Underaged Poker

[Jonny]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel like an important thing about underaged gambling hasn't been mentioned here. I personally started online at age 17, after working at Papa John's for $6/ hr. Online poker is simply the best job a person under 18 can get, by far. I made at least three times more playing online poker at 17 than I did working at Papa John's. As long as the people take it seriously, I don't see any problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Couldn't have said it better myself. Anyone with discipline and a brain under the age of 18, and has an understanding of bankroll management etc., should be able to make 4-5x what others their age make. AND they get to make their own hours. I started online when I was 17 with only $50. Built it up to 20K in the first year, and I only played about 5000 -8000 hands per month.

Sure beats working at Wendy's, McDonald's and anywhere else for $6/hr.

[vilemerchant]

I think if you're underage and smart enough to win at poker and get cashouts without bringing yourself un-done.. good luck to ya. If you think about it it's possibly much less destructive than an adult gambling. A 15yo can't rack up credit card debt - a 15yo can't gamble his rent or food money - can't gamble his ex-wifes child support money - in fact a 15yo is that poor he hardly has anything to gamble, so what's the most he's going to risk.. 50 bucks? And even if he lost it what would it matter, he just woulda spent it on a nintendo game or whatever they play now, hardly anything more constructive than playing poker [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

More likely a lot of these underage players started with play accounts and then won a freeroll or something and got going from there. Or perhaps that's who all these $1 beggars on the rail at stars are... (damn annoying btw, BeggarStars!)

Dont get me wrong i'm not trying to say that underage gambling is right, cos it isn't. It's illegal for a reason, but just like in real life there is always going to be people who break the rules, a young kid who is making money at poker is not going to change his mind because of any preaching in this thread.

Just my random and probably contradictory thoughts..

[StacysMom]

I know that undreage gambling can be a problem, but i dont see much of a difference in problems between underagers and legal gamblers. As stated, 16yo's have less to lose. I have tought/coached a couple of my friends/family who where underaged to play online and make good money. Essenstially, I didnt think much about it as I had always played Magic The Gathering with them, and as i switched to poker and made money, it only seemed natural to help them do the same. As discussed on these forums before, good magic players transfer their skills to poker really well, andthere for all my friends became winning players at instant speed.

I would ahve to say u can't generalize when it comes to this issue. It is case specific. Underage gamblng is not the problem, irresponsible gambling is. If a 15 yo steals his moms CC and runs to play poker that is bad. If a 15yo avoids working fast food cause there are soo many ppl pissing away money on PP, how is that wrong?

[captZEEbo1]

I don't see how underage gambling is much worse than overage gambling...Many adults aren't responsible about it. Youth won't have as much money to lose.

I think it's greatly +EV to have young kids playing poker. They are more likely going to be inexperienced and bad, aka lining my pockets more. I'm not too concerned if they are blowing their money. That's for their parents to worry about. Are people saying that we should not allow anyone with poor money management skills at the table? That sounds like some tougher games. Kids gotta learn sometime.

[Al Schoonmaker]

You wrote: "Bad news for those who don't truly understand the consequences of their actions. I for one would love to back legislation to stop underage individuals from playing through security checks and what not. I like that idea and eventually it will likely happen rather than an all out ban on internet poker."

You have raised two issues that merit serious discussion. First, do young people truly understand the consequences of their actions? The legislatures and courts have very clearly said, "NO!"

In fact, children under certain ages are regarded as "legal infants," and they are not held fully responsible for certain actions. For example, they can't drink or gamble legally, can get out of contracts, or can be tried in juvenile courts. The Supreme Court just decided that they can't be executed for murder precisely because they are seen as less responsible for their actions.

As a psychologist I believe that the lawmakers and judges got this one right. Young people generally do not have the ability to understand the consequences of their actions, and virtually every civilization in history has tried to protect them from their own immaturity.

The claims that "I can play better than adults" may or may not be true, but they are irrelevant. As anyone who has spent much time in poker rooms will know, skill is NOT the most important factor determining results. We all know talented players who are often broke because they lack judgment about their abilities, can't resist the challenge of playing above their own level, love to play craps, or have other "immature" leaks. And they are adults! Young people have even less control.

