text:
MR-Int 2009, p. 41 – 50: Is poker bidding farewell to gambling law?
Rechtsanwalt Dr. Wulf Hambach
Hambach & Hambach Rechtsanwälte
Haimhauser Str. 1
D - 80802 München Tel.: +49 89 389975-50
E-Mail: w.hambach@timelaw.de
A report on the current situation in administrative and criminal law regarding the poker variant Texas Hold'em by Attorney-at-law Dr. Wulf Hambach/Attorney-at-law Dr. Michael Hettich/Tobias Kruis
Poker is a game of chance. This has been the unconsidered opinion of many legal experts for more than 100 years. A blanket judgment such as this, however, neither complies with high court decisions regarding the distinction between games of chance and games of skill, nor does it apply to the poker variant Texas Hold'em, which at present is the most popular form of poker. Proof for this, which had so far been missing, has now been provided in a first large field study in Germany, supervised by TÜV Rheinland,[1] and has been confirmed in an appeals decision by the LG (Regional Court) of Karlsruhe. This report examines the results of the field study and describes its consequences regarding criminal law and administrative law. In conclusion, the legislative objective of the privileged position of games of skill will be analysed, using poker as an example.
Looking at games of chance and games of skill from a legal point of view, the observer may be led to believe that he faces paradise on one side, and purgatory on the other. Even before Dostojewski's novel "The Gambler", games of chance had the reputation of being socially destructive, morally undesired and iniquitous. As early as in the Middle Ages, games of chance were referred to as "the devil's prayer book", and at times were subject to a complete ban.[2] Games of skill, on the other hand boost the good in every human being; they train the body and the soul. The Reichsgericht (supreme court of the German Reich) held that games of skill serve "honest amusement" and disport, while games of chance serve acquisitiveness.[3] Skat, Schafkopf and Doppelkopf, for instance, have been generally recognised as games of skill for a long time[4], while poker is not permitted to take this privileged position, even though all of the mentioned games hold competitions as national and international championships[5]. In 1906, the Reichsgericht made do with two sentences in order to disqualify Draw Poker as a game of chance[6]. Numerous scientific studies abroad, on the other hand, have reached the conclusion that Texas Hold'em Poker, for instance, is a game of skill.[7] Taking this into consideration, it is even more surprising that a large part of legal literature and many court decisions continue to uncritically follow the 100 year old Reichsgericht decision.[8]
As is so often the case, the devil is in the details. This is because there is poker and there is poker. The "Draw Poker" variant, which is the form examined by the Reichsgericht,[9] may be known to some people from the so-called "Spaghetti Westerns". The most popular form nowadays, and also the most important variant in the practical work of courts and authorities, however, is Texas Hold'em, which has little in common with the game to which the Reichsgericht decision referred. On the other hand, a legal delimitation between games of skill and games of chance is only possible on the basis of the specific modalities of a game.[10] This has also hardly been taken into consideration up to now.
A new study oriented at high court decisions with regard to the delimitation of games of skill and games of chance, however, shows that Texas Hold'em, at least in some variants of the game, actually is a game of skill in the legal sense of the term.[11] This conclusion has now also been reached by the LG of Karlsruhe in a recent judgment.[12] In this decision, the Court correctly refused to transfer to Texas Hold'em the conclusions reached by the Reichsgericht.
As the delimitation between games of skill and games of chance is of major significance for criminal liability under section 284 StGB (German Criminal Code) on the one hand, and – due to section 33h No. 3 GewO (Trade, Commerce and Industry Regulation Act), which in the German dual gaming law system sets the course for either trade law or the state monopoly – for the evaluation under administrative law on the other hand, this report shall initially classify Texas Hold'em on the basis of the criteria developed by the courts.
II. Game of chance or game of skill?
The question as to whether Texas Hold'em is a game of chance or a game of skill is of major importance for the further legal evaluation. Section 284 StGB as well as section 3 subsection 1 GlüStV (Inter-State Treaty on Gambling) are based on the term "game of chance". However, pursuant to section 33h No. 3 GewO, sections 33c et seq. GewO are not applicable to other games as defined in section 33 d subsection 1 sentence 1 GewO[13] which are "games of chance" in the meaning of section 284 StGB. The decisive issue for the classification are the criteria developed by high court decisions.
According to settled case law, the term "game of chance", and thus the differentiation between such games and games of skill, is uniformly defined as follows:
"It is the nature of a game of chance that, under the contractual terms and conditions, the decision on winning or losing does not substantially depend on the skills, the knowledge and the level of attention of the players, but only, or mainly, on coincidence. The decisive factors for this evaluation are the circumstances of the game under which the game is opened and is usually being operated, i.e. the skills and experience of the average player. The standard here is to be the audience to which the game is open, not the more experienced or very experienced participant."[14]
This means that the decisive question is whether the decision on winning or losing only, or mainly, depends on chance.[15]
2. Classification of mixed games
On this basis, it is possible at the same time to make a rough classification into three categories, which are: absolute games of chance, pure games of skill and mixed games. While in pure games of chance, such as roulette, the outcome unproblematically merely depends on chance,[16] pure games of skill only depend on the player's skills, while chance does not play any role at all.[17] The latter will, however, rarely be the case as the influence of chance – such as the condition of the pitch during a football match, which causes the ball to bounce in a different direction and into the goal – can never be completely excluded, even in games of skill. The most frequent types therefore are the so-called mixed games. In these games, the decision on winning or losing depends partly on chance and partly on the players' skills.[18]
Texas Hold'em is definitely a mixed game. The card distribution is definitely an element of chance here, which has more importance if the number of played hands is lower.[19] Texas Hold'em can, however, not be reduced to this element of chance, which is what parts of legal literature and some court decisions have been trying to do.[20] The card distribution plays a role in all other card games as well, for instance in Skat or Schafkopf, irrespective of whether they are regarded as games of chance, or, as the latter, are unanimously classified as games of skill. In addition to this, Texas Hold'em has numerous options of influencing the outcome of the game due to the players' skills, which will be described in more detail below.
