Archive for September, 2010

Denmark’s slow march toward the abandonment of its state monopoly on internet gambling is set to experience further delays, according to a Ladbrokes executive, and Betsson’s chief executive is undecided on whether the Swedish company will apply for a licence.

Back in July this year, the Danes started accepting licence applications after earlier agreeing under pressure from the European Commission to some liberalisation.

The snag was that applicants had to cease all activity in the market for a six month period until the licenses became effective, originally estimated to take place around January 2011. This ‘black period’ condition was widely interpreted as an attempt to create a protective cushion around state monopoly Danske Spil, giving it a significant advantage over its eventual competitors.

Licenses cannot be issued until the EC has completed a review of the draft law liberalising the market, which includes provisions for ISP and financial blocking of unlicensed operators.

Assuming there are no complications, a tentative date of October 11 has been set down for the issue of licenses, but interested parties fear that the Danes may impose the ‘black period’ from that date, further prolonging their exclusion from the action.

There has apparently been no shortage of licence applications, and last week a well informed Ladbrokes executive opined that the black period could be extended further, perhaps as far as the second quarter of 2011, a delay justified by the licensing process.

This week Betsson chief executive Pontus Lindwall revealed that his company is unhappy with the taxation aspects and the black period, and remains undecided on whether to seek a licence.

He said that he additionally saw no reason for the Danish proposal that lottery, horse betting, bingo, keno and scratch cards should remain the sole prerogative of Danske Spil.

In the meantime he has complained to the European Commission on grounds that the Danish approach contravenes European Union law.

Unconfirmed reports suggest that the Danes want all the advantages; there are indications that the Danish Gambling Board wants to let Danish-licensed companies access the player equity available in international markets, although competitors in those markets cannot operate in Denmark unless they have a local licence.

Generating plenty of heat on player message boards at present is the sad tale of a German player who is still struggling to be paid out on an online progressive jackpot, worth €167,500, that he hit in August 2008.

Just one of several disturbing aspects of the affair is the manner in which Malta’s regulator LGA is alleged to have handled the complaint. After a protracted wait on the regulator’s decision, the player was dumbfounded to learn that the online casino in the dispute, GVC Holdings subsidiary Casino Club, could apparently set aside its obligation to pay due to a Malta law that gambling debts are unenforceable!

The surreal dichotomy of a state-sanctioned regulatory regime which is effectively rendered powerless to intervene due to that same state’s own laws has boggled the minds of many players, and not in a good way.

After all, statistics made public by the Malta Minister of Finance earlier this year show that the island nation makes tens of millions of Euro annually from licensing and supposedly regulating online gambling sites! The sheer irony is inescapable, and the loophole could leave the door open to questionable conduct.

The player claims that he has been an active gambler at Casino Club from 2003 until his account was shut down after his big win in the third quarter of 2008, and that his action and deposits have never been questioned or challenged by casino staff. Until the big win, that is.

He claims that his account was in good standing following a recent deposit of €25,000, boosted by a casino-granted bonus of €5,000. On his 20th spin on the Jackpot Poker progressive he hit the sort of jackpot gamblers dream of – €167,500.

After first suggesting to him that more wins could be achieved if he played on with his windfall, casino staff then advised him two weeks later that his account had been locked for a security check, and he simultaneously discovered that his new-found wealth had been taken back by the operator.

Accusations that he had funded his lucky gamble on the progressive with money he had allegedly first earned illegally on Casino Club’s blackjack offering were then made to justify disallowing the progressive win. Some time later the player lodged a complaint with the LGA.

The regulator asked for evidence from Casino Club, which the casino claims it supplied.

After a further delay whilst the regulator digested the material, the player was given the bad news that his issue was ‘resolved’ because the casino had exploited a legal loophole that gambling debts are unenforceable under Malta law. Apparently the regulator did not comment on the real merits or otherwise of the case.

German lawyers advised the player that he would have to contest the issue in the Malta courts, a process likely to take time and money, but which would presumably require the casino to prove its allegations and show why it had only decided that the player was undesirable when a large amount of money was involved.

The affair has been the subject of intense debate and speculation on gambling message boards ever since.

From the online casino’s perspective, the incident is not quite as straight forward. It has claimed, so far without public substantiation, that the German player was deprived of his winnings because he was suspected of being involved in a two person ‘gambling ring’ and was guilty of unspecified fraud, using robot software, multi-accounting, collusion and bonus abuse – a formidable mix of accusations covering almost every serious offence an internet player can commit.

A Casino Club spokesman claimed that the player had been under security surveillance for some time to see what he was up to; that the casino was perfectly justified in taking the action that it had; that the LGA had been supplied with full details; and that the finding had been in favour of the casino.

A parallel debate regarding funds involved in the disallowed progressive had meantime developed, with players wanting to know why the disqualified win had not been put back in the progressive jackpot, as this was funded by a percentage of player bets and was consequently not company money.

After first assuring players that Casino Club was part of a financially sound group of integrity and that the funds were therefore safe, a casino spokesman last week made a commitment to return the disqualified funds to the jackpot, explaining that the money had been held pending a resolution of the complaint (the complaint was allegedly finalised early in 2010, according to the player – ed.)

With the heat rising on this long-running issue and an apparently ludicrous situation that suggests that Malta licensees can play the ‘unenforceable gambling debt’ card, Casino Club declined an InfoPowa invitation to comment after considering its position for several days.

