Merry Christmas!



The New York Times had an article yesterday which discussed the removal of an obstacle to online gambling. Basically, the Wire Act which was used to limit (and essentially ban) online poker, was ruled to only apply to sporting events.

This, combined with the fact that individual states desperately need new sources of revenue and want to enlarge their base of people gambling, is very good news for the future of legal and regulated online poker in the United States.

Rich Muny (TheEngineer on 2+2), the VP of the board of the Poker Player Alliance, said this on 2+2:

"I think it's huge. For one, it means Congress will have to revisit the broader issue if they wish to have clarity. For another, it does seem to clear the way for intrastate poker IMO (again, IANAL).

Both developments bode well for us, perhaps increasing the odds of moving federal legislation by double-digit percentage points."

Here is more agreement from PokerXanadu (another 2+2 mod very involved with the legislative side of ipoker) on the huge implications of this ruling. He specifies:

"It's essentially equivalent to passing a federal opt-in i-poker bill [my highlight for emphasis - PN]. Any state that now passes legislation that authorizes i-poker can legally participate in interstate i-poker with NV and other states with similar legislation. Arguably, it can also occur without such state enabling legislation in states that don't have a law that expressly prohibits i-poker, but I don't think that will happen."

More from PX: "this makes the chances for federal legislation go to near 100%"

WSJ article: "Internet Poker Is Sort of Legal!"

"In a nutshell, the department's Office of Legal Counsel has determined that the Federal Wire Act, the 1961 law that had been interpreted to outlaw all forms of gambling across state lines, actually only applies to "a sporting event or contest."

Well, what does this mean? It means that Internet poker isn't barred by any federal statue.

This story is still developing, but outlook seems very upbeat!

I have an idea for a poker-education related project which requires programming some software. I have no experience with programming but have a clear direction for what I want the software to do.

If you, or someone you know, would be interested in collaborating on this, shoot me a PM with some basic info (name, experience with programming & poker). I'll be happy to discuss both the scope and the financial end of it.

Lee and I have a question about formatting and style for Hand Histories for my book - it will take you 10 seconds to look it over and vote - please do it and help me out :)

http://www.cardrunners.com/cr_forums/showthread.php?156521-Need-your-advice-on-Verneer-s-new-book...

Thanks!

... was Muslim and praised Allah after every big play and during post-game interviews? Things would be completely different. I'm certain that Tebow's open faith is much more polarizing than his playing style.

On a different note, if you missed it, SNL had some funny skits this weekend. Here is the most recent digital short:

I had a chance to read Tri Nguyen's new book - How I Made My First Million. I wrote my review on 2+2 so I'll just post the link here:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=30160814&postcount=4

Bottom line: Very enjoyable read from someone who has thought a lot about issues relevant to anyone who wants to make poker a key part of their life. There is really no other book out there like this.

Slowplayed set, slow-played set, or slow played set?

This is probably the first post on this topic. It's will be impossible to cover all of this in one blog, but I want to begin an important discussion.

There is a lot of discussion on 2+2 about the presence and effectiveness of poker bots. Here is some general background:

1. Bots have been around for years and they are winning at a good rate (2 bb/100+) at the midstakes (1/2 to 10/20).
2. Their technology and speed will only get better.
3. If done correctly, it will be impossible for pokersites to detect them.
4. They could effectively kill the games.

All of this adds up to being pretty scary. Some top calliber players have stated that the problem is very serious and with some depressing implications. I'll try to summarize some of the ideas that have been floated around.

1. Bots have been around for years and they are good.

This shouldn't come as a big surprise, but some of the most primitive bots would all play the same style, grind out a small profit (and make tons off rakeback). They were easy to detect and highly exploitable once you could identify them. They would mostly play at the micros. I just recently learned that this new wave of bots has been playing the midstakes and killing them.

Here is a graph of the compilation of ~70 accounts playing 6-max from 2/4 to 10/20:

I was reading Daniel Kahnema's Thinking Fast and Slow. Kahneman begins by showing a picture similar to this one:

Problem 1:



What can you tell from that picture?

Problem 2:

***

Next, find a number which makes the following statement true:

"Four more than seven times some number is equal to thirty-nine"

What's the answer?

***

When you are confronted with the first problem, you engage with Kahneman describes as "System 1" of your brain - located mostly in your amygdala. It's an emotional reaction and you process it quickly and effortlessly. He calls it "Fast Thinking". You let the totality of the situation sink in and make a decision.

Contrast that with the second problem. This one you solve using "System 2" - engaging among other things your preflontal cortex. This is what Kahneman describes as "Slow Thinking" - it's deliberate, effortful, and orderly. It's also taxing on the brain as it requires effort.

So what's the point of this blog post?

Have you ever been involved in a hand and made decisions which upon review don't really make much sense? It's almost as if another person played that hand. Does it seem often that when you look at different forum posts you seem to come up with lots of good lines and answers which other respectable posters seem to agree with, but when you actually play, there is tons of FPS in your game?

What's going on there?

One answer is that when you are involved in a hand online, there is money at stake, time is limited, and you have lots of information to consider at once. If you are also playing lots of tables, you need to make quick decisions. You will often tap into your System 1 of thinking and make Fast Thinking decisions - mostly emotionally and with limited (notice I said limited and not absent) mental effort.

On the other hand, if you are reviewing your hand on the forums, there is no money at stake, you are able to logically and deliberately break the hand apart with no time constraints and arrive at an answer you are happy with. You are working almost entirely using your slow thinking.

So there you go - the You at the tables is siginficantly different than the You on the forums and the You that reviews your sessions afterwards.

Where the expert players have a huge edge is many of the small decisions are automatized and they are able to devote their mental focus in actively engaging their slow thinking during important situations at the table.

I have no experience with any sort of programming or coding, but I am sure some of you guys do.

1. How difficult would it be to write a program like PokerStove?

2. How difficult would it be a write a simple simulator where you play NLHE HU vs. a computer opponent who is programmed to make basic plays with specific frequencies and ranges?