Such mixed games are only to be classified as games of chance if the decision on winning or losing only, or mainly, is influenced by chance rather than by the average player's skills.[21]
a) Control options
In order for a game to not only, or mainly, depend on chance, it is first of all necessary that the game is sufficiently difficult to learn, otherwise it would not come into consideration as a game of skill. This means that the player must be able to obtain a sufficient level of playing ability (in other words: sufficient skills) by a certain amount of practice.[22] The decisive abilities in this respect, according to court decisions, primarily are the mental and physical abilities (in particular good memory and quick deduction skills), knowledge, such as mastering the rules of the game, and also practice and the player's level of attention.[23] Darts can be used as an example in this context. In this case, the player needs to learn how to control the flight path of the dart and thus to make a targeted throw.
Transferring this to Texas Hold'em, it can be seen that a successful game requires a number of skills.[24] Texas Hold'em is played with 52 cards (French deck) and game chips. The only player left in a game, or the player showing the best hand in a showdown, wins the hand.
The decisive difference between this game and the variant of Draw Poker is that community cards are placed face up during different phases of the game, which all players can use to form their "best hand", and also that a much larger number of betting rounds per game is scheduled than in ordinary poker.[25]
The player first of all must have sufficient knowledge of the rules of the game regarding the betting options. Furthermore, theoretical knowledge comprises the options of game strategy. In particular for Texas Hold'em, these options are particularly diverse and can only be roughly outlined here, as the specialised literature in this respect in the meantime has increased to more than 100 books.[26] The strategy options mainly relate to the number of players[27], the types of players[28] and the table image[29], the position[30], the blinds & stacks[31] and the pot odds[32]. Further strategies refer to the various action options call, bet, raise or fold. The options of blind stealing[33], bluff[34], semi-bluff[35], value bet[36], information bet[37], slow play[38], check raise[39] and change gears[40] are foremost in this context. Texas Hold'em furthermore requires a high level of concentration, as the players are forced to make fast decisions under pressure. Also, the player must commit the other players' way of behaviour, and his competitors' cards during the previous rounds, to memory in order to thus be able to draw conclusions regarding their future actions. Finally, the player must implement his theoretical knowledge in a competitive situation. This requires a large amount of discipline and practice. Therefore, Texas Hold'em requires the mastering of a variety of skills which initially have to be learned. Texas Hold'em can be influenced by the player's skills.
This at the same time shows that Texas Hold'em has even more possibilities of influencing the game than Skat. While in Skat, the possibility of betting and the fact that all cards are dealt provide sources of information on the other players' strength of play, this cannot provide complete information on the composition of the opponents' hands. This also applies to the possibility of counting cards which have already been played, as the remaining cards may have been dealt in any combination to the other two players. Furthermore, the element of chance in the card distribution in Skat plays a much more important role than in Texas Hold'em. While Skat knows so-called "made hands" which the player just "plays down", even a particularly experienced player cannot use his abilities if he is dealt a very poor hand.[41] The only additional information he may have is that he will get a caning.
The situation in Texas Hold'em is not comparable. Rather, the player can at all times, even if he holds poor cards, force all other players to give up by applying his tactical skills so that he wins, or can reduce his losses to almost zero by putting down his own hand.[42] This fact is being completely overlooked by some court decisions (possibly due to lack of awareness of the course of the game), which assume that the only decisive factor are the cards the player is dealt.[43] Contrary to this, several studies have shown that in more than 88% of poker games, the winning player is not the player who has been dealt the best hand.[44]
b) Average players
In order to answer the question as to whether a player can predominantly influence the outcome of the game by applying his skills, general opinion holds that it is necessary to use an average player as the standard.[45] In particular, mere mathematical computations and complicated probability calculations must not be taken into consideration, as they do not reflect the average player's skills.[46] The decisive circle is the audience to which the game is open, rather than the experienced or very experienced player.[47] However, it has been made clear by the courts that for this average player the decisive level is not the beginner's situation, as otherwise the predominant number of mixed games would have the character of a game of chance. For instance, a raw recruit in the mentioned game of Darts will usually not be able to control the throw of the darts, so that the results reached will only depend on chance, as the average players will only in rare cases be able to master all abilities on which skill are based, prior to the beginning of the game. This means that the decisive factor is:
"whether or not the level of skill that overcomes the element of chance can be obtained by a person interested in the game, with an average standard, within a period of time which is short enough to ensure that the rule of chance is at the most limited to a introductory phase, the length of which is determined according to the empirical average duration of participation in the game."[48]
This means that the average player must be interested in the game and must already have played the mentioned practice phase which must be tolerated, and thus must have reached a level of proficiency which is higher than the beginner's level. Only when a player fulfils these requirements does he have the level of skill of an average player. For Texas Hold'em, this means that the average player will initially have to learn the rules and have to play a certain number of practice games during a practice phase, which must correspond to the average duration of a game participation.
