We have a robust poker community here on WSO, and I know at least some of you got jammed up on Black Friday - April 15, 2011 - when the Department of Justice seized Poker Stars, Full Tilt Poker, and Ultimate Bet. I personally know a guy who has a 6-figure Full Tilt account which is still in limbo, despite the fact that Full Tilt was sold to PokerStars in January. So what's the hold-up when it comes to getting your money out?
It turns out the DOJ is really big on seizures, but not so much on restitution. Even though the DOJ made over $500 million in profit on the sale of Full Tilt, it has yet to return a cent to players despite promising to do just that after the sale.
According to Steven L. Kessler, an attorney based in New York City who specializes in forfeiture law and is representing high-stakes pro Adam Webb's attempt to recover nearly $59,000 in this case, it's business as usual to make seized funds difficult to recover. “Any forfeiture case is about fund-raising,” he says. “In one of its publications [the 'National Asset Forfeiture Strategic Plan 2008–2012'], the government talks about bringing in $2 billion in forfeitures and returning only $700 million.” Recouping Full Tilt funds will be “a long, drawn-out process to the point that you will need to be out five or six or seven figures for it to be worth pursuing. The system is set up so that you are discouraged from going after your money.
The free market being what it is (and poker players being market makers by nature), a secondary market in these cash balances sprung up almost immediately after the seizures. Initially you could sell your frozen cash balance for as much as 85 cents on the dollar, but as the case dragged on balances sold for as little as one penny on the dollar. Now that the government has sold Full Tilt and at least made the promise to pay at some point, players can now find buyers for their cash balances around 70 cents on the dollar.
I find this absolutely ridiculous. Not only is online poker a victimless crime (unless you count Vegas, Atlantic City, and the Indian tribes who lost revenue), it's not even gambling. It's a game of math and probabilities. That's why there's a rake; there's no advantage to being the house.
Anyway, if you have money tied up with the former Full Tilt at least there's a little light at the end of the tunnel. I played at Pacific Poker for a number of years but eventually closed my account. I guess it was lucky timing.
Is anyone playing online anymore? How do you fund your account? Is there any way around the government leviathan in the online poker rooms anymore?
It's just disgusting that shit like this is allowed to happen.
Does anyone know of any big name professional players having had their money lost/tied up due to this?
I still have an account on PokerStars but havent played in a while...built up a $50 account to ~$500 but stopped playing about 6 months before this happened...also haven't been back on since I dont want to spend more hours not knowing if I can get my $ out.
I haven't even tried getting my cash out...is this just for Full Tilt or have you guys been able to get $ out of PokerStars?
Also, this topic is pretty funny because in my public speaking class at Wharton where we had to choose a topic to argue, I argued that online poker shoudl not be made illegal under the label as a game of luck.
I then proceeded to show countless player graphs downlaoded from sharkscope.com to demonstrate the fact that there were clear patterns in players win and loss patterns with many steadily going up since they were more skilled...just like what you see in the stock market.
Anyone with ANY knowledge of poker knows that it is a game of SKILL in the long run.
Those graphs are great proof that poker is a skill game. I would spend countless hours looking at the more successful online player graphs and just being in awe of their consistency. If you saw my graph it would look like a rollercoaster where I would win $1k+ and then give it all back every month or so.
Patrick,
If I'm reading it correctly, you should be able to cash out of PokerStars no problem. I'd be interested to hear if that's not the case and you have trouble getting your money. They're basically the best capitalized outfit in the online poker world.
I played online extensively at one point in my life but realized that in order to be a winning player I would have to fully devote to it. I chose finance instead. I have plenty of friends with funds frozen on fulltilt and I feel for them. For a lot of them, this was the way they made their income. When black friday came, the bigger players either a. switched to live or b. moved overseas (Costa Rica, Canada, Europe were the most popular locations).
Pokerstars still works perfectly Patrick. I have ~40 bucks there and I'm hoping to become once again a semi serious player.
This is an example of poor government intervention. I see their point about using online poker as a means of money laundering, but completely shutting down an industry instead of reforming it so that A. Players funds are safe and B. Government makes tax revenues off of it was definitely not the way to go.
