each with their own calculation biases and level of subjectivity in determining the best poker players in the world.

Perhaps surprisingly, I still recognize most at least half of the 21 names comprising the four different Top 10s … but I’ll bet the rest of the world surely doesn’t. There’s a reason, after all, Jason Mercier doesn’t even have a Q-score.

So with subjectivity in mind … best player, winningest player, field strength, skill measurement, tournament luck, run-good ratios, late position likability, backer’s credit score …

Ed. Note:  Shortly after Tom wrote this piece, the AGCC revealed that some $330 million had been seized pre-Black Friday. I sent an email asking if this changed the math, to which Tom replied, “That’s almost all that they owed to players, just short $60 million which is purportedly what they had in the bank.  Makes my case even stronger.”

Just yesterday, I heard the news that the Department of Justice accused Full Tilt Poker of running a Ponzi scheme.  A Ponzi scheme is defined as a pyramid investment swindle in which supposed profits are paid to early investors from money actually invested by later participants.

I object your honor.  Taking money I deposit and distributing it to owners is no Ponzi scheme.  But wait, let’s look at some facts/guesses.

Had our politicians not passed a law that restricted financial institutions from transferring money to and from poker sites, all players would still have their money. 

In reviewing the DOJ complaint and other sources, the following information jumped out at me:

More…

Jesse May

---

OP-ED

It didnt’t really bother me when Poker Spot folded, because that guy had history. And I laughed about the money Aces Poker stole, because anyone who trusted them couldn’t ever spot a cheat. The Ultimate Bet scandal wasn’t really that surprising, as we’d heard stories about him for years. And it never shocked me when they cheated me in Atlantic City, or went partners against me in Vegas, or at Foxwoods tried to do a runner with my funds. The nips, the moves, the cheats, the angle shooters, and those that were just plain thieves. For the past ten years when the stars put on their caps and badges and smiled for the TV, we used to smile to ourselves. And then we’d laugh as we’d tick off the big names in poker and say, “But he’s really just a little scumbag, isn’t he?” Because they pretty much all were. And that’s the way it’s always been.

I didn’t always think like that, of course, and neither did you. I came into poker just like yourself, wide eyed and dough faced and on the back of a little bit of luck. Full of passion for the game and a romantic view of the poker world and a desire to be accepted by the rambling gambling men who ruled. It’s natural when you have a pocketful of money and a bellyful of gamble and all the confidence in the world, it’s natural that when it comes to people you can be a little naïve. I certainly was, and so probably were you.

I’m ashamed that I have sat by in silence while you all cheated, stole, and lied. I know you, you thieving tournament directors, you scumbag poker players, you dirtbag angle shooters with your names stitched on your shirts. I know you. And I’m ashamed that I’ve sat here for twenty years and let you rule the poker world as long as I was still getting paid.

But you get wiser because you have to. My circle got small and my radar got sharp and I could count all the people that I could really trust on maybe one hand. And I told them they could trust me. And pretty much everyone else were scumbags and cheats. In poker, that’s the way it’s always been. That’s the way it’s been for me, and that’s the way it is for you. And we don’t ever talk out of turn. Because in this world if you shit where you eat, then you’ll end up hungry. That’s what you need to know about poker. That’s what you need to know about me.

I’ve been around long enough so that just one more scam, cheat, or mismanagement of funds, one more of those should be just like more water off another duck’s back. But something happened to me when Full Tilt Poker collapsed. This one is different. This has laid me low. It’s not just anger I feel, it’s not just disdain, and I can’t sit here like I always do and smile to myself and point fingers and call them scum. Because what I feel more than anything else right now, is shame.

More…

A new California-like law goes into effect next week in Nevada, making it illegal to text-and-drive, as well as use handheld devices for verbal and non-verbal communications. While it’s not clear to me if truckers got a carveout for CB usage nor where non-verbal communication via middle finger might fall … @JessWelman will likely be disappointed to learn the ban applies at stop signs and stop lights, too (“intelligent multitasking” notwithstanding).

The imminent talk-and-text ban on the Las Vegas Strip and across Nevada will not only have a notable impact on 10s of thousands of local lives … but also gives a good microcosm look at how a bill may or may not become a law. Stuff to think about as we watch the next push for federal online poker legislation this fall.

Online Poker Logic
When I first heard about a “distracted driving” bill in Nevada, I was immediately concerned about lives lost and unnecessarily put at risk my future as a photographer of mildly amusing and sometimes pokery license plates. Though I have obtained many of these images with a handheld calling device while driving on Nevada highways, fortunately, using online poker logic, I’m sure I can find a lawyer who will tell me I’m totally in the clear.

More…

Yesterday the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York sought leave to file a first amended civil complaint in US v. PokerStars et al. Mr. Pokerati posted a link to the amended complaint; if you haven’t seen it yet, it’s here. The government’s memorandum in support of the motion is here. As widely reported yesterday, the order granting leave to file the amended complaint was granted.

I have read the amended complaint and the exhibits, all of which are available on PACER. Two of the bigger allegations in the amended complaint – I won’t call them “new” – as they relate to Full Tilt are that Tilt: a) didn’t hold player funds separately from operating funds, contrary to its public statements; and, b) distributed money to its insiders when the enterprise was insolvent. The two allegations are discrete but connected; player funds being co-mingled with operating funds set the stage for the alleged misappropriation of ‘easy money’ by the principals.