c) Predominant influence
(1) Approaches in the past
The decisive question as to whether or not the average player is able to predominantly influence the outcome of the game by applying his skills, is often referred to in legal literature as a question of assessment[49] or balancing of interests[50]. Even those authors who have up to now tried for a differentiating approach ultimately base their classification on an assessment which is not supported by empirical data.[51] One approach in literature is the "rule of thumb" that poker as a cash game is a game of chance while the tournament variant is a game of skill.[52] Other authors always classify Texas Hold'em as a game of skill[53], or as a game of chance[54]. In the decision mentioned at the beginning of this report, the LG of Karlsruhe had to decide on a Texas Hold'em tournament and reached the conclusion that this was a game of skill as the players must be able to limit their losses if they are dealt poor "hands" and to obtain the highest possible winnings if they are dealt good "hands". This requires tactical skills, strategy and mathematical and psychological intuition – all of which are characteristics which are to be classified as elements of skill.[55] Other court decisions in the past did either not make a differentiation between the various poker variants in the evaluation of Texas Hold'em, and treated poker in general as a game of chance,[56] or made a differentiation while ultimately not answering the question of how to classify the game.[57]
(2) Criticism
All mentioned approaches, even though they reach different results, have one thing in common: They ultimately answer the question as to whether the elements of skill or of chance prevail, by means of a subjective assessment or an abstract balancing of interests. Subjective assessments are generally unsuitable here to provide legal proof. Stochastical considerations may provide proof which is convincing from the point of view of logic and mathematics, however, they are insufficient for solving the legal issues. According to the high court decisions described above, the skills and abilities of an average player are decisive for the classification of a game as a game of chance or as a game of skill. This playing ability of the average player can, however, not be determined by stochastical means nor can it be simulated in an abstract way. As has been confirmed by high court decisions, the question as to whether the average player is able to predominantly influence whether he wins or loses a game, can only be answered in a field study with test persons.[58]
(3) Classification on the basis of a practical test
High court decisions state that this test must differentiate between the game variants where participants play against a machine (e.g. slot machine/ gaming machine as defined in sections 33c, d GewO) or where each player plays against the bank (e.g. Black Jack), and the case where the participants only play against each other and the organiser has pure organisational functions, which has to be evaluated in a completely different manner.[59]
(a) Game against the bank or a machine
If the individual participant plays against a machine or against the bank, the test is obvious, according to court decisions. In this case, the decisive question is whether the win rate is above or below 50%. If it is below 50%, this leads to the conclusion that
"the average skill was not sufficient to overcome the element of chance. Under these circumstances, the outcome of the game has been reached mainly due to circumstances which the player could not influence."[60]
This test is not applicable to Texas Hold'em and other games where the participants compete against each other, for reasons of logic alone. This is because, as soon as one participant wins more than 50% of the games, one of the competing players, who are similarly worth of protection, must lose more than one half of the games. This means that if average players compete against each other (rather than against the organiser) it is impossible for all average players to win more than 50% of the games. A game of skill would therefore be out of the question in this constellation.
The most frequently played games in practice, which courts, legislator and authorities have already unambiguously acknowledged as games of skill, such as Skat, Schafkopf, Billiards, various types of sports etc.[61], are based on the competitive situation, i.e. on a game structure where the participants compete against each other. It is therefore necessary to apply a different type of test to games such as Texas Hold'em in order to determine whether they are to be regarded as games of skill.
(b) Games against other participants
Court decisions have made it clear that a game test regarding competition games can only answer the question as to whether the majority of the games are decided by skill or by chance if the average player competes against players acting randomly.[62] This means that in games where participants compete against each other, the decisive issue is that a specific test is carried out with players. A mere theoretical and abstract approach and probability calculation is not sufficient, as this does not adequately take into consideration the effects of the competition character of a game.[63] Rather, the average players must be put into a real competitive situation. Only a test with test persons can provide the necessary proof.
© Summary
Summarising, it can be stated that, in a game such as Texas Hold'em, where the participants compete against each other, only a practical test with test persons allows a conclusion as to whether the average player is able to predominantly influence the outcome of the game by applying his skills. During this test, average players must compete against players acting completely randomly. If the average players predominantly win – i.e. in more than 50% of the cases – the game is a game of skill. For this purpose, it is necessary to create a real competitive situation in the form of a field study, which causes the average player to perform as well as he can.
This shows that a mere subjective assessment, or abstract balancing of interests, which up to now has been used as the basis for the classification of Texas Hold'em as a game of chance or as of game of skill by legal literature and by the courts, is not sufficient. This also applies to approaches which differentiate between tournament games and cash games in making this evaluation. Here, too, only the field study described above can lead to a classification of a specific game variant.
d) Implementation of a practical test by TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH, and its results
A practical test such as this, aligned along the prerequisites set by court decisions, has been carried out by TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH.[64] In this context, the following game variants were examined: No Limit and Fixed Limit Hold'em (according to the standard rules), six players at one table, 30 seconds limit for a play, initial game account balance 2000 chips, minimum buy-in: No Limit: 40 chips, Limit: 20 chips – maximum buy-in: No Limit: 200 chips (buy-in = chips which may be brought to the table), small blind (small obligatory stakes): 1 chip, big blind (large obligatory stakes): 2 chips, small bet: 2 chips, big bet: 4 chips, no pay-outs prior to the conclusion of 300 hands, re-buys (new credits into the game account), if 2000 chips were lost during the first 200 hands, 300 chips during the first 300 hands, or 4000 chips during the entire 300 hands. After each re-buy, a 1 hour break must be observed. In this test, it was ensured by means of a questionnaire that the participants were persons interested in the game and they had gone through the necessary practice phase prior to their participation, i.e. they were average players in accordance with the definition developed by the courts.[65] 100 test persons participated in the test and played, after having completed their training (if necessary) to become average players, for at least 6 hours or at least 300 hands under real conditions in a monitored competition carried out according to the terms described above. This test has shown that the average players beat the random players in a significant number of cases. The significance of the test results[66] for the overall evaluation of the game was established to be positive, applying stochastical methods.[67] This shows that Texas Hold'em in the series game versions examined in the study, is a game of skill.[68]
III. Consequences for the legal evaluation
Texas Hold'em in the examined variant of a series game is thus a game of skill. The legal consequences resulting from this depend on the utilisation of the term "game of chance", which plays an important role in the various fields of law and in various statutes.
1. Uniformity of the term "game of chance"
The most prominent statutory use of the term "game of chance" is in section 284 StGB. In addition to this, the term can also be found in section 33h No. 3 GewO and, most importantly, in the GlüStV, its implementing acts and in the casino acts. The RennwLottG (Act on horse racing and lotteries) does not use the term "game of chance", but section 27 RennwLottG mentioned lotteries, draws and oddset bets, all of which are games of chance.[69] Due to the fact that the prerequisites of the norms in sections 284 et seq. StGB are linked to administrative decisions, the necessity of a uniform use of the term "game of chance" is obvious; it shall, however, nevertheless be examined again hereinafter.
The fact that the terms are identical in section 284 StGB and section 33h No. 3 GewO does not require any additional explanation, as the latter expressly refers to the criminal law provision. With regard to section 17 RennwLottG, the following applies: the intention of the provision was to achieve an adaption to the criminal law regulations,[70] so that the terms must be interpreted uniformly in this area as well.
