DC plans on being the first US jurisdiction to open an online casino

  • alwayssplitaces

     

    I’d rather see a real casino open in DC. There are tons of tourists in DC and a large population within 50 miles of DC, so a physical casino would be able to serve them. An online casino would only be able to serve the residents, so the funds would dry up once the residents get tired of it.

    There’s no point putting restrictions on an online casino. The gambling addicts will be gambling on offshore websites between 4-10 am. The DC population is too small to support an online poker site. If the blackjack was countable, a $250 limit is too small for me.

  • Thunder

     

    I agree with you except where you say DC would be too small to support a poker site. I think you underestimate just how many poker players are in the DC area.

  • Jack_Black

     

    Quote:
    In the District, bettors would have to be 19 or older and be physically located in the city. City officials think they can avoid federal restrictions on interstate financial transactions related to gambling by ensuring that all bets are handled within the District’s 61 square miles…..

    61 square miles!? that site will not be busy at all, doesn’t matter how many people play poker. Pokerstars in its heyday would have in the high millions of players playing on at one time. Now it’s the low millions. I play on pokerstars france right now and it’s dead most of the time, and that’s for the entire country!

  • tthree

     

    Why can’t a Marylander or anyone else play the DC online casino?

  • pit15

     

    Quote: Jack_Black said:
    61 square miles!? that site will not be busy at all, doesn’t matter how many people play poker. Pokerstars in its heyday would have in the high millions of players playing on at one time. Now it’s the low millions. I play on pokerstars france right now and it’s dead most of the time, and that’s for the entire country!

    Seriously? They’re opening a website and restricting it to half a million people in the world.

    That concept alone makes this a failure to begin with.

    HOWEVER, it could just be a way to get a foot in the door. Start off with restricting it to DC residents, show it’s successful then get the legislation to expand it.

  • The Chaperone

     

    Maybe Barack will be a red player.

  • Wookets

     

    The idea is completely counter-intuitive. One of the largest advantages of the Internet is the ability to increase your exposure with relatively minimal effort. Why limit the Internet’s intrinsic advantage over brick and mortar establishments?

  • alwayssplitaces

     

    Quote: Thunder said:
    I agree with you except where you say DC would be too small to support a poker site. I think you underestimate just how many poker players are in the DC area.

    Sure, in the beginning it’ll be a fishfest but once the novelty wears out and the fish lose their money, it’ll be regulars grinding against each other. DC is small enough that a regular casino would be easily accessible to the whole population.

    I wonder if visitors will be able to play if they’re connected to one of those wireless hotspots. If so, it might be worth it for me to go to DC the first day it opens and play online poker all day. It would be soft like the PartyPoker days. I can imagine the +EV it would be to multitable 1/2 NL for a day that’s as soft as live 1/2 NL.

  • shadroch

     

    Federal law prohibits inter-state gambling. It does not prohibit intra-state gambling, and says nothing about the District of Columbia. New Jersey was set to have intra-state gambling on line, but Gov. Christie vetoed the bill.
    A Maryland resident can bet only within the state of Maryland, or he is violating Federal law.

  • Remember Remember

     

    Quote: shadroch said:
    New Jersey was set to have intra-state gambling on line, but Gov. Christie vetoed the bill.

    I think he’s trying to protect AC’s business, but utterly failing. First he doesn’t allow card rooms up state now this. AC’s dying if not already dead imo. NJ needs to wake up to reality and start looking at alternatives like card rooms or small casinos in the Newark/NYC-area.

  • Thunder

     

    Quote: alwayssplitaces said:
    Sure, in the beginning it’ll be a fishfest but once the novelty wears out and the fish lose their money, it’ll be regulars grinding against each other. DC is small enough that a regular casino would be easily accessible to the whole population.

    I wonder if visitors will be able to play if they’re connected to one of those wireless hotspots. If so, it might be worth it for me to go to DC the first day it opens and play online poker all day. It would be soft like the PartyPoker days. I can imagine the +EV it would be to multitable 1/2 NL for a day that’s as soft as live 1/2 NL.

    They’ll never have a regular casino in DC. Far too much opposition to it. But if they open an online casino, all they need is just a few hundred people playing and they’ll be making lots of money. I for one would be quite happy to eat tons of fish when it first opens I doubt it’ll be 2005 all over again but surely it should be fun for a while.

  • alwayssplitaces

     

    On Day 1 people would willingly play. It would have a lot of media coverage reinforcing that it is completely legal, so people will not have any worries depositing via their credit cards. The plan to open a play money online casino first to test the software is good since the poker players would play “bingo” like they do on Facebook poker. Then when real money is accepted, those same players would play badly with real money. But I don’t think a play money casino based in DC would get much traffic since there are so many play money casinos online.

  • Nynefingers

     

    Quote: alwayssplitaces said:
    I wonder if visitors will be able to play if they’re connected to one of those wireless hotspots. If so, it might be worth it for me to go to DC the first day it opens and play online poker all day. It would be soft like the PartyPoker days. I can imagine the +EV it would be to multitable 1/2 NL for a day that’s as soft as live 1/2 NL.

    It wasn’t clear to me whether multitabling will even be allowed. If so, it almost certainly will be limited to a small number of tables.

    “An Intralot official said that payouts in the District would be competitive but that the target market is recreational players, not high-stakes professionals who play many hands at once.”

    Quote: shadroch said:
    Federal law prohibits inter-state gambling. It does not prohibit intra-state gambling, and says nothing about the District of Columbia. New Jersey was set to have intra-state gambling on line, but Gov. Christie vetoed the bill.
    A Maryland resident can bet only within the state of Maryland, or he is violating Federal law.

    Can you provide a reference for this? The only thing I’ve ever seen used as an argument against online poker has been the Wire Act, which does not apply. Is this a new law against interstate gambling?

  • Caesar

    Multitabling is bad for online poker!

    “It wasn’t clear to me whether multitabling will even be allowed. If so, it almost certainly will be limited to a small number of tables.”

    I see some of you remember the 2005 days. One thing–not the only–that led to demise of soft online poker is multitabling. Give an expert player the chance to clean out dozens of fish at the same time and game quality goes south in a hurry.

    Why not limit players to one table? After all, it is still much, much faster than one table brick-and-mortar poker.

    I’m a winning online poker player (I don’t play now.) and I’m perfectly content to play one table at a time.

  • alwayssplitaces

     

    Quote: Caesar said:
    “It wasn’t clear to me whether multitabling will even be allowed. If so, it almost certainly will be limited to a small number of tables.”

    I see some of you remember the 2005 days. One thing–not the only–that led to demise of soft online poker is multitabling. Give an expert player the chance to clean out dozens of fish at the same time and game quality goes south in a hurry.

    Why not limit players to one table? After all, it is still much, much faster than one table brick-and-mortar poker.

    I’m a winning online poker player (I don’t play now.) and I’m perfectly content to play one table at a time.

    Thing is, with this site promoted as legal, there will be a lot more fish that will play and feed the pros. But the population of DC is small.
    As someone who used to multitable Rush Poker on Full Tilt, playing one table seems slow. I made my money with rakeback. Rush Poker was full of rocks, but there were the occasional loose players who did make it worthwhile to play.

The BlackjackInfo Knowledge Base contains over 200,000 messages posted by the BlackjackInfo community.

Posting and replies to the knowledge base are no longer available, but comments and replies are welcomed on the blog.