Those are some excellent suggestions. A study by UMass just came out which would agree with a number of these, if you are interested. You can find it at http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/23805/problem-gambling-data-online-legalization-massachusetts/

We are not telling our legislatures what they need to do to get what they want, tax revenue and protect problem gamblers.

I sent a proposal to PA , it was ignored.

short version.

each state will have poker player registration.

can only buy-in through the states registry or appointed delegate which will take it’s fee (tax) on each buy in.

MAX buy in for one year will be limited to 10% of cross income for anyone making less that 50k per year.
20% for those make 50 to 150k
and 35% for everyone making more than 150k per year.
people with no income would be limited to $50 per month, ie entertainment value.

The states can lease out any part of the plan they want. or form larger collisions of states for economy of scale..

A federal protection agency would keep players from double dipping in multiple states.

all PROs would have an avatar indicating they are a pro ( make over half their income form poker, playing and indorsements). If players want to challenge them they can, but they better know something about bankroll management.

They also need to play the age and debility card. I am too freaking old to set in a casino for hours on end. But I can play from my recliner at home. I’m also a VET and earned for my freedom to spend my money the way I choose. This is really tics me off.

.

Just google “DFS courses” for the sports you are interterested in studying

James, you are absolutely right about problem gamblers. I most commonly play in a local cardroom, and I often wonder how some of the folks that I am playing are able to come back from week to week and lay another $100 down on the table (and another, and another). I feel bad for them, but not bad enough to stop taking the money that they are laying down. I console myself with the fact that someone is getting that money. Might as well be me. It is definitely an ethical dilemma that I ponder not infrequently. Fortunately, I do not believe that those folks are in the majority, but they are definitely out there.

Heather i completely agree with your last statement. As I said DFS does require a great amount of skill (which really just means having the knowledge of what to research while also having the discipline to actually do the research in order to create consistent winning lineups and proper bankroll management). But this requires skill is not in the same league as poker, as there is way more variance in DFS than poker. Because you can do all the research you want but once the lineups are created and the slates start, the rest of the night is out of your control. This does not compare to poker were you are involved in the decision making process until until the match is over.

So yea, the approval of DFS over Poker is still just as frustrating, despite the modicum of knowledge it takes to play DFS. Because I don’t think they are in the same league.

It’s tough to argue with that legislation. Because yes we all know that poker is a game of skill. But I know there are a ton of players that treat poker like a game of blackjack, thinking, wishing and hoping they get dealt the luckiest cards in order to win big pots. These same guys are the ones that replinish there 100 dollar minimum buy in like the fish they are, because they don’t know any better. This is exhilarating for me because it gets me paid on a day to day basis, and enabled me to move up to 2/5 stakes in about no time (all thanks to this site and a few books). But at the same time I feel incredibly bad for these players because at the poker table they are problem gamblers. They don’t know when to stop buying in and they come to the table thinking, today will be the big day. And they are actually the majority in the local poker rooms. This makes me want to teach these players because my dad was a problem gambler at the black jack table and I have experienced how that can debilitate a families livihood. But at the same time I cant jack my own money up at the low limit tables.

All in all, I think banning online poker is going to save true problem gamblers more money than it will restrict online pros from making money. All the pros are gonna do and should do is focus on their live game. That’s the only aspect of the poker world that I can’t imagine changing for the worse. If anything it’s growing at a very rapid pace, especially on the east coast (lucky me !). So I don’t see the point on choosing to focus your time and money on online poker with such an uncertain future. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Stick to live games. And obviously, keep training here !!

Cash-Game James, I am thinking about getting into the world of DFS and would love some rudimentary advice from someone playing there already!

Crossing Australia off my list of places to move.

Not a good situation.