Section 3 GlüStV, on the other hand, contains an expressed definition of the term "game of chance", and is not restricted to a mere reference to criminal law. According to section 3 subsection 1 GlüStV, a game is a game of chance if remuneration is requested within the framework of a game in return for the chance of winning, and if the decision on winning only, or predominantly, depends on coincidence. In this context, the decision on winning is considered to always depend on coincidence if the basis for this decision is the uncertain occurrence or outcome of future events. Here, some think that, while the term "game of chance" as used in the GlüStV is similar to the term in criminal law, it is by no means identical.[71] This differentiation has up to now mainly become important with regard to the term "remuneration" as used in section 3 subsection 1 GlüStV,[72] however, it cannot be excluded that other deviations from the characteristics of the criminal law term "game of chance" may be taken into consideration in the future. However, the legislator had not intended to cause a deviating development of the term under criminal and administrative law, which furthermore would have fatal consequences on the stability of the law. For systematic and historic reasons, as well as due to the principle of the uniformity of the legal system, nothing but a uniform interpretation of the term "game of chance" can apply.[73]
The Federal Republic of Germany knows a so-called "dual system of gaming regulations",[74] which is divided into commercial gaming law on the one hand and gambling and lottery law on the other hand. The decision on the route to be taken is made in section 33 h No. 3 GewO which has already been mentioned above. While according to this provision gaming appliances offering winning opportunities (section 33c GewO) are governed by commercial gaming law, other games as defined in section 33d subsection 1 sentence 1 GewO are only encompassed if they are not to be considered as games of chance under section 284 StGB.[75] The backdrop to this regulation is the distribution of legislative powers between the Federal government and the individual Länder (Federal States). According to Art. 74 section 1 No. 11 GG (German Constitution – Law of the Economy), the Federal government in principle has concurrent legislative powers with regard to the regulation of commercial gaming law,[76] of which the Federal government has conclusively made use to this extent.[77] According to recent judgments by the BVerfG (Federal Constitutional Court), gambling and lottery law is also encompassed by this legislative power.[78] However, this has not been used up to now, which means that the Länder were able to keep their legislative powers in these areas. They have used these powers by passing the GlüStV, the associated implementing acts and the casino acts.
Depending on whether or not a game is to be qualified as a game of chance as defined in section 284 StGB, it is either subject to the Federal government's commercial gaming law, or to the Länder gambling and lottery laws. Double competence is excluded. Rather, the licensing obligation and licensability either depend on the GewO or on the Länder gambling acts. If the term "game of chance" is interpreted to encompass a wider range of games in section 3 subsection 1 GlüStV than in section 284 StGB, this will have the consequence that a game, as it is not a game of chance under section 283 StGB, requires a licence under section 33d subsection 1 GewO, while it at the same time is subject to a permission obligation under section 4 subsection 1 GlüStV, because it qualifies as a game of chance under section 3 subsection 1 GlüStV. This would mean that the licensing prerequisites, the prohibition powers and the administrative competences would at the same time follow from the GewO and from the Länder gambling laws.[79] This would, on the one hand violate the separation between national and Länder law and, on the other hand, would give rise to the risk of inconsistent decisions which must be avoided in order to comply with the principle of consistency of the legal system[80].
Such blurring of the delimitation line between commercial gaming law and gambling law was not intended by the legislators of the GlüStV either. This can be seen from the legislative material – the explanations on the draft of the treaty and the revised explanations on the GlüStV. According to these, the Länder clearly assumed that the GlüStV would not be applicable to "situations which are regulated under Federal law". Furthermore, the treaty was in particular not meant to apply to "games with winning opportunities which are conclusively regulated in the GewO".[81] The reform of the federalism system in Germany, which gave the Länder exclusive legislative powers with regard to the law regulating amusement arcades, but not for commercial gaming law, was not intended to change this either.[82]
In addition to this, a different development of the terms "game of chance" in criminal and administrative law would be questionable in view of the principle of uniformity of the legal system. Criminal liability under section 284 StGB depends on the lack of an administrative licence. This means that the provision refers to facts which depend on administrative decisions.[83] In connection with this dependence on administrative decisions (the problems of which have up to now mainly been discussed in the area of environmental criminal law)[84] the principle of uniformity of the legal system, according to prevailing opinion, means that activities which are permitted under administrative law cannot be liable to criminal punishment.[85] Due to this, the question regarding the significance of the administrative licence is only governed by administrative law, as this is the only way to avoid inconsistent results.[86] If criminal law provisions which depend on administrative decisions contain elements which at the same time are a prerequisite of the administrative licence obligation – such as the term "game of chance" – it is necessary to additionally base the decision on a uniform definition of terms which are used identically in order to avoid inconsistencies. Otherwise, there would be a violation of the principle of clarity and definiteness of legal enactments as provided for in Art. 103 section 2 GG. The affected citizens would no longer know from the wording of a criminal law provision on its own, in which games their participation is subject to criminal punishment.
This uniform interpretation of the term "game of chance" in criminal and administrative law, which is required due to the principle of clarity and definiteness of legal enactments and due to the allocation of legislative powers, is decisive for the legal treatment of Texas Hold'em.
2. Evaluation of Texas Hold'em in the various areas of law
Sections 284 et seq. StGB do not encompass Texas Hold'em game variants which – such as, for instance, the variant examined in the empirical study carried out by TÜV – are organised as games of skill. This excludes criminal liability.
Similarly, the regulations of the licence obligation in section 4 subsection 1 GlüStV and the prohibition provisions in section 4 subsection 3-4 and section 5 GlüStV do not apply to Texas Hold'em variants which are organised as games of skill.
In section 33d subsection 1, the GewO provides for a general licensing obligation for games of skill, and thus also for the corresponding Texas Hold'em variants. An exception in this area is the organisation of games on the internet. As violations of section 33d GewO are administrative offences and, in case of persistent repetition, may even lead to criminal liability pursuant to section 148 No. 1 GewO, the organisation of games on the internet cannot be encompassed due to the principle of clarity and definiteness under Art. 103 section 2 GG, unless this has expressly been provided for. This means that the GewO can only be relevant for Texas Hold'em variants organised offline.
