The government agency that regulates gambling in Alberta is deciding whether it should get into the game.
Global TV reports the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission is considering creating websites for people to play poker, blackjack or to bet on sports online.
The commission has ordered two polls to gauge how Albertans feel about the idea.
Marilyn Carlyle-Helms, spokeswoman for the commission, says they’re in the early stages of player research.
She says they’re “moving slow and steady” on the idea.
But Liberal member of legislature Laurie Blakeman called the concept “one of the dumber ideas” conceived by the Conservative government.
“Internet gambling — nobody’s been able to control it, or regulate it, or even follow it properly,” she said.
Source: Edmonton Journal

The FBI has frozen funds held in customer accounts at Neteller, the “virtual wallet” payment processor, as part of its case against the firm’s two Canadian founders who were last month arrested and charged with racketeering and money laundering.
Neteller refused to disclose how much had been frozen but company filings make clear huge sums were flowing between its United States customers’ “e-wallets” and online merchants — particularly gambling websites — up until the firm was pressured to close its US operations in the wake of last month’s arrests. Over a six-month period last year the company processed transactions worth $5,1-billion, with about 85% involving US customers.
Less than three weeks ago, Neteller said in a statement to the stock exchange: “The funds of US resident customers are held in segregated trust accounts and are fully secure and will be available for withdrawal by customers on demand.”
Since then, advice on the group’s website makes clear customer withdrawals have now been blocked. “As a top priority, we are working to resolve all withdrawal issues but in the meantime we continue to maintain these funds in trust on your behalf,” customers are told. “Please check this page regularly for more updates.”
The US Congress passed tough anti-gambling laws last October but several rogue operators based in off-shore tax havens have continued to target US punters, flouting the new legislation. They relied heavily on Neteller.
In the past five years, Neteller came to dominate gambling transactions in the US because its e-wallets allowed users to get around credit card blocks on gambling sites. Following the arrests of founders Stephen Lawrence and John Lefebvre, who face up to 20 years in jail if convicted, the decision was quickly taken to shut down US operations. Trading in the company’s shares was also suspended and remains so.
The FBI claim JSL Systems, a US-based payment company owned by Lefebvre, received customer funds in the US for Neteller and then transferred them to accounts held by a Neteller company in Canada. Last month Neteller told the Guardian that wagered money no longer passed through JSL.
It is unclear whether the FBI will treat some or all of the funds as proceeds of illegal gambling. One US newspaper report cited Neil Donovan, an FBI agent, saying the funds were being held in court as potential evidence. Some money may be returned to Neteller customers but no timescale was forthcoming, the report said. A spokesperson for the Department of Justice on Monday night refused to confirm details in the report, as did Neteller.
Source: Mail & Guardian

The chips are down for principals in online gambling operations, and the cyberspace scenario is probably going to get worse. That’s because federal officials, already incensed over billions in gambling revenues leaving the U.S., are trying to link Web gambling to terrorism.
“The reason why a lot of land-based casinos have backed away from the Internet and offshore enterprises is because of the Patriot Act,” said Saverio Scheri of WhiteSand Consulting. “Investigators believe some of that money is being laundered and is ending up in the hands of terrorist groups.”
SOUND FARFETCHED? CONSIDER:
The prosecutor leading the charge against online operations is David Litterick, 45, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York who has built a reputation as an expert in terrorism. He prosecuted some of the terrorists involved in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. His prosecutions of the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania earned him death threats, as well as a position at the Department of Homeland Security.
All U.S.-based casinos with annual gambling revenue of more than $1 million are classified as “financial institutions” by the Patriot Act and subject to strict government regulations, including adopting money-laundering programs, identifying the identity of foreign nationals and filing a Suspicious Activities Report to the Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). Online operations skirt all these rules.
Law enforcement has arrested several principals of online gaming companies’ subsidiary operations in recent weeks. On Jan. 15, federal agents arrested Stephen Lawrence and John Lefebvre, former directors and founding shareholders of Neteller. Their company is a publicly traded Internet-payment processor used by many online gambling sites, one of which continued serving American players after passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. BusinessWeek magazine estimates Neteller made nearly $850 million in fees during the first half of 2006 — the bulk of it from American bettors.
