Poll on Governing Body

[AndyG]

Thought this was a good way of testing attitudes

[tikay]

Hi Andy, good to hear fom you.

I voted "YES", but I do feel the question should have said "Would POKER benefit from a Governing Body?". Different thing, but same answer! Poker would benefit - obviosly & enormously, via organisation & structure - and that in turn would benefit the plyers. To solve a problem, start at the root of it.

This issue is SO simple, SO Fundamental, & SO obvious, it's one of life's mysteries to me that it's never happened, & everyone is so relaxed about it.

I get excited just thinking about how good a Governing Body would be for the game, how many benefits would accrue from it. I have a million ideas & thoughts on the subject, look at how well F1, Tennis, Cricket, Rugby, Football, Horse Racing have all done simply BECAUSE they have a Governing body which structures & grades them & collectively bargains with the TV peeps. It makes me wanna weep with frustration at times, but that passion for a Governing body is not uiversally shared. Ayyarrrr!

[thetank]

The governing body should be non-profit distributing in order to be universally recognized.

Therin, perhaps, lies the problem. Everyone involved in poker is too interested in making a buck.

[bolt pp]

i voted no.

i think that the autonomy that poker enjoys is condusive to the game as a whole.

during the recent proggression of poker online it has flourished without a governing body.

i just feel that it would be detremental to the individual, as a governing body would be inherintly compelled to explore avenues such as taxation and restriction.

The implimentation of such a body would give the goverment a platform on which to extensivly investigate this possibility.

furthermore i think that as oppossed to just regulating the game a governing body, by it's very appointment, would be compelled to improve/change the industry.

this sort of interferance would  lead to prevelent exasperation among a vast amount of players who are happy with the way things are, and are currently afforded a vast and diverse number of games to play if they are not happy with a particular:location; format; structure of any given game.

[tikay]

Online does not really need it, it has it's house pretty much in order. A few cardrooms will go skint, & take punters money with them (listen to the howls of anguish when THAT happens), but they don't have disputes, the rules are clear, & there is huge choice.

It's Live Poker that needs help.

[winkie]

I would definitely be in favour of a poker governing body.

A common set of rules and regulations should apply to all cardrooms. It's the only way they'll ever be any parity.