IV. Privileged status of games of skill
As according to the aforesaid, Texas Hold'em, at least in certain organisation forms, has been proven by the tests demanded by the courts to qualify as a game of skill, we shall finally examine whether the conclusion we have reached complies with the intent and purpose of the differentiation between games of skill and games of chance.[87]
The wording of sections 284 et seq. StGB as well as the legislative intent only refers to games of chance. It is consistent that the organisation of games of skill is not liable to criminal punishment, which has been settled case law for more than 125 years, and was initially clarified in decisions by the Reichsgericht, later by the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice).[88] As the foundations of this decisive differentiation between games of chance, liable to criminal punishment, and games of skill, exempt from punishment, go back as far as the Allgemeine Preußische Landrecht (General Law for the Prussian States) dated 1794 (sections 1298 et seq.) and the Strafgesetzbuch des Norddeutschen Bundes (Criminal Code of the Northern German Federation) dated 1870 (sections 284 et seq. StGB),[89] it is hard to find a legislative intent for the privileged status of games of skill in criminal law which would still be valid today. The legislative intent of acts tightening or liberalising gambling law throughout the last 215 years, however, allows the deduction of some general principles which show the necessity of the privileged status of games of skill.
The historic legislative material shows that games of chance were only made subject to criminal punishment as they were played because of greed, or because they were organised in order to exploit the playing instinct in order to obtain a profit.[90] Present court decisions and legal literature consider the reason for the penalisation of games of chance to lie in the exploitation of the natural play instinct with the intention of making a profit. This risk does not exist if the average player can influence the outcome of the game by applying his skills.[91] Here, the player does not enter the vicious circle of losing and hoping to win everything back, as he will win in more than one half of the cases on average anyway.
Furthermore, games with elements of skill are socially desirable. They train the body and the soul, which enhances the participants' performance potential.[92] This special privileged status of games of skill is usually not being expressly justified any more. However, the Reichsgericht, in a decision in 1906, stated in detail that, in games of skill where the decision is mainly based on the better proficiency or practice of the players, the incentive of a prize is less important than the joy in playing, while games of chance mainly satisfy greed.[93]
Summarising, it can thus be said that games of chance were made subject to criminal punishment as this game form makes it possible for the organiser to induce a large number of persons to put at stake substantial parts of their assets without obtaining any further consideration, merely by promising a prize which can only be obtained by a very small number of players. Games of skill, on the other hand, have a privileged status as here the joy in playing and physical exercise and/or mental training are in the foreground.[94]
Applying this to Texas Hold'em, one will reach the conclusion that the privileged status of games of skill is justified.[95] The game and the various tactical options as well as the competitive situation train the players' minds. Furthermore, ability to react and concentrate and mathematical and economic understanding are being improved. The fact that tactical consideration and the joy in playing are in the foreground can be seen in the establishment of associations and clubs[96], trade fairs[97], magazines[98] and championships on a mass audience level[99] as well as the countless internet forums where poker players discuss the best tactical options[100].
V. Conclusion
The classification of Texas Hold'em as a game of skill or game of chance in the past was based on an inadequate subjective assessment or abstract balancing of interests, while according to high court decisions a field study was indispensible. If in a game, as is the case here, several competitors play against each other, average players must prevail against random players in a real competitive situation within the framework of this study. If the former predominantly win – i.e. in more than 50% of the cases – the game is a game of skill. A study carried out and monitored by TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH[101] has shown that this is the case, at least for Texas Hold'em in a series variant where a pay-out is only possible after a large number of hands have been played.
The treatment of Texas Hold'em under criminal and administrative law is linked to this classification. In this context, it must initially be stated that the term "game of chance" as used in sections 284 et seq. StGB and in section 3 subsection 1 GlüStV must be interpreted uniformly due to historic and systematic reasons and also due to the principle of uniformity of the legal system. Texas Hold'em as a game of skill falls neither under the scope of application of section 284 StGB nor under section 3 subsection 1 GlüStV, while this is the case for the organisation form as an offline game as defined in section 33d subsection 1 GewO. Furthermore, the issue in the foreground in Texas Hold'em is the joy in playing and the learning effect, while the incentive of winning is less important, which means the game even more is among the privileged games of skill. The demonization of games of chance referred to at the beginning of this report definitely is unsuitable for Texas Hold'em.
[1] Hambach & Hambach Rechtsanwälte/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008 (the study, which has not been published up to now, is at the authors' disposal).
[2] See Süddeutsche Zeitung dated 14.04.2008, "Der Teufel schlägt den Papst", accessible online at http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/404/439147/text/, and http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spielkarte.
[3] RG, 07.12.1906 – V 473/06, RGSt 40, 21, 35 et seq.
[4] See, for instance Marcks, in: Landmann/Rohmer, GewO, § 5 a SpielVO, par. 7; v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, § 284, par. 9.
[5] For Skat, see, for instance the homepage of the Deutsche Skatverband e.V., accessible at http://www.dskv.de/.
[6] RG JW 1906, 789.
[7] E.g. the studies by Cabot/Hannum, Poker: Public Policy, Law, Mathematics, and the Future of an American Tradition, Cooley, Law Review 2005, 443 et seq.; Alon, Poker, Chance and Skill, Working Paper, University of Tel Aviv 2007; Dreef/Borm/v. d. Genugten, On Strategy and Relative Skill in Poker, International Game Theory Review 2003, 83; Borm v. d. Genugten, On a Relative Measure of Skill for Games with Chance Elements, TOP 2001, 91; Dedonno/Dettermann, Poker is a Skill, Gaming Law Review 2008, 12; summary in: Hambach & Hambach Rechtsanwälte/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 14 and 142 et seq., as well as Rock/Fiedler, Die Empirie des Online-Pokers – Bestimmung des Geschicklichkeitsanteils anhand der kritischen Wiederholungshäufigkeit, ZfWG 2008, 412, 414 et seq.