The second issue has implications for us all. There are extremely powerful people and organizations that want to outlaw online poker. Every time some kid loses a great deal of money it gives them more ammunition, and you can be certain they will use it.

Because I play for royalvegaspoker.com and love our game, I don't want to increase the threats to online poker (which can also affect B&M games). We are having history's greatest poker party; let's not screw it up.

My recommendation is therefore unambiguous: If you know of anyone underage who is playing online, do whatever you think is appropriate to stop him. I will leave the meaning of "appropriate" to you.

Regards,

Al

[TheNoodleMan]

[ QUOTE ]
In VA, we say that you can drive when you are 16, vote when you are 18 and drink when you are 21.

I always find it amusing that Americans are responsible enough to decide who drops bombs on their behalf three years before they are allowed near a drink that might make them be sick.

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]
I always find it amusing that Brits mock American politics, but will unwaivering follow us in to a war if care to start one. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Al Schoonmaker]

I commented on this issue in this thread.

Since virtually every society in history has protected young people, there is almost certainly a logical reason for doing so. The age at which one is regarded as able to understand and accept the consequences of his actions varies greatly. The principle does not.

For example, most societies have ceremonies such as Bar Mitzvahs at certain ages that mark the passage from childhood to various levels of maturity. America has chosen 18 for some responsibilities, 21 for others, but EVERY society says there is a dividing line.

That line is necessarilty arbitrary. Even you with your arrogant position about stereotypes would not claim that a six year old should be allowed to drink or gamble. At least I hope you wouldn't.

Do you seriously believe you are smarter than ALL the people who have written laws for virtually ALL the societies that have ever existed?

Regards,

Al

[scotty34]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you seriously believe you are smarter than ALL the people who have written laws for virtually ALL the societies that have ever existed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Some of those people are awfully dumb.

Good points though. Some form of restriction needs to be imposed. Whether its an age line, or required tests, or some other method of doing so is a different story. I suppose the simplest choice is obviously the age restriction, but if they really wanted to work at it, there could definetly be a better system which serves greater benefit to all of society.

[CountDeMonet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For every 14-year-old bright enough to play poker, there are masses that aren't responsible enough. For that reason alone they shouldn't be allowed to play until they are a legal adult (18) and have financial responsibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

Define responsible enough? What does a kid have to lose? His allowance money? His money for taking a high school girlfriend on dats?

How about this one. I started my own small business at age 14. At age 15 I took out my first $25k loan. By 16 we had gone through approximately $80k of product. At age 17, I am financially responsible enoguh to play .50/1 at the party limit tables? Isn't the question a bit absurd?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, YOU define responsible enough, then get the courts to agree and get back to us. Here's my definition of old enough to gamble, you have to be 21. Of course, it doesn't address individual proclivities. Same with the drinking, military, marriage age etc. Why not? Because it is a big pain in the ass to come up with a fair test and then apply it. And...no one cares. Kids don't vote, it's easy to be dictators here. Want something different? Come up with it. Then sell it to the adults. Show us how to tell apart the the ones who can handle it from the ones who can't.

Need a REAL reason why? Here's one.

A National Institutes of Health study suggests that the region of the brain that inhibits risky behavior is not fully formed until age 25.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Jan31.html

Your point is a bit absurd (your success in other endeavors)...nice, but can you handle gambling? Maybe you can, many ADULTS I have seen cannot (yet they have nice businesses, careers, homes). We decide to draw the line of competence to handle these affairs somewhere, 21 is it. Believe it or not this is one of the ways we show care about you kids, we protect you. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Jurollo]

Al,
Nice well written response. I think the major issue here isn't that anyone under 21 is "idiotic" or not as mentally advanced as those who are older but rather that generally they cannot see the consequences of their action today on their lives tomorrow. In most cases young adults are horribly short sighted, I know this because I am one, granted of legal age now and fell victim to the ease in funding poker accounts. Granted it was not an obscene amount of money the short term luck in poker makes it all the more attractive to youngsters trying to make a quick buck. Ramble over.
~Justin