Multi-State Internet Gaming Association Announcement

Hopefully something is brewing finally.

Bill Introduced For Pennsylvania To Join Multi-State Online Poker Compact

Under no surprise, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) would regulate the state’s involvement with the MSIGA.

Should the bill pass, Pennsylvania would join the following states already in the MSIGA:

Nevada
Delaware
Michigan
New Jersey
West Virginia
A potential six-state MSIGA opens the door for a shared liquidity arrangement that allows for merged player pools. Joining the MSIGA should help Pennsylvania get back to the top of the poker market, as it lost ground late in 2023.

Impact MSIGA would have on Pennsylvania gambling market
Pennsylvania has four poker operators within the state, which are:

WSOP PA
PokerStars PA
BetMGM Poker PA
Borgata Poker PA

https://www.playpennsylvania.com/new-leg...

I’m seriously stoked to finally see some movement for PA joining MSIGA. Hopefully it moves through the house and senate quickly and we can be a part of the player pool by early 2025. I imagine that’s the fastest timeline. Anyone else think it may be possible to join player pools before mid-2025?

Michigan joined MSIGA in May of 2022 and went live with combined pools with NJ Jan 1st 2023. I'm sure six months isn't out of the question, but maybe a year.

Curious what the the landscape will look like. Obviously PS will be the first to scoop in, but now you got stories of PartyPoker being for sale and the rumors of 888 and WSOP wanting to go separate ways.

And why are HUDS good for the game? You just suck at poker if you need a hud to win.

Sorry for the grunch, came in here to read up on something and this was just something I had to comment on.

What's bad for online poker is people playing 24 tables and ****. 4 tables maximum.

I wouldn’t mind improved software with WSOP. Agreed that I think PS will combine pools the fastest. I also wouldn’t mind seeing run it once added to the existing 4 options in PA.

I think 1-2 sites will win the majority of players over time and whoever combines player base the fastest will have the biggest MTT guarantees and higher cash game traffic. Like we have all seen over the past 20 years, it’s hard to unseat whoever becomes dominant once the combined player pool gets going.

Most winning players aren't winning because of their HUD. Does the HUD increase their win rate? Of course, but if they have a win rate that is significant, a HUD isn't going to be the difference between winning & not winning. Executing a sound game plan is more important. If you're not winning without a HUD or at least close to break even (like -2bb/100 or better bare minimum), you're not going to all of a sudden become a winner by using one ... maybe if you study but not by using a HUD alone.

HUDs help to catch bots and cheaters as we have seen in multiple ongoing threads.

4 table max for normal tables is horrible unless the result ends up being 100NL+ games being drastically softer. At that point just make all tables Zoom/Fast Fold so players can still get in good volume.

The bolded statement is brain-dead clueless.

I actually agree that HUDs, and mass multitabling, are bad for the ecosystem; but imagining that the players who use HUDs are therefore bad players is wish-fulfillment fantasy.

When did I say they were bad players just because they use one?

It's pretty easy to understand if you think about it. There are two reasons why both are bad and I've never used a HUD but are well aware of what they do.

I'm assuming HUDS help people multitable right? Ok, well if that is true then:

Players who are good will have more ability to take money from the fish when playing more tables.

Using a HUD allows one to make decisions at lightening fast pace, but if playing fewer tables (3 or 4 max) will begin to get bored and play more hands making the games better. I.E, one hand washes the other.

Edit: also, unless the cheaters are super sneaky and patient (they never are) any site worth their salt should catch them. But I know, sadly they don't seem to care too much about that.

I was responding to the statement “you suck at poker if you need a HUD to win” … the point is other that description really small # of HUD users. The vast majority are either capable of winning at a decent clip without it, or are clearly losing players.

The statement about being bored is nonsense too. Good players don’t play extra hands just because they’re bored … at least not on a frequent enough basis that it would be discernible. That is what fish do.

My hand selection is generally tighter without a HUD since I can’t get as much information to tell whether playing that hand is likely to be +EV

That's bigger nonsense. People who are capable of 24 tabling would certainly get more creative on the 4 tables they are limited to in this hypothetical. Of course it's not a hard and fast rule but it's much easier to throw away a suited connector up front if you're going from table to table than waiting and haven't had a hand in 3 orbits.

People who are capable of 24 tabling will be playing more than 4 tables even if a site limits the table count. There is more than 1 site.

I highly doubt there is anyone able to 24 table at this point in online poker history and still have a reasonable winrate at any meaningful stake.

I have a winrate at about 12 tables but anything more than that gets hectic and it starts to fall off. Anything over 50nl and would need to play less than 12.

I guess there are some good players who might open their range simply because they’re playing more attention with only 4 tables, but being bored is not a reason good players play more hands. If they’re paying more attention they’re not going to be getting too out of line at all - HUD or no HUD - unless there is a good reason.

This is not a HUD thread. You have hijacked a thread that originally was intended to discuss PA hoping a multi-state compact. Perhaps you all would be most gracious and start your own thread to dissect your HUD opinions.

You're right. My bad, carry on.

Well it's kind of relevant in a way to the MSIGA ... since NV bans HUDs nobody can merge with them without ruining it for other states ... but yeah I guess we were taking the discussion too far.

No Stars in NV, so if you're still dependent on a HUD a Stars player pool from NJ, PA, and MI should be attractive to you.

Now that the genie of merging pools is out of the bottle, it’s probably too late to stop … but the effect of merging NJ / MI was not good for the cash games. The average table has more regulars than before the merger, game difficulty went up significantly.

I hope it will be different this time.

Pokerstars NJ only was completely dead in 2022 pre merger, the merger gave it some life last year. Agreed right now games aren't good but to claim it was so much better pre merger is false

Is a combined player pool good for a reasonably ok-ish mid stakes MTT player?

I was talking about Pokerstars MI, not NJ.

The quality of the cash games was a lot better (softer) pre-merger, and there were still plenty of games available.

Maybe adding on more states where poker is less established/popular will alleviate this … but seems we are far off from that atm.

https://pokerfuse.com/news/industry/2207...

I'm conflicted; it's good to see that the 'main guy' i.e. the governor has his eyes on this bill, but it's my understanding that this bill is not even needed; He & the PA Gaming Board can make this happen without going through all these loopholes. So, it's good to see he's watching, but bad that he's not pushing it through right now.

While many of us keep bringing up the 'domino effect', I truly believe that when PA connects, the 'effect' we're hoping for will finally happen. When West Virginia launches poker and connects with the other states, that won't move the needle. If Betmgm finally launches in Nevada, that won't move the needle. Even if WSOP Nevada connects with Michigan/New Jersey, that won't move the needle. Pennsylvania/New York, the needle moves.

If I lived in PA, I would contact my elected officials to help get this done.