The U.S. is seeking the extradition of Gary Kaplan from Costa Rica. Kaplan is the former owner of BETonSPORTS, which has ceased taking sports bets from Americans. David Carruthers, former CEO of the company, was arrested in the Dallas last July and is currently under house arrest at a hotel in St. Louis, awaiting trial. Carruthers, a food connoisseur and wine expert, appeared in court in leg irons.
Last week, subpoenas were issued to at least four Wall Street investment banks to hand over details of their dealings with online gambling companies. The firms reportedly are HSBC, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank and Dresdner Kleinwort, which have underwritten public offerings of some of the most popular and profitable online gambling sites, and have offices in London, a city that is the fundraising center of the online gaming industry. Shares in European online gambling companies, which already had been hit hard in recent months, fell as much as 14 percent after news of the subpoenas broke.
SCARE TACTICS
“There certainly have been a lot of scare tactics but they’re working,” said Sue Schneider, president of River City Group, which monitors the online gambling industry. Schneider says federal investigators are trying to link online gaming operations to terrorist groups.
“They’ve been saying that since 9/11,” Schneider continued. “At some point it gets to be ridiculous and, more probably than not, what they’ll do is drive the business underground.”
One who agrees is Anthony Cabot, a Vegas-based attorney who specializes in Internet-gambling law. “After a while, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and frighteningly similar to Prohibition,” Cabot said. “By forcing them underground, you increase the potential for less-reputable sites.”
Another gaming expert, who asked to remain anonymous, was more succinct: “(Terrorism is) a smokescreen thrown up by the right-wing Christian lunatics in the government who want to control every facet of human behavior from birth to death. As far as I know, there isn’t a scintilla of evidence there’s any link between online sites and terrorist groups.
“With the new legislation, though that is ironically more likely to occur,” the source continued, “since Russian mobsters and others are likely to see unregulated, rogue sites as a way to raise untaxed money.”
REGULATION & TAXATION
It’s hardly news to Cabot that investigators believe there is a link between online gambling sites and terrorist groups. “This argument has come up before,” he said. “There are probably 2,000 online gaming sites. Can you say that all of those have no relationship whatsoever to terrorism? No, but what you can say is that the larger companies operating out of the United Kingdom are completely transparent. They have public shareholders and dividends, and audited financial statements.”
Allyn Shulman, corporate counsel at Card Player magazine, added, “to specifically link terrorism to online gaming is disingenuous.” She believes that, rather than prosecute operators of online gambling operations, the federal government should investigate how to regulate and tax the industry.
“This is just another example of the benefit of regulating and taxing online gaming, as they do in Antigua, where the online gaming companies must open their books to independent auditors who report back to the government,” Shulman said.
But other industry observers note it doesn’t look like that’s going to happen … at least not in the immediate future.
“You would think that officials would look at (the potential for tax revenue),” Schneider said. “This is an industry that has been advocating regulation and it would not be averse to some sort of tax structure. But this isn’t about regulation and taxation. It’s about control and (being) anti-gambling.”
http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/articles/2007/02/05/news/iq_12303811.txt

It’s a tough call, sports fans.
Will Peyton Manning complete two more passes in the Super Bowl than Zydrunas Ilgauskas’ combined points and rebounds during today’s Cavaliers game against the Detroit Pistons?
Or will Tiger Woods’ fourth-round score in the Dubai Desert Classic be higher than Bernard Berrian’s total receiving yards?
Welcome to Super Bowl Sunday, the biggest day of the year in sports and sports betting. Counting so-called “proposition” bets like the two mentioned above, there are more than 300 different wagers being offered for this year’s big game – the Indianapolis Colts against the Chicago Bears in Miami’s Orange Bowl. You can bet on how long it will take Billy Joel to sing the national anthem, the outcome of the pregame coin flip and an array of individual and team performances.