[8] see Dietlein, in: Dietlein/Hecker/Ruttig, Glücksspielrecht, 2008, § 3 GlüStV, par. 4; Kühl, in: Kühl, StGB, 2007, § 284, par. 3; v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, § 284, par. 14; Duesberg, Die Strafbarkeit des Online-Pokers, JA 2008, 270, 271; Reeckmann, Zur Zulässigkeit des Pokerspiels außerhalb konzessionierter Spielbanken, ZfWG 2008, 296, 296; Fischhaber/Manz, Grenzen der Zulässigkeit von Pokerturnieren, GewArch 2007, 405, 406; VG (Administrative Court) of München, 08.05.2007 – M 22 S 07.900; VG of Frankfurt a. M., 12.02.2008 – 7 G 4212/07, ZfWG 2008, 219. A further development of the Reichsgericht's case law can be found in: VG of Düsseldorf, 18.05.2009 – 27 L 1607/08; OVG (Higher Administrative Court) of Berlin-Brandenburg, 20.04.2009 – 1 S 203.08.
[9] Here, each player is dealt five cards face down which he can improve by exchanging them and can also play against his opponents in two betting rounds. For a detailed description of the game, see, for instance, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Card_Draw.
[10] To this effect, BGH, 11.01.1989 – 2 StR 461/88, BGHSt 36, 74; v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, § 284, par. 7, 14.
[11] Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008 (the study, which has not been published up to now, is at the authors' disposal).
[12] LG (Regional Court) of Karlsruhe 20.01.2009 – 18 AK 127/08.
[13] The "other game" primarily is another game in relation to section 33c subsection 1 sentence 1 GewO, which encompasses gaming machines with winning opportunities.
[14] BGH, 18.04.1952 – 1 StR 739/51, BGHSt 2, 274, 276; BGH, 07.12.1979 – 2 StR 315/79, BGHSt 29, 152, 157; BGH, 11.01.1989 – 2 StR 461/88, BGHSt 36, 74, 80; v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, § 284, par. 7 with further references; also see BVerwG, 17.05.1955 – I C 133.53, BVerwGE 2, 110, 111. This definition is also being taken over in § 3 Abs. 1 GlüStV, see Dietlein, in: Dietlein/Hecker/Ruttig, Glücksspielrecht, 2008, § 3 GlüStV, par. 2 et seq.
[15] Also see Hambach & Hambach Rechtsanwälte/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 88.
[16] See, for instance, BVerwG, 17.05.1955 – I C 133.53, BVerwGE 2, 110, 111; OLG (Higher Regional Court) of Frankfurt, NStZ 1988, 459; BVerwG, 24.10.2001 – 6 C 1/01, BVerwGE 115, 179, 186.
[17] One classic example is the game of chess. Here, the starting conditions are the same for all players, the decisive issue for winning or losing merely is the mastering of the rules of the game and the individual player's strategic abilities, see, for instance v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, § 284, par. 9.
[18] BVerwGE 17, 182, 184.
[19] Duesberg, Die Strafbarkeit des Online-Pokers, JA 2008, 270 et seq.; Holznagel, Poker – Glücks- oder Geschicklichkeitsspiel?, MMR 2008, 439, 441; Koenig/Ciszewski, Texas Hold'em Poker – Glücksspiel oder Geschicklichkeitsspiel, GewArch 2007, 402, 402.
[20] Duesberg, Die Strafbarkeit des Online-Pokers, JA 2008, 270, 271: "Ultimately, it depends on chance whether the player concerned has the best cards in comparison to his opponents at the end of each round of poker, and will therefore win." Similar: Fischhaber/Manz, Grenzen der Zulässigkeit von Pokerturnieren, GewArch 2007, 405,. Reaching the same conclusion: VG of Neustadt (Weinstraße), 09.07.2008 – 5 L 592/08.NW, ZfWG 2008, 293; VG of München, 08.05.2007 – M 22 S 07.900; VG of Münster, 03.04.2008 – 9 L 13/08, ZfWG 2008, 151, with further references; VG of Düsseldorf, 18.05.2009 – 27 L 1607/08; OVG of Berlin-Brandenburg, 20.04.2009 – 1 S 203.08. See early decision RG, 11.06.1906 – 1443/05, JW 1906, 789.
[21] BGH, 18.04.1952 – 1 StR 739/51, BGHSt 2, 274, 276.
[22] OVG of Kassel, 10.04.1979 – II OE 41/77.
[23] BVerwG, 09.12.1975 – I C 14.74, GewArch 1976, 87, 87 et seq.; Hambach & Hambach Rechtsanwälte/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 89 et seq.
[24] Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 90 et seq.
[25] An explanation of the rules of the game can, for instance, be found at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Hold%27em.
[26] See the detailed description in Koenig/Ciszewski, Texas Hold'em Poker – Glücksspiel oder Geschicklichkeitsspiel, GewArch 2007, 402, p. 403 et seq.
[27] The higher the number of players, the better a hand must be in order to win, as the probability of having the best hand at the table is reduced with an increasing number of players.
[28] Depending on their willingness to take a risk, players can roughly be categorised as "loose" or "tight". A player must adjust his actions to this, and must adapt his playing behaviour to his opponents' behaviour.
[29] "Table image" means the impression which the opponents have of a player. A player can influence this image through his own behaviour.
[30] The position determines the volume of information a player has prior to his own action, and correspondingly influences his behaviour.
[31] Refers to the relation of the basic stakes in comparison to the remaining number of chips held by the individual players (stacks). The lower the stacks are in comparison to the blinds, the higher the pressure on a player.
[32] "Pot odds" is the relation between the sum of the pot at stake and the required bets. This must be compared with the winning probability which is determined by the so-called outs, i.e. the number of possible remaining cards which may be dealt face up during the various card dealing phases, and can therefore improve the player's hand so that he will win the showdown. This allows reliable conclusions regarding the opponents' cards, which is what some court decisions fail to recognise: see, for instance, VG of Düsseldorf, 18.05.2009 – 27 L 1607/08; OVG of Berlin-Brandenburg, 20.04.2009 – 1 S 203.08.
[33] Here, a bluff attempt in a late position can be particularly successful, as the players who had to bet the blinds also can only play a maximum of 20% of all hands, and will usually fold if there is a raise.
[34] In a bluff, a player pretends to have a strong hand by betting or raising, even though this is not the case.
[35] Similar to a bluff, with the difference that, due to the pending card dealing phases, there is the possibility that the hand may still turn into a strong hand.