Some have spoken about the prosecutor’s characterization of this as a Ponzi scheme. This appears to have been mentioned twice in the press release from the US Attorney’s office: once in the headline and once in the second paragraph of the release. There’s no doubt that use of this term was designed to get maximum media exposure, but it wasn’t a true pyramid scheme. A Ponzi scheme needs investors seeking returns and payouts to older investors using newer money. Here, there were players depositing money – not investing – and, while some of the funds may have been paid out to players cashing out, it seems that they were mostly used to line the pockets of the insiders. I wouldn’t have used the term, but the allegations point to something conceptually akin to a pyramid scheme, i.e., an inherently unstable financial structure perpetually relying on new funds to keep it going, so I’m not put out by use of the term “Ponzi scheme,” even if it was done for political reasons.

More…

Matt Savage

---

OP-ED

My dedication to poker tournaments and the game itself is two decades old. Starting with my first foray into the role of tournament director in 1997 and through my founding of the Tournament Directors Association (TDA) with Linda Johnson, Jan Fisher, and Dave Lamb in 2001, I have worked tirelessly to standardize tournament rules and to make poker a better game for everyone involved.

This is the reason that we host the website www.PokerTDA.com, open the TDA to all interested parties, and make myself available on Twitter and other social media outlets. My passion for poker only grows when I share it with others.

The rule is not new, and does not ban table talk by any means … A recreational player may not understand, nor even care to know all the rules, but professionals who make a living at the game should.

During the 2011 World Series of Poker “nearly live” telecast from the Rio, I became aware of comments from Daniel Negreanu (@RealKidPoker) through my own Twitter feed (@SavagePoker). He said that the TDA created a “new” rule that banned table talk. This certainly is not the case and in hindsight, it was learned that he had received an incorrect ruling at the table that had nothing to do with TDA rules. Since social media has limited words with which to sufficiently explain the rule and its longtime existence, this clarification seems necessary.

The TDA board, in conjunction with tournament directors and card room managers, has donated thousands of hours to standardize rules in the best interest of the game.  When well-known poker players like Negreanu and Phil Hellmuth choose to say on national television that “the TDA has it wrong” and “does not care about what the players want,” it becomes personal.

More…

With the live coverage of the WSOP main event on ESPN2 and ESPN3, live poker coverage really has been taken to a new level — that much is certain. In fact, now that they are down to 14 players, the WSOP Live is about to move over for a couple hours to ESPN1. But there seems to be a rift over it all that frankly, I find kinda surprising.

While I think it’s been friggin awesome and indeed downright historic, a cadre of Pokerati commenters seem to have a vitriolic distaste for the live coverage that goes far beyond a typical poker whine. (I’m very disappointed in them, obv.) Not much in-between … it seems a love-it-or-hate-it affair.

So at Marvin in Bedford’s recommendation — though I did try to remove bias by not calling the live coverage “phony” — I put it to the readers of Pokerati with a simple multiple choice question asking your quick gun-to-the-head take on how ESPN has elected to bring us the 2011 WSOP:

By letter to federal Attorney General Eric Holder dated July 14th of this year, US Senators Jon Kyl and Harry Reid have made known their views on Internet gaming. Or rather: they’ve let the AG know what they want the Department of Justice to do without exactly saying what their position is. (Thanks to Chris Krafcik for circulating the letter.)

This letter, from two senators coming from very different camps on the Internet gaming issue, is a very interesting document both for what it says and for what it doesn’t say.

What it says is that the Department of Justice has been lax in pursuing foreign private Internet gaming operators and that this has “led to a signficant and growing perception … that the Department of Justice thought that the case [against operating Internet poker and other Internet gambling websites] was uncertain enough that it chose not to pursue enforcement actions.” The senators state that it’s important for the DOJ to pursue “illegal Internet gambling” in the United States “aggressively and consistently.” Most notably in this paragraph, Senators Kyl and Reid assert that Internet poker websites have been offering online play to Americans for many years “with apparently no repercussions.”

More…

Your body is an intricate and delicate system designed to sense threat, and biologically programmed to avoid it. Your nervous system is a vast information highway that runs every cellular process in the body. From breathing and your heartbeat to movement and thought, your nervous system affects every process of your body.

So what’s happening in your body during a hand?

Because of the unknown outcomes, the variability of chance, and the sheer financial risk, poker is stressful by design. Let me be clear about what I mean. Let’s define stress as a physical, emotional or chemical factor that causes bodily or mental tension and let’s avoid judgment of whether stress is good or bad. Stress simply exists and we live in relation to it.

So during a hand, regardless of age, gender, ethnicity or experience at the table, a body responds to stress exactly the same. Stress is a threat and regardless of the size, shape, cause or intensity the body reacts with a Fight or Flight response.

Originally intended to protect you, the fight or flight response causes a release of hormones that:

• Increase your heart rate
• Increase your blood glucose (blood sugar)
• Put you in a “ready” state

Ever have the feeling that you need caffeine, sugar and other stimulants to keep you on your toes? You’re simply prolonging the “high” your body has already initiated.

More…