However, a company spokesman became active on the Casinomeister.com message board, putting forward an offer to ask the LGA for a review and committing to returning the €167,500 to the progressive jackpot.

Sceptics have been quick to point out that these circumstances now present the regulator with something of a dilemma, if it is shown that it has accepted the ‘unenforceable gambling debt’ loophole as a valid argument.

On the one hand, the LGA has been appointed to license and regulate the operations of Malta-registered operators, but it would seem to be constrained from effectively doing so by a legal loophole that enables those same operators to evade their obligations to pay out on a win. Hardly an endorsement for fair and safe online gambling.

Whether the player could seek justice in a Malta civil court on the grounds of a contractual relationship through the casino’s T&C’s is unclear. If the casino responded to such a challenge by presenting its accusations of foul play by the gambler, it would presumably have to detail and adduce proof of those allegations to the satisfaction of an independent judge.

The LGA has thus far remained aloof from the controversy.

Viktor Blom, the young Swedish internet high stakes player whom many believe is the famed online high roller (and big loser) Isildur1, took charge in Saturday’s day 2 action at the World Series of Poker Europe Main Event in London.

Rapidly overhauling the chip leader at the start of the day, James Mitchell, and respected international ace Phil Ivey who first took it away from Mitchell, Blom powered his way through a field of 195 Day 2 starters to end on 443,000, just ahead of nearest rivals Bojan Gledovic from Serbia on 442,300 and Darren Woods (372,500).

Only 69 of the 195 Day 2 starters survived the competition and will again gather on Day 3 to do battle once more; the organisers hope to bring the field down to only 27 by the end of Day 3.

346 hopefuls entered for the £10,000 buy-in event, generating a £3,460,000 prize pool with £830,401 set aside for the main event winner, and the money bubble scheduled to pop at elimination 37.

There were three WSOP 2010 final tablers active throughout the day in John Racener, John Dolan and Filippo Candio – Racener and Candio did not make it to Day 3.

Potent Day 2 survivors who will face Blom on Day 3 include Andrew Pantling (344,000), Phil Ivey (289,300) and Arnaud Mattern (280,900), along with formidable players like Yevgeniy Timoshenko, Huck Seed, Roland de Wolfe, Daniel Negreanu, Hoyt Corkins, Freddy Deeb, Greg Mueller, JP Kelly, Nick Schulman, Nicolas Levi, Barry Greenstein and Dan Shak.

Less fortunate, in that they busted out without making the money bubble, were aces like Eric Baldwin, Chris Moorman, Allen Cunningham, J.C. Tran, Leo Margets, Liv Boeree, Chris Ferguson, Jason MercierJohn Juanda, Barry Shulman, Carlos Mortensen, Praz Bansi, Phil Laak and girl friend Jennifer Tilly, Kathy Liebert and Antonio Esfandiari.

September 24 – The NFL announced that the Black Eyed Peas will perform during the Halftime Show of the Super Bowl this season and fans across the country are already buzzing with anticipation for what fireworks might fly. After only two weeks of regular season action, BetUS.com have already posted odds on what might eventuate in the Super Bowl Half Time Show.

Analysts at BetUS.com posted the following odds on the Super Bowl Halftime Show:

Odds on a wardrobe malfunction
Will.i.am 7/1
Apl.de.ap 3/1
Taboo 4/1
Fergie 3/2

Who will smoke a joint on stage
Will.i.am 4/1
Apl.de.ap 5/1
Taboo 3/1
Fergie 5/2

Odds that Fergie falls off stage
Yes 2/1
No 1/3

Odds that the Black Eyed Peas get booed off stage
Yes 10/1

Odds that one of the “Peas” gets caught lip-synching
Yes 2/1
No 1/3

Which “Pea’s” voice cracks first
Will.i.am 4/1
Apl.de.ap 5/2
Taboo 3/1
Fergie 2/1

Odds on Fergie’s hair color
Black 6/5
Brown 2/1
Blond (Dark&Light) 2/3
Auburn 3/1
Chestnut 4/1
Red 5/1
Grey/White 8/1
Green 10/1
Purple 15/1
Blue 12/1
Pink 7/1
Orange 10/1

Odds that Josh Duhmel gets caught sleeping with one of super bowl contender’s cheerleader
AFC 10/11
NFC 10/11

Malta-licensed CasinoClub.com has announced that it recently made a pair of brothers very happy by awarding each with a dream trip courtesy of its range of slot tournaments.

Playing under the pseudonym ‘mumie3’, one brother won two tickets to last month’s Belgian Grand Prix being held at Spa-Francorchamps courtesy of the Lucky’s Diner slot tournament while the second, ‘Jack Frost’ took home the top prize of a 15-day vacation to South Africa next month after triumphing in a similar CasinoClub.com contest.

CasinoClub.com revealed that the brothers have only been members for one year while two more of their family members have also recently joined.

“The two brothers told us they are all very happy with our CasinoClub.com service and especially our making prompt payments,” said Marc West, Manager for CasinoClub.com.

“Although the Formula One contest was limited to German-speaking countries, players have many other opportunities at CasinoClub.com to win tournaments and special prizes.

“Only at CasinoClub.com can you find so much variety and so many quality games and so many ways to win. And remember, new players making their first deposit can earn a 100 percent welcome bonus.”