It’s no wonder folks who normally wouldn’t bet on whether a traffic light will change from red to green will gamble on the Super Bowl.
“For the professional bettor, it’s just another game,” said Las Vegas-based gambler Andy Iskoe.
“For the public at large, it’s the only game they’ll bet all year,” Iskoe said. “It’s sort of like an excuse for a New Year’s Eve party a month later.”
Nevada sports books are expected to accept more than $100 million in wagers for this year’s Super Bowl, topping last year’s record handle of $94.5 million. Worldwide, between legal sports books, offshore Internet gambling sites, hometown bookies and office pools, Super Bowl wagering is estimated at more than $1 billion.
“Punters” in Ireland and the United Kingdom are expected to bet $16 million on the Super Bowl at Paddy Power Plc’s 250 betting shops.
“It’s our biggest American sport of the year,” said Paddy Power spokesman Darren Haines. “For an event that takes place in the middle of the night here, that’s quite exceptional.”
Early last week, about 80 percent of Paddy Power bettors had put their money on the Bears, a seven-point underdog.
“People who know more about it than me think they’ve seen enough in Chicago that they can pull off an upset,” Haines said.
Five thousand miles away in Las Vegas, professional sports gamblers also think the Bears taking the points is a smart bet.
“I like the Bears’ defense more than the Indianapolis offense,” said John Kelly, who hosts a weekly radio show devoted to sports gambling. “With the seven-point head start, I think you’re obligated to take the underdog.”
(The point spread is not a prediction of a game’s outcome. Instead, it is a number that sports books hope will split wagering evenly between the two sides, minimizing their risk.)
Kelly said oddsmakers are acutely aware of professional bettors during the NFL’s regular season when setting point spreads and other odds. But Super Bowl betting lines are made with the general public in mind because casual bettors are much more likely to pick the favorite.
Jay Kornegay, executive direc tor of the race and sports book at the Las Vegas Hilton, said the Colts would be favored by only 4 or 4½ points if the game were played at a neutral site during the middle of the season.
“There’s no doubt the Colts are the better team,” Kornegay said. “But I don’t know whether they are going to win.”
By the middle of last week, most bettors at the Hilton also were putting their money on the Bears, Kornegay said. He expects – and hopes – that Colts money will pour in this weekend.
(For what it’s worth, the team picked by oddsmakers as the favorite in the previous 16 Super Bowls has “covered” the point spread 11 times. The favorite failed to cover three times, and twice the game resulted in a “push” – a tie on the point spread that resulted in bettors getting their money back.)
Steve Fezzik, who runs a Las Vegas-based sports betting syndi cate, also thinks the Bears will “cover” – lose by fewer than seven points. But the Dayton native thinks the real value is in the proposition bets.
Fezzik – a pseudonym he uses to protect his identity – said he’ll have as many as 100 wagers on the game. Oddsmakers often treat proposition bets as a “nuisance,” which can lead to mistakes that sharp players love to exploit, he said.
“There are a lot of proposition bets that have a lot of value if you’re a savvy pro and know what you’re doing,” Fezzik said.
One of those proposition bets Fezzik said he always makes is whether there will be overtime. There has never been overtime in the previous 40 Super Bowls played. (You would have to bet $1,200 at one online sports book to win $100 on a no-overtime wager.)
“I know one of these years I’m going to get burned,” Fezzik said.
Just in case you’re interested, Ilgauskas, the Cavs center, is averaging a combined 20 points and rebounds a game this season; Manning is averaging 22 completions a game.
Good luck. Chances are you’re going to need it.
Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer

Super Bowl Sunday is a good time to examine the federal government’s hypocritical relationship with gambling. Betting at Native American casinos on federal land is fine. Wagering in Nevada and New Jersey is OK, too. State lotteries are great. So is the stock market.
As long as the government is in on the action (taxes), placing a C-note on the Bears or the Colts is as moral as eating apple pie.
But don’t dare use your BlackBerry or laptop to visit an offshore gaming Web site. If you do that, you lock the Internal Revenue Service out of the take and offend the “legitimate gaming” lobby.
