Online boom is music to the ears of poker sharks

Online boom is music to the ears of poker sharks By Jonathan Rendall for www.timesonline.co.uk EVIDENCE mounts that, as far as gambling opportunities are concerned, Britain is rapidly becoming the world’s bordello, apparently with governmental sanction. The figures for online poker gambled on British websites in the past year are astronomical, running into billions. It is the main growth area for the leading bookies. Is this good? Good for bookies’ profits, that’s for sure. And good for the Government’s tax take. I am not against bookies’ profits, as long as I don’t contribute too greatly to them. I am not even against tax, as long as I can evade it as much as is legally possible. But I don’t understand why novices are thronging to online poker. What is it, some cinematic idea of themselves as serious dudes? They are being eaten alive by a small community of true poker sharks from around the world. It is the biggest turkey-shoot since the invention of the gun. You can’t even see the colours of their eyes. If you could, would you walk into the room? The bookies don’t care who wins or loses. Why should they? They get their cut from “table fees”, then the Government gets its share. It is not just online poker. American gambling laws are far stricter than ours and in many states, internet betting, if not illegal, is legally ambiguous. There is now a growing trade in Americans coming here to place their bets. During the American presidential campaign, I know of one man who came over to place a £150,000 bet on George W. Bush. I don’t know if he got it on. The British bookies generally got that one right. In fact, throughout the whole campaign, John Kerry was favourite for precisely half an hour. A week before Brad Pitt’s separation from Jennifer Aniston, a mystery American approached Ladbrokes in London, seeking to get on a £10,000 bet that they would divorce. Ladbrokes turned him down, but let him have £100 on instead. A friend of the couple, perhaps? There has also been some action on the Oscars, rumoured to emanate from American sources. For Best Supporting Actor, Morgan Freeman, in Million Dollar Baby, has been backed in from as high as 5-1 to 4-9. That suggests someone knows something. The bookies did get hit this week by Barcelona beating Chelsea. However, they made money on the draw, which was also backed, and by Manchester United getting beaten. For the bookies, though, the best result of the week came on Sunday, when the spectre of the Chelsea quadruple was banished with Newcastle United’s victory in the FA Cup. “The best result we’ve had for donkey’s years,” a William Hill source told me. They stood to lose fortunes. With the Tories now out to 6-1 for the general election, that market is dead apart from a flurry of small bets on the Liberal Democrats at 50-1. Well, if you want to chuck it away. I am told, however, that a would-be punter approached a leading firm with a proposed £100,000 bet on new Labour at 1-12 recently, only to melt away without putting it on. Mysterious. Cherie? I lost a severe wedge on Howard Eastman to beat Bernard Hopkins after being tipped by a good boxing source. Eastman was terrifically game but Hopkins was masterly, a throwback to the days of honed defensive boxing. So much so that I didn’t mind losing the money, even if it meant roll-ups for a while. Then, after a prolonged bout of seconditis, I finally got a horse to win: Bridge Loan at Lingfield Park on Wednesday. I practically had to buy the win at 11-10, but you can’t keep losing for ever. When I put the bet on, the young bloke behind the counter asked cheekily if I’d named the horse myself. Later, he accosted me in the square, going: “Eh! Eh! It won!” He said he’d backed it, too, and had now left his job. So you leave your job for a £40 win. Is this the new breed of punter? I bet he plays online poker.