Mansion announces first Loyalty Freeroll prize

Posted on November 16th, 2007 in Poker News, Poker Rooms by Fayaz

GIBRALTAR — Mansion.com continues to deliver real player rewards with the inaugural monthly US$15,000 Loyalty Freeroll run and won by Walter M. on Saturday November 10.

A press release issued here, said Walter M. from Germany walked away with US$1,498.00 absolutely ‘on the house’ in Saturday’s free to enter online poker tournament, which was open exclusively to Mansion.com Members who had qualified throughout the month of October by earning a minimum 200 Mansion Poker Points (MPPs).

Tikru87 went All In with the QH-3H up against Walter M.’s QD-9C. The Flop came JH-TS-JD, with the 6S revealed on the Turn, and the River the 7S bringing no joy for Tikru 87, sealing the deal for Walter M..

It was Walter M.’s second major Mansion Poker tournament win in as many weeks, snagging top prize in the online site’s weekly US$110,000 Guaranteed tournament on October 23.

Tikru87 from Finland pocketed a healthy US$1047 runner-up pay day, and what’s even sweeter is that it didn’t cost either player a cent to participate.

“This tournament is a great way to show our dedicated Mansion.com Members our appreciation,” says MANSION Group CEO, Guy Gussarsky.

“We’re already gearing up for the next Loyalty Freeroll event, to be held on December 8, so we recommend our Members start earning their Mansion Poker Points now,” adds Gussarsky.

Mansion Members who earn a minimum 200 MPPs during November will be automatically given exclusive access to participate in the site’s December US$15,000 Loyalty Freeroll - where the only risk is winning.

MPPs are earned for real money ring game and tournament play, and are an exclusive offering of Mansion Poker, a system that rewards every Member for continuing to play Poker at Mansion.com

There’s no better time to switch on to Mansion.com an increasingly popular place amongst online Poker enthusiasts to stay and play.

Keep playing and keep earning. It really is that simple, and the new system means that Mansion Members can earn MPPs at a faster rate than ever before.

Experts call for internet gambling ban reversal

Posted on November 16th, 2007 in Poker News by Fayaz

WASHINGTON, DC — Top experts testified before the US House Committee on the Judiciary today and called for the U.S. to reverse it policies related to Internet gambling, arguing the prohibition of Internet gambling activities, the approach most recently undertaken in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), violates the American principles of personal freedom and individual liberty. The experts explained how the ban on Internet gambling violates U.S. treaty obligations with other countries and exposes U.S. businesses to potential criminal retaliation overseas. Additionally, Internet verification software technology was described that successfully protects against underage and compulsive gambling, further eliminating the rationale for banning online gambling activity.

“Today’s hearing made clear the arguments why Congress needs to reverse its current policies related to Internet gambling,” said Jeffrey Sandman, spokesman for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative.

Expert testimony at the hearing was provided by Representative Shelley Berkley (D-NV), professional poker player Annie Duke, New York University Law School professor Joseph Weiler and Michael Colopy, a representative of Aristotle Inc., a leading provider of verification services for child protection online.

Reversing U.S. Policies on Internet Gambling

Representative Shelley Berkeley provided testimony on the need for Congress to change its policies related to Internet gambling and protect the million of Americans that continue to gamble online despite passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA).

“A combination of outdated laws, selective enforcement by the Justice Department, and an intentional lack of clarity by Congress resulted in a confusing environment for those law-abiding Americans who want to wager online, and that was before enactment of last year’s so-called Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act,” said Berkeley. “The UIGEA actually made things even more confusing by targeting the financial sector rather than gamblers, and further memorializing the carve-out for horseracing. Although some Internet gaming executives have been arrested and some of the more reputable operators have stopped doing business in the U.S., an estimated 10 million Americans are still wagering online on poker alone, and they are doing so without the benefit of the protections afforded by effective regulatory oversight…I applaud this committee for attempting to lay the groundwork for a legislative solution that ideally would legalize online gaming, subject it to some sort of regulation, and protect underage and problem gamblers.”

Preserving American Freedoms

Professional poker player Annie Duke testified that Americans deserve the right to determine whether to gamble online without government intrusion.

“What’s at stake here is the right of individual Americans to do what they want in the privacy of their homes without the intrusion of the government,” said Duke. “This country was among the first to embrace the idea that there should be distinct limits on the ability of the government to control or direct the private affairs of its citizens. More than any other value, America is supposed to be about freedom. Except where one’s actions directly harm another person’s life, liberty or property, our government is supposed to leave citizenry alone. Examples of Congress straying from this principle are legion, but few are as egregious as The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006.”