[36] The so-called "value bet" is a strategic measure to increase a pot with the aim of maximising a players winnings, as the player is convinced that his hand will win the showdown.
[37] A further strategy is an "information bet". A relatively small bet is often suitable to draw information from an opponent regarding the strength of his hand, with a small financial risk.
[38] In principle a reverse bluff: The player intends to cause the impression that he holds a weak hand, while the opposite is the case.
[39] Here, too, the player holds a strong hand, but does not show this immediately, but checks to start with, in order to then raise after a hoped for bet by the opponent.
[40] Consistent creation of a certain image at the table, in order to execute an action which constitutes exactly the opposite in special situations.
[41] Kretschmer, Poker – ein Glücksspiel?, ZfWG 2007, 93 (96).
[42] To this effect, see Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 126 et seq.
[43] VG of Düsseldorf, 18.05.2009 – 27 L 1607/08; OVG of Berlin-Brandenburg, 20.04.2009 – 1 S 203.08.
[44] see the study by Cigital, Inc., 05.03.2009, Hope/McCulloch, Statistical Analysis of Texas Hold'em, www.cigital.com and by TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH, April 2009 (unpublished, at the authors' disposal).
[45] MüKo StGB. par. 7; Wohlers, in: NK-StGB, § 284, par. 9; v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, § 284, par. 8, all with further references; Ennuschat, in: Ennuschat/Geerlings/Mann and others, Gedächtnisschrift für Peter J. Tettinger, 41, 45; Dickersbach, Der Geschicklichkeitsautomat als Problem des gewerblichen Spielrechts, GewArch 1998, 265, 267; Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 94 et seq.
[46] VG of Wiesbaden, 10.10.1995 – 5/3 E 32/94, GewArch 1996, 68; VG of Wiesbaden, 10.12.2007 – 5 E 1417/05, GewArch 2009, 117; BVerwG, 28.09.1982 – 1 C 139/80, GewArch 1983, 60.
[47] BGH, 18.04.1952 – 1 StR 739/51, BGHSt 2, 274, 276; BGH, 07.12.1979 – 2 StR 315/79, BGHSt 29, 152, 157; BGH, 11.01.1989 – 2 StR 461/88, BGHSt 36, 74, 80.
[48] BVerwG, 09.10.1984 – 1 C 20/82, GewArch 1985, 59, 60; also see BVerwG, 28.09.1982 – 1 C 106/78, GewArch 1983, 63, 65; BVerwG, 24.10.2001 – 6 C 1/01, BVerwGE 115, 179, 185.
[49] For instance: Kretschmer, Poker – ein Glücksspiel?, ZfWG 2007, 93, p. 98.
[50] Holznagel, Poker – Glücks- oder Geschicklichkeitsspiel?, MMR 2008, 439, 444.
[51] To this effect, also see the analysis of German-language literature by Rock/Fiedler, Die Empirie des Online- Pokers – Bestimmung des Geschicklichkeitsanteils anhand der kritischen Wiederholungshäufigkeit, ZfWG 2008, 412, 414.
[52] Kretschmer, Poker – ein Glücksspiel?, ZfWG 2007, 93, 98.
[53] Koenig/Ciszewski, Texas Hold'em Poker – Glücksspiel oder Geschicklichkeitsspiel, GewArch 2007, 402, 404. Similar: Holznagel, Poker – Glücks- oder Geschicklichkeitsspiel?, MMR 2008, 439, 442 et seq., while this author does not answer the question as to whether some cash games variants may also be games of skill.
[54] Fischhaber/Manz, Grenzen der Zulässigkeit von Pokerturnieren, GewArch 2007, 405, et seq. In a similarly brief manner, Duesberg, Die Strafbarkeit des Online-Pokers, JA 2008, 270 et seq., states that in poker, the player by no means had the chance to substantially influence the outcome of the game. Also to this effect: Reeckmann, Zur Zulässigkeit des Pokerspiels außerhalb konzessionierter Spielbanken, ZfWG 2008, 296.
[55] LG of Karlsruhe, 20.01.2009 – 18 AK 127/08.
[56] Many court decisions refer to the abovementioned judgment by the Reichsgericht dated 1906 in order to prove that Texas Hold'em is a game of chance (see, for instance, VG of Neustadt (Weinstraße), 09.07.2008 – 5 L 592/08.NW, ZfWG 2008, 293. However, the Reichsgericht decision was given on Draw Poker, while the administrative courts nowadays mainly have to decide on Texas Hold'em. But even decisions addressing current forms of poker lack empirical evidence: for instance: VG of Düsseldorf, 18.05.2009 – 27 L 1607/08; OVG of Berlin- Brandenburg, 20.04.2009 – 1 S 203.08.
[57] The VG of Wiesbaden, however, makes the differentiation and distinguishes between Texas Hold'em (VG of Wiesbaden, 10.12.2007 – 5 E 1417/05, GewArch 2009, 117) and Omaha (VG of Wiesbaden, 10.12.2007 – 5 E 770/06, juris); however, the court ultimately does not classify the game.
[58] In this context, see, for instance BVerwG, GewArch 1985, 59 et seq.
[59] Schmidt/Wittig, Poker: Alles nur Glück?, JR 2009, 45, 48 also realise that it is necessary to distinguish between games against machines and games against opponents. However, contrary to our position here, they think that this differentiation is relevant for the definition of the average player.
[60] BVerwG, 24.10.2001 – 6 C 1/01, BVerwGE 115, 179, 187. Detailed information in this context: Marcks, in: Landmann/Rohmer, GewO, § 33 d GewO, par. 4 a-f.; also see Dickersbach, Der Geschicklichkeitsautomat als Problem des gewerblichen Spielrechts, GewArch 1998, 265, 268 et seq.; Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 99 et seq.
[61] BVerwG, 28.11.1963 – I C 69.60, I C 72.60, BVerwGE 17, 182, et seq.; BFH, 11.11.1993 – XI R 48/91, BFH/NV 1994, 622; BPatG, GRUR 2004, 685, et seq.
