Legal Poker Room(s) in Colorado?

[DenverPokerTour]

One of you, I am sorry to say I forgot who) asked me my opinion on LEGAL poker rooms in Colorado. This obviously means poker rooms outside of the 3 state approved gaming towns.

In my opinion, I wouldn't mind if they were here. However, I would like there to be some state or federal control on the poker room(s). My reason is, could you imagine poker rooms on every corner? Poker rooms is every 7-11? I know it sounds good now, but seriously think about it. Would your property value suffer, would there be an increase in crime, would your children be exposed to it? Who would operate them?

I think we would all like to own a poker room, maybe even make a couple of bucks off it. But wouldn't the big boy casinos' come in and take away most of the business? Would it stop at poker? Would they then be allowed to have slot machines? Craps? Blackjack? Roulette?

I find it an interesting conundrum. We sure could use the tax dollars, but would the tax dollars that we brought in make up for the problems that could occur.

Brian Masters
Denver Poker Tour

PS. Of course I would like to own a poker room, and given the chance I probably would.

[ctswpt76]

Hi Brian,
I think it was Brent_in_Aurora who was asking...but could be wrong...

ANYWAY, I agree with you on this issue, although it seems like California (I wish I could type it the way Arnold S. says it... ;) ) has it together pretty well. I do have to say that I have never visited a CA casino, so this is all just speculation.........Yet, from what I've heard, Commerce Casino is in a pretty shabby area of L.A. and they seem to keep it pretty respectable.....?? But like I said, I have not been there.

Another option that may or may not work, would be to raise the betting minimums up at BlackHawk, CC, and down south to something other than $5 max........

I would probably go up the Hill more often if I felt like I had a snowball's chance in hell of actually beating the rake.....but with the 2-5 spread, it's nearly impossible.......

So maybe not opening MORE casinos, but loosen the restrictions on the poker rooms already set up? And I would leave the slot machines at $5 max, that is plenty of house edge for the casino's to get $$ from the stupid gambler's....... :donk:

But I can always dream of a "Bay 101" in my backyard can't I ??!! ;)
We could call it "Mtn. 101" lol

Anyway, just seems like there has to be a better solution than what we have at the present, and I honestly think free poker tours could survive right alongside real poker rooms too.

I've heard Florida is even worse off than us with $2 MAX bets.....ouch that's gotta suck....... :scared:

cts

[Brent_in_Aurora]

Florida just allowed $5 limits and $100NL. The bill is going to the governor for signing by July 1.

Having a Bay 101 in Denver would be easier and more convenient than the mountain gaming industry.

[pseudoswede]

In my opinion, I wouldn't mind if they were here. However, I would like there to be some state or federal control on the poker room(s). My reason is, could you imagine poker rooms on every corner? Poker rooms is every 7-11? I know it sounds good now, but seriously think about it. Would your property value suffer, would there be an increase in crime, would your children be exposed to it? Who would operate them?

There would obviously be state regulations if this were ever to happen. In addition, the cities themselves would probably have to rezone to permit these. From there, the cities would then determine if they would even want one or more poker rooms operating within their limits. How many bingo halls are in Colorado? Very few. Think about the whole Greenwood Village debate last year about allowing adult entertainment venues. While they did approve an area for such places, the restrictions are so severe that no one will probably ever open one.

In addition, I think the Colorado casino lobbyists are pretty powerful, so any measure to open poker rooms outside the casinos would be met with extreme opposition. In the end, the only ones getting rich would be the politicians.

The only reasonable, and likely (especially with the approval of the casino lobbyists), change we'll ever see in gaming laws in Colorado will be the raising of maximum bets.

[Mondogarage]

Having a Bay 101 in Denver would be easier and more convenient than the mountain gaming industry.

And that is exactly why it will never happen. The existing casino ownership interests in the mountain towns will see to that, unfortunately. If anyone questions their power, you'll note they had no trouble getting their smoking exemption written into last year's legislation.

Woohoo, first post!