Can they sue for interest expenses + attorney fees? Your friend must be shitting bricks.
It's been so long that he's actually pretty zen about it now. If he ever gets any of it back it'll be what we in New Orleans refer to as "lagniappe".
It is interesting how card rooms are legal, which is basically a poker room, but online poker is not...Vegas lobbyist >>>online poker lobbyists. I miss online poker, i don't have the patience to play one tablet live, need to play a few since you normally muck 90% of your hands anyways.
You have no control over the hand you're dealt
Gotta love government. Another example of how money = power and the government is the enforcer of this power. Only people against online gambling are established casino's who throw money at the clowns in Washington and fuck the rest of us.
Patrick, i would challenge your conclusion on this, not through logic, but through an alternative way of viewing it. The vast majority of people do not understand what is going on. They play on whims, gut feeling and lucky hands. And lose heavily because of it. If i was arbitraging betting shops (assuming there is a market for it), would I be gambling? What about the guy that is placing what he thinks are the same bets as me in the same shop? If you were to pick at random, from the sample population, 90% of them would be playing poker as gambling. While I agree it can be a game of skill under some conditions, it is certainly a game of luck given how most people play it.
How is someone playing a game for real money on a whim any different from the lottery? How is it different from guys trading stocks on a "whim"/ "gut"?
Anytime real money is involved, if you don't understand the game well, you should probably not be playing. I am not sure I follow your betting shops analogy?
If you're going to say that public market participants are more savvy, you shoul speak with my dad when he tells me why he is going to make a certain trade (and he is more educated than 99% of population)...maybe we shoudl make buying and selling stocks illegal as well? maybe we should make the lottery illegal since the expected return is likley lower for that than sitting down at a poker table...or it's ok because "everyone" loses there?
The difference might be that the people involved in making the laws regarding stocks and trading on the market actually own stocks and do trade in the market.. Making trading on the market illegal would actually hinder their portfolio and income stream. These same people don't utilize online poker or online gambling and don't understand it. Since they have no skin in the game, it doesn't hinder them to make it illegal.
The betting shop analogy is that it is theoretically possible to play "gambling" as non gambling in more forms than poker. However given that the non gamblers require there to be a lot of gamblers to be able to make any money (play 10 identical poker bots against each other, the game will end surprisingly quickly) and the majority of people are unable to get the odds in their favour. The lottery is legal because it's easy to tax. Not getting into the stock market debate, it's a different and long and opinionated debate, although the points are similar. I dont want to digress the thread away from poker.
Absolute archaic laws we have. The nanny state will keep getting worse before it minimizes.
Anyone know some good live games on WS or in FiDi?
I have 4 figures locked up still with FTP. Pretty unsettling that the DOJ is taking this long.
Dept of Justice is nothing but an oxymoron. Glad to know that the DOJ has time for this bullshit while fast and furious is ignored and enforcing immigration laws is forgotten. Full Tilt Poker and suing states that are doing the Fed's job is where it is at though.
PokerStars repaid players within a couple of months, maybe even a couple of weeks. What was great about Stars was their communication, whereas FT left us in the dark, honestly didn't hear a word in close to a year. Last I have heard the DOJ is setting up an administrator in early Q1 2013, which means I wouldn't expect payouts anytime soon. The bigger question is if they plan on paying out player balances or deposits (deposits would just be wrong on so many accounts).
For anyone that wants updated news on timing of Full Tilt payouts, their is a thread on twoplustwo titled "The big question for Full Tilt U.S. players: Will they get their money back?". If you don't mind navigating through numerous trolls, some very good insight and individuals with good knowledge on the situation ITT.
I've written off my FTP funds as a loss. I feel sorry for all the players that kept their entire bankroll online.
Wait so can you still play on Stars like you could back in the day, or are you just allowed to pull your Stars money out? A poster mentioned getting serious about the game again, so now I'm a little confused.
I live in Canada, the land of the free
EDIT: yes, i think US players are still only allowed to withdraw
1) Reasonably sure that one of the key reasons that playing with real money through Full Tilt et al was axed is because of the concern that terrorists were using it to transfer money. This seems to be convneniently glossed over in this discussion, where people act like what has happened to online gambling so illogical.