Answering questions from Committee members, Duke affirmed that the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, legislation introduced by Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) would allow individual states to maintain full control over online gambling in their jurisdiction, including determining what kind of online gambling would be allowed, how online gambling operators would be taxed, and how the industry would be regulated.

Resolving the WTO Internet Gambling Dispute

Joseph Weiler, a professor of law at the New York University School of Law and an expert in the law of the WTO, provided testimony that the U.S. is in violation of its WTO trade agreements around Internet gambling and should seek to bring itself into compliance.

“The U.S. bans online gambling offered by overseas operators even though it made treaty commitments to allow it and even though it allows online wagering domestically, including for horse racing,” said Weiler. “We should bring our law and conduct into compliance with our international legal obligations. Our country is the trendsetter and leader in so many international arenas. Whether we like it or not, we lead by example. As our economy moves increasingly towards a high tech, knowledge based service oriented model and as we realize that our future prosperity will depend increasingly of tapping into export markets, notably the huge emerging markets such as China and India, is it really in our self interest to teach this particular example? How we would we feel if China prosecuted and imprisoned American businessman for engaging in commerce in China that the government there decided to ban despite its treaty obligations?”

Combating Compulsive and Underage Gambling

Michael Colopy, a representative of Aristotle Inc., a leading provider of verification services for child protection online, provided testimony on the opportunity to use technology and controls available on the Internet to combat compulsive and underage gambling.

“Online age and ID verification has matured as a needed solution such that any merchant may do online what is routinely done at stores every day across America,” said Colopy. “In fact, as ever more efficient technologies and databases have been developed, online transactions have become in many instances faster and less risky than the visual driver’s license scans that suffice for alcohol or cigarette purchases in America’s neighborhood convenience stores, restaurants and bars.”

Colopy added that a self-exclusion list program is an example of a solution to keep compulsive gamblers from wagering online. “A central self-exclusion list program (SEL) has been under development over the last several months and is now deployed. Through the SEL, individuals will be able to put their own names on a confidential list of those who do not wish to be solicited or allowed to open an account with a casino.”

Jeffery Sandman added, “Instead of prohibiting Internet gambling, which is futile and denies Americans the freedom to decide whether to gamble online, the government should regulate and tax Internet gambling. Regulated Internet gambling would ensure proven and effective security controls are available to protect consumers and capture billions in revenue that is needed for critical government programs.”

House annoyed over UIGEA exceptions

Posted on November 16th, 2007 in Poker Administration, Poker News by Fayaz

Without signalling whether it was inclined to repeal the UIGEA, the House Judiciary Committee voiced its frustration with inconsistent nature of gambling laws and prosecution at a House hearing on Wednesday.

The Democratic chairman of the committee, John Conyers, openly questioned the “selective enforcement” of anti-gambling laws. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) to her criticism a step further.

“The laws regarding Internet gaming are absurd and inconsistent,” Berkley said. “And the UIGEA has made things worse, targeting the financial sector and creating a hypocritical carve out for horse betting.”

Berkley also blasted the government’s decision to remove online gambling from its WTO commitments.

“It’s the trade equivalent of taking our ball and going home,” Berkley said before noting the U.S. is now on the hook for a substantial amount of money as a result of that decision.

Berkley would like to see Internet gambling regulated in the U.S., and has proposed conducting a study that would provide Congress data to help make that decision.

Opponents of online gambling, meanwhile, tried to keep the focus of the hearing on problem gambling, protecting youths and state’s rights.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) called Internet gambling “fronts for money laundering and terrorists.” He also said that gambling online leads to addictive gambling and claimed that children can play online without having their ages verified.

But the most interesting testimony came from U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway. Hanaway, representing the Department of Justice, noted that it was legal for American players to place bets online, but that it was illegal of casino operators to accept those bets.

Hanaway also said repeatedly that “all online gambling is illegal.” But she did note that the DOJ had not seen a case in which online gambling was used to launder anything other than gambling winnings.

The two funniest moments in the hearing came during question and answer sessions. Deep into the session, Family Research Council Vice President Tom McClusky admitted that his organization wasn’t just opposed to online gambling, but all forms of gambling, At that point, Rep. Stephen Cohen (D-Tenn.) was asked McClusky if he “was opposed to all forms of fun.”

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) provided the other humorous moment when he said that there was no wagering in fantasy sports and that’s why America’s youths are allowed to participate in it. No one in the chamber chose to laugh, but the absolute silence that followed that statement spoke volumes.