It’s time to sack the online gaming ban, which makes criminals out of people who may not always have the best judgment but aren’t doing anything that hurts others. There are, of course, gambling addicts, but the vast majority of players aren’t. Banning online gaming for that reason is about as wise as banning pinot noir because some people sip too much of it.
Like other pronouncements against “sin,” the government crackdown is creating crime where it shouldn’t need to exist. The prime beneficiaries of the assault on computer wagering appear to be local bookies and illegitimate Web sites run by organized crime, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Apparently some of those who want to place bets on the big game are too scared to do so from their computers, which are easy to trace, but they don’t mind risking a call to a guy who looks like one of “The Sopranos” and collects in person (scary). Some Americans are still taking chances; some gaming sites in Costa Rica and other countries are still accepting action from the United States.
Americans last year bet $94.5 million on the Super Bowl in legitimate Nevada casinos. That’s just a fraction, considering what went to offshore and into office pools. This year, the Silver State expects to take in more than $100 million from rollers high and low.
People clearly want to bet on sports, and they are increasingly using computers to direct their money to where they want it to go, the right of anyone in a free society. Gambling is a form of speculating, and if someone thinks he can get a greater return on the Super Bowl than he can on Ford stock, why not let him?
The best bet would be for the government to lift the online gaming ban and instead license, regulate and tax Web sites that seek American bettors. Under this system, online firms would have to obtain proof of age, not just accept credit card numbers, and audits could single out those who need counseling.
Gambling is governed by an unbeatable market force. Whether it’s illegal, tolerated or legal, online gambling should not be subject to an unrealistic blanket ban by the government.
Source: Daily Breeze

Nevada basketball fans will bet on their 15th-ranked Wolf Pack against just about anybody, but they won’t get a chance this weekend to pit their star players against the Chicago Bears.
At the request of school officials citing NCAA rules, a Reno casino discontinued a wagering proposition Wednesday on who would score more points – Nevada star forward Nick Fazekas in Saturday night’s game against Hawaii, or the Bears in Sunday’s Super Bowl against Indianapolis.
Wacky Super Bowl propositions are a way of life at Nevada sportsbooks, which raked in a record $94.5 million from last year’s big game. Among this year’s props:
• Colts quarterback Peyton Manning’s total passing yards vs. Phil Mickelson’s four-round total at the FBR Open in Scottsdale, Ariz., where even par is 284.
• The Colts’ total score vs. Lebron James’ total points in the Cavaliers NBA game against the Pistons on Sunday.
• The Bears’ total touchdowns vs. goals scored in Sunday’s English Premier League soccer game between Manchester United and Tottenham.
The Club Cal Neva Hotel-Casino decided to add a bit of local flavor to the pot by adding wagers involving the Wolf Pack, who were 19-2 entering Wednesday night’s game at Louisiana Tech.
In addition to Fazekas, who is averaging 20.2 points per game, they offered a bet on whether the Bears and Colts combined would score more in the first half than Wolf Pack sharpshooter Marcelus Kemp, or whether guard Kyle Shiloh would have more assists than the number of field goals made on Sunday.
The problem is, NCAA rules prohibit the use of student athletes to promote a business in any way, shape or form.
“They were just trying to generate some local interest and had no idea that what they were doing was a violation of NCAA policy,” said Jean Perry, the school’s special assistant to the president for athletics, academics and compliance.
“As soon as it was brought to their attention, they immediately withdrew the bets,” she said Wednesday.
Perry said she already has reported the situation to the Western Athletic Conference and was preparing a formal report for the NCAA.
“In a nutshell, the NCAA bylaws say you can’t use a student athlete’s name or picture without his or her consent and you can’t use it in any commercial way,” she said.
“If we as an institution finds out someone has done that, we have the burden of asking them to stop that, which is what we did.”
The Reno Gazette-Journal first reported the wagers on its Web site Tuesday afternoon, which is where university officials first learned of it.