2) Online poker is more about luck than table poker at a casino. Why you might ask, well, great question. The reason of course is that some of what makes poker somewhat controllable, the psychology aspect (reading people's faces, body language, minute muscle twitches, blinking patterns, etc.) is largely absent from the online variety of poker. That's also why table poker is much more fun anyways, so I really don't see what everyone is whining about.
3) I never realized TNA was such a liberal! And that's great of course, because if he went to the king of the red states (Texas), he would be SOL since casino gambling is completely banned there (except there's some pathetic class 2 Indian casino which doesn't count). In contrast, the queen of the blue states (Massachusetts) legalized gambling like a year ago and is in the process of constructing 3 legit casinos and one baby casino. So looks like all those red state bros are holding back the gambling revolution.
4) Poke-her, haha.
I know I feel safer...
re 2) Any decent poker player would know that 'tells' ie. face twitches, blinking, ball scratching etc. are largely useless. If someone is basing their primary decision off these things, I can almost guarantee he/she is a long-term loser in the game. I do agree live poker is a lot more fun, but the skill required to succeed online is so much bigger than it is live. Nowadays with everyone using a HUD and the game almost being solved in certain areas (bots are playing almost game theoretically optimal in limit holdem) online is drying up as less and less recreational players get involved.
I live in Canada so I was able to get my 5-figure FTP balance back. As someone else mentioned earlier, if you want to move up the stakes online you have to devote a vast amount of time to poker. I'd be fine with this if it were 2006 but the future of online poker is really uncertain right now. Unfortunately this means I have to find a job :(
This is simply just not true. The luck involved in poker is attributable to short-term variance, and the more hands that player plays the less luck plays a factor. In live games one might see ~15 hands per hour, whereas online allows the identical player to multi-table lets say 10 tables & see ~45 hands/table/hr.
There is an extraordinary amount of luck in any single tournament played or one cash-game session. The main factor that decreases this luck is volume.
The "psychology aspect" you mention is not absent at all from online poker. There are plenty of online tells (timing, auto-folds, if their location is Sweden :)) Even more so, HUDS essentially give you players betting tendencies,etc. allowing you to adjust your game.
You're not comparing apples to apples. Not everyone that did online poker were in 10 tables at once and deciding on 450 hands (?) every hour. Really that sounds like some sort of poker freakshow.
That's a fair point. But you still can't see their face or their person in the flesh. Also, any stat can be intentionally manipulated, and online poker also makes it more possible to cheat somehow (as in, greater than zero). I have nothing to back this up though, just a hunch.
This is 100% correct, whether you are playing one table of 15, the volume of the game is what reduces the variance.
Going Concern has no idea what he is talking about.
It's the right wing Christian extremists that are keeping gambling from entering red states. It is absolutely absurd! BTW, I am a Libertarian.
Remember folks...if we legalize online poker, the terrorists win.
While your sarcasm is indeed very refreshing, I was simply providing an offset to the deluge of "this is disgusting" sentiment to the banning of online gambling. I have nothing against it from an ethical standpoint, but I'm also not going to just ignore the unintended risks that arise. It's just like not being able to bring water bottles into airplanes. Yeah, it's a asinine rule, but if we didn't have it you would have to suffer the potential ramifications. So pick your poison. Still can't believe that I of all people am being the voice of reason here, LOL!
Since you chose to directly quote me I am under the assumption that you, in fact, believe me to be the one that doesn't understand what is going on with the legality of online poker.
I believe your blatant acceptance of this law is a little discerning and hiding behind the blanket of "well, online poker supported terrorism" is total bullshit. The government hopes citizens such as yourself buy in to that retarded line of thinking so less people oppose what they are doing. What is to stop someone in the United States from gifting someone living in a country where online poker is legal, money through pay pal, for that person to then turn around and lose that money to someone else for terrorist activities, through online poker? It is the same thing only one step has been added and nothing has been solved.
Instead of wasting the government's time and taxpayer money, they should have made a stricter structure around online poker and gambling while adding revenue to the government.
1) Liberal states probably legalize gambling to a) pay for entitlement programs and b) because religious groups probably have a weaker power position there. Either way I am all for gambling, smoking and drinking since it screws the poor and uneducated over.
