CasinoGaming.com


	Sundays: Inside Gaming Tuesdays: Video Poker Wednesdays: Off the Shelf Fridays: Richard Eng, Player's Edge Saturdays: Pocket Aces

POCKET ACES

Columns

• Back to Maryann's index

• Back to columnists' index

Maryann Guberman has been a writer and editor with many gaming publications, including Sports Form, Card Player, Poker World, Player's Panorama and Systems and Methods. She also has written and edited numerous books on gambling.

April 24, 2004

Cyber Poker Ownership Follow Up and Correction But No Apology

Like most people, I wince inwardly when I realize I've made a mistake. If the blunder is private, the cringing isn't bad, but when I err in public, I end up wishing I had the athletic ability to kick myself in the head (softly, of course) for carelessness. Admittedly, it is almost always carelessness that brings these mistakes about.

Two weeks ago when I asked the question, "Who owns online poker anyhow?" I made a typo regarding a monetary amount. That error was then compounded when in attempting to put the proper figure in place the sentence skewed. The number was now correct but the sentence itself was not.

Here's how it read: "If this same cyber card room, which in one recent 24-hour period had $44 million in action, decided to take a hike, who would ensure players they'd get their deposit money back?"

Here's how it SHOULD have read: "If this same cyber card room, which in one recent 24-hour period had PART OF $44 million in action, decided to take a hike, who would ensure players they'd get their deposit money back?"

Another phone call turned out to be more like a threat. Someone seemed to interpret that article as opposition to online poker.

Not true, not true, not true.

In the role of observer and essayist on poker, I think it's more or less a duty to pose myriad questions. (I don't have to answer them!) And I have a lot of questions I've been asking over the years about cyberpoker. These questions relate to the authenticity of a randomly dealt deck of cards to collusion between and among players; from the anonymity of players to trying to read cyber play tells; from tracking play-by-play via software to keeping your own records; from who owns the poker rooms to is the whole thing legal (in the U.S.). There's no vindictiveness, no attempt to offend. There's no need for either of those attitudes but there's no need to be gentle or nice.

I am concerned about people who tentatively, at least, might be breaking the law but I'm more concerned about a government that restricts people "for their own good." And I'm more concerned about cybercasinos that end up unable to pay when the stakes get too high or when the books don't balance. (This has happened!)

So, unless I make a mistake that has to be rectified, I don't have to apologize to anyone.

Except maybe Daniel Negreanu, who should have received mention in last week's coverage of good-poker-advice sites. His www.fullcontactpoker.com/ is nicely designed (thanks, it looks like, to Chris Bigler of Propokermedia), easy to navigate and filled with old and new articles, many offering poker advice that has nothing to do with numbers or theory. When you think you're going bad, really bad, for example, read his "Look Within Yourself for Answers" article for special guidance and insight that has nothing to do with the cards you're holding.