[PoWdA]

The casinos would go 24 hours before they would ever increase the limits. It just sucks. I mean honestly what can WE do to help this along? is it inevitable that the limits will eventually increase?

Also welcome to the forums mondo!

[Brent_in_Aurora]

The casinos lost on the smoking law and they will be smoke free by July, 2008 in HB1269. It is up to the gov to sign it by June 4, which is expected to occur.

[adaugust]

Word is now that the casinos are going to have to be smoke free by Jan 1st. The casinos wanted to wait until July of 2008 and the politicians wanted July of 2007 so they comprimised and and said Jan 2008.

I too wouldnt mind seeing card rooms in the metro, but it would kill every card room up the hill and would ultimately cost me my job which I have up there as a poker dealer. The rumors that I have heard up there is they are going to try and raise the limits, but there is so much that has to happen that it could take a few years to get it past. The $5 limit does suck. You dont know how many times a day I see a major suckout!!! "Well it was only $5!!!

[Brent_in_Aurora]

You would make more money because there would be bigger games here in Denver.

[JJHurt]

How would having a local poker room create any issues that bars and strip clubs in areas of town don't. I am afraid that too many times we concern ourselves with the negative things that "could" happen.

Sure having a local poker room is going to change things but not all change is bad. It will also bring about other positives. Creating employment and generating tax revenue too name a few.

I also agree that the "hill" may be the biggest opposition as they do stand to lose some revenue. Poker doesn't keep them afloat though. There may be a way to have them see the benefit of local rooms.

Well that is my first post

later all

[pseudoswede]

Welcome to the forum, JJHurt.

One thing I just remembered...

There is a company out of Rockford, Illinois, that runs charity poker events throughout the state. The charity pays this company X dollars to run the 10-hour event. In turn, the company runs tournaments (STT and MTT) and cash games ($1/3, $2/5, $4/8 and $5/10 Hold'em and $4/8 Omaha). The charity takes a 10% cut of buy-ins and 10% of the cash game pots (up to $5.00). I thought they used to run $1/2 and $2/5 NL games, as well, but maybe the state told them to stop those.

Check them out at http://www.rockfordcharitablegames.com

IIRC, this is how some bingo halls in Colorado run their operation, as well. Why couldn't they run poker tournaments in the same fashion? I'm also going to guess that one of the sticking points would be the $5 max bet laws in Colorado. Nonetheless, you could still probably run $1/2, $2/4, $2-5, and $5/5 games locally (plus tournaments) and still make a bundle of money for the charity.

P.S. - If any bar poker operators read this and runs with this idea...I'd like a 10% cut of revenue for bringing this up. :D

[TJ]

Only problem with everything is the state deeming poker a game of chance, unlicensed outside of the 3 municipalities they want it.

[Wetdog]

The state legislators listen to the Focus on the Family bunch because it makes them more holy looking. Good for the image. They also pander to the (wait for it, you haven't heard it in a while) BINGO LADIES who are the ones being preached to by the ministers who supported the Bushmonkey presidency. In effect the legislature is a theocracy. Of course most theocracies are gambling that they are the ones who are praying correctly.:mrgreen:

I'll challenge anyone to a luck/skill match on one premise: that I do my best to lose every hand to make the opponent the dominant winner over a significant number of hands if the opponent conversely tries to win. That's right, I'm going to use skill to lose. Can that be done in craps, baccarat or any other game of pure chance? If the player's conscious action is the causation for the outcome of the game, does that make it a game of chance?

Of course the biggest determinant of a lawmaker's vote is how much money they will get for helping the special interest group get their agenda thru. That makes them the holy whores, but it's to be expected in this day of (the now thankfully departed) Falwell.

[Brent_in_Aurora]

Only problem with everything is the state deeming poker a game of chance, unlicensed outside of the 3 municipalities they want it.

TJ, as you are a lawyer, would you cite some of the case law regarding chance? Is there any way that a court could find that skill > chance or has it been determined in the past, either legislatively or through other opinions? If skill > chance, does that open up the game to a California style legalization? As I have heard anecdotally, it was the courts that opened up Cali cardrooms.