2) Glad to know we infringe on American rights because "terrorists" might use it. We already have a ton of money laundering laws, god forbid we enforce them.
Only terrorists I see recently are the clowns in Washington.
LMAO. Thanks, bro. It's been a rough day and that comment actually got a guffaw out of me. I needed that.
LOL, this is inconsistent. Let me draw it out for you:
Poor ---> Gambling ---> Revenue to state ---> Entitlements --> Poor |_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ |
It's the circle of life!
How is it inconsistent? It would be if the goal was to help the poor, instead of screwing them and buying their votes.
New York sold the lottery as a way to fund schools and education. The vast majority now goes to the general coffers. The poor disproportionately play the lottery. So we take their money, spend it and give a piece back through entitlements, thereby locking in future votes.
If we really want to help the poor and uneducated we would have a bifurcated system of freedoms. The poor need to be told what to do and when to do it because they cannot function as adults.
Also, little side rant, but I just flew this weekend and find it hilarious that we piss so much money away on the TSA. The high school graduate who got my soup this afternoon at Cosi can't even get my choice of bread correct. I am sure those knuckle draggers working at the airport are just SOOOOOO much more competent.
Poker Stars and Full Tilt are only able to serve players outside of the USA. There are several other small sites that are open to US players however the player base is much lower.
Ain't my entitlements.
And when a dude can't give me whole grain bread instead of white bread at Cosi I think the government needs to step in.
I think the goverment should step in when people think that "whole grain" bread is healthy. glycemix index people, glycemic index.
I think we shoudl ban all corn subsidies....ready....go!
I always love hearing people bitch about the way companies treat their employes. That is until they own stock in their retirement account and get pissed when they miss earnings.
This idea that other people have a right to decide how people or companies should spend money that they didn't own is pervasive and cancerous. What you earn is yours and only you should decide what to spend it on. If a company provides a product that consumers want they should be able to spend those profits however they want.
I just like the taste better. I didn't even get bread one day and literally threw a fit when I got back to the office. Considering I eat one cup of soup and one piece of bread a day the meal takes on far more importance than it should I suppose.
I've never done online gambling because I always assumed there was some algo in there to cheat you. I guess I've worked on Wall Street too long. I'm surprised so many of you are so trusting of online gambling operators.
That's true now, but in the beginning it was wide open. The hosting companies took a while to figure out they could seat algo bots and make a killing.
Sit harum quasi maxime ullam. Repellat eveniet explicabo esse. Consequatur voluptas quis et repudiandae. Quasi non provident consequatur id tempora ipsam sunt. Ipsum est ad quidem ut nam sed illum.
Quos magni dolores explicabo nulla earum enim nesciunt veniam. Praesentium magnam amet nam qui.
Officia omnis qui autem quis in. Odit sit voluptatibus occaecati eligendi est. Aut accusamus fugiat iure vero. Sed recusandae ut eum eos cupiditate ut.
Similique saepe quia aut voluptatibus accusamus est delectus eum. Officia assumenda voluptas deleniti. Delectus excepturi eos facilis cumque molestiae id magni et. Quo id suscipit aut odio qui iusto nobis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Rem sequi nihil sint quaerat earum hic. Magnam fugit et saepe qui aut fugit. Libero soluta beatae aliquid.
Saepe eum consequuntur odit. Sit facilis saepe laudantium non. Quasi enim ipsam qui qui. Ex nemo consequatur unde. Voluptate ut voluptatem esse aut.
Tenetur aliquam velit nisi sunt cupiditate et. Repudiandae ea atque sit tenetur aut vero dolor. Et ipsum placeat dolorum expedita atque qui et. Illo praesentium ad sed neque.
Modi magnam quia vel molestiae nostrum dolor possimus aut. Quam pariatur optio necessitatibus perferendis facere voluptatem optio animi.
Et ducimus at consequuntur adipisci odit tempora quod. Quia recusandae ut iste quis. Quo reiciendis qui occaecati ea dolorem. Sequi aut vel sed et et aperiam. Consequuntur vero molestias dolores. Iste cumque aut et quo exercitationem repudiandae. Reiciendis tempore veritatis quia est.