It was not immediately clear whether bets made prior to Wednesday would be honored or if gamblers would receive a refund. Cal Neva officials did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
Sportsbook manager Tony DiTommaso told the newspaper on Tuesday that he “wanted to do some more of the local stuff.”
“One of the things I wanted to do this year was capitalize on UNR,” he said.
Perry doesn’t expect the incident to result in any penalties against the school.
“This is a thing that was not instituted by us.
The student athletes that were involved had no idea about it,” she said.
Source: North Lake Tahoe Bonanza

Super Bowl Sunday at the sportsbook often looks like this: Frenzied betting starts in the morning and continues up to the 3:25 p.m. kickoff. Experienced bettors lay down their greenbacks, knowing who is injured and who is favored. Novices scratch their heads over the spreads and propositions, some even over the basics of football.
This is the game that attracts old-timers and newbies. It’s the culmination of a season for the avid fan. For those who aren’t so obsessed, it’s a social event highlighted by commercials. It’s all about fans who have an opinion who then spice up the game by putting money on the line, said one local sportsbook manager. And that’s what makes this the most profitable day of the year for sportsbooks. Nevada sportsbooks collected a record $94.5 million from last year’s game.
“The thing about the Super Bowl is, it brings out people who never bet on anything, making it the highest-grossing vetted game in the U.S. – that’s legal,” said Steve Napoletano, sportsbook supervisor for Leroy’s Race & Sportsbook in the Carson Nugget. “We take more Super Bowl bets than anything else.”
Using sports knowledge and luck, a gambler can walk out with a heavy wallet. Or not.
Louie Sanchez, of Carson City, has bet on Super Bowls since Joe Namath won Most Valuable Player in 1969, that was Super Bowl III. The game takes on a greater meaning when you have money on it, he said.
The most the 57-year-old has ever won on a game was $420, which may still be a comfort when he thinks about how much he’s bet and lost.
Cathleen Allison/Nevada Appeal Ed O’Donnell, of Minden, holds his Super Bowl betting tickets Tuesday at the Carson Station.
Browse and Buy Nevada Appeal Photos
Sanchez made his picks this week at the Cal Neva Sports Book inside the Carson Station with his friend Freddie Melendez, a warehouse manager from Carson City. They eyed the special “in-house” props, which are bets specific to the Cal Neva sports books. Sometimes the props can get a little odd.
This week, the Cal Neva pulled its bets that included members of the Wolf Pack basketball team. University of Nevada, Reno officials said the wagers violated an NCAA rule that prohibits the use of student athletes to promote a business.
That’s unfortunate for Sanchez and Melendez, who believed they could win money favoring a star on the 15th-ranked Wolf Pack over the Super Bowl.
The special prop: Kyle Shiloh, a Pack guard, total assists during the Saturday game against Hawaii vs. the total number of field goals made in the Super Bowl.
They’ll have other options, such as: total goals scored at this morning’s Manchester United soccer game vs. the Bears’ total touchdowns.
Vince Carter’s total points scored today during the Hawks and Nets game vs. Colts-Bears total points in the first half.
To grab a greater share of gamblers, sportsbooks offer these creative props for basketball, golf, soccer, NASCAR and hockey fans.
“It’s crazy,” said old-time sports bettor Allen “Ozzie” Osborn, 77, who then laughed at the unusual props.
He’ll place a bet on Sunday, probably for the Colts (who are favored) after watching the newspaper for the injury report. It’s not his favorite game on which to bet. The most he’s ever won is $1,000. It can be difficult to pick between the two best teams in the league.
Osborn, who divides his time between home and the casino, said he’ll probably watch his pick from home.
“It can get nuts here,” he said.
There’s an even stranger bet at Casino Fandango, but it’s for those who have the patience.
At Fandango’s sports book, fans can place a bet on whether the highest-scoring game will be in 2007 or 2008.
“It doesn’t matter which side you bet on, you’ll have to wait a year to find out,” said Jason Kolenut, Casino Fandango race and sport book supervisor.
Just don’t lose your winning ticket.
Source: Nevada Appeal