[62] BVerwG, 09.10.1984 – 1 C 20/82, GewArch 1985, 59, 61: "Finally, the taking of evidence (…) was laid out incorrectly (…), as all participants strived for success, applying all skills available to them, rather than – which is what would have been required – one player in the various games being guided by coincidence (…) However, the game examination would only have been able to answer the question as to whether the majority of games is decided by skill or by chance, if in each individual game one player had made two untargeted throws while his opponent made two targeted throws." OVG of Kassel, 10.04.1979 – II OE 41/77 states the same: "The demonstration of the game carried out before the Court confirmed the conclusions reached by the defendant in numerous tests (375 games with seven persons), which is that mere chance decisions, i.e. drawing cards face down, led to poorer results in comparison with games played according to the rules." Also see Dickersbach, Der Geschicklichkeitsautomat als Problem des gewerblichen Spielrechts, GewArch 1998, 265, 268.
[63] To this effect, see BVerwG, 09.10.1984 – 1 C 20/82, GewArch 1985, 59, 61.
[64] This field study is described in Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 51 et seq.
[66] E.g. 20 tables with six players each, with one average player and five random players: The average player came first at 19 tables, and reached second place at one table.
[67] This was carried out by Mr. Henze, head of the Institute of Stochastics at the TU of Karlsruhe, who used the standard trust probability of 95%.
[68] According to the legal evaluation of the field study in: Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 103 et seq.
[69] v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, Vor § 284, par. 24. Lotteries and draws fall under the scope of application of the criminal law provision in section 287 StGB as lex specialis, see v. Bubnoff, in: LK-StGB, § 284, par. 4. For oddset bets, the legal classification is disputed, prevailing opinion, however, treats them as games of chance, see BGH, 28.11.2002 – 4 StR 260/02, wistra 2003, 145; Heine/Eser, in: Schönke/Schröder, StGB, 2006, § 284, par. 7. The utilisation of the term "game" in section 762 BGB (German Civil Code) also is relevant in this context, shall, however not be discussed here in detail.
[70] Schild, Die Öffentlichkeit der Lotterie des § 286 StGB, NStZ 1982, 446, 447.
[71] Dietlein, in: Dietlein/Hecker/Ruttig, Glücksspielrecht, 2008, § 3 GlüStV, par. 3.
[72] For an interpretation of the term "remuneration" which deviates from the criminal law term "stakes", among others: VG of München, 09.02.2009 – M 22 S 09.300, ZfWG 2009, 70; similar result: VG of Münster, 03.04.2008 – 9 L 13/08, ZfWG 2008, 151; VG of München, 08.05.2007 – M 22 S 07.900; VG of Frankfurt a. M., 12.02.2008 – 7 G 4212/07, ZfWG 2008, 219; VG of Weimar, 19.10.2007 – 5 E 1520/07, ZfWG 2008, 62; in legal literature, above all Dietlein, in: Dietlein/Hecker/Ruttig, Glücksspielrecht, 2008, § 3 GlüStV, par. 5 making reference to the different wording. Holding a different opinion: OVG of Koblenz, 21.10.2008 – 6 B 10778/08; OVG of Münster, 10.06.2008 – 4 B 606/08, GewArch 2008, 407; VG of Trier, 03.02.2009 – 1 K 592/08, ZfWG 2009, 66.
[73] Reaching the same conclusion: OVG of Koblenz, 21.10.2008 – 6 B 10778/08; OVG of Münster, 10.06.2008 – 4 B 606/08, GewArch 2008, 407; VG of Trier, 03.02.2009 – 1 K 592/08, ZfWG 2009, 66.
[74] To this effect: Tettinger, in: Tettinger/Wank, GewO, § 33 h GewO, par. 1.
[75] See Ennuschat, in: Ennuschat/Geerlings/Mann u. a., Gedächtnisschrift für Peter J. Tettinger, 41, 43 et seq.
[76] The reform of the German federalism system has removed certain parts of trade law from the concurrent legislative powers, and has attributed them to the exclusive legislative power of the Länder. However, commercial gaming law is not affected by this, with the exception of the law regulating amusement arcades, see Höfling/Rixen, Die Landes-Gesetzgebungskompetenzen im Gewerberecht nach der Föderalismusreform, GewArch 2008, 1.
[77] This corresponds to the view taken by the Länder in the legislative material on the Inter-State Treaty on Gambling, see printed matter Drs. 15/1454 of the Parliament of Rhineland Palatinate, p. 31.
[78] BVerfG, 28.03.2006 – 1 BvR 1054/01, BVerfGE 115, 276. In this context, see Degenhart, in: Sachs, GG, Art.74, par. 47 and 52.
[79] Similar: OVG of Koblenz, 21.10.2008 – 6 B 10778/08.
[80] In this context, see also: Sodan, Das Prinzip der Widerspruchsfreiheit der Rechtsordnung, JZ 1999, 864.
[81] See supplement to printed matter Drs. 13/5365 of the Parliament of North-Rhine Westphalia, 24, and printed matter 15/1454 of the Parliament of Rhineland Palatinate, 31.
[82] Printed matter Drs. 15/1454 of the Parliament of Rhineland Palatinate, 31. This means that the Länder assume that, even after the changes introduced by the reform of the German federalism system, commercial gaming law is conclusively regulated by the Federal government in sections 33c to 33g GewO, and that the Länder at the most have been granted the power to decide on the permission (with only local validity) regarding amusement arcades.
[83] Fischer, StGB, § 284, par. 14; Heine/Eser, in: Schönke/Schröder, StGB, 2006, § 284, par. 18.
[84] Cramer/Steinberg-Lieben, Cramer/Heine, in: Schönke/Schröder, StGB, 2006, Vor §§ 324 et seq., par. 15 et seq.; Dannecker/Streinz, in: Rengeling/Breier, Handbuch zum europäischen und deutschen Umweltrecht, § 8, par. 17 et seq.
[85] Dannecker/Streinz, in: Rengeling/Breier, Handbuch zum europäischen und deutschen Umweltrecht, § 8, par. 17; Heine, Verwaltungsakzessorietät des Umweltstrafrechts, NJW 1990, 2425, 2431.
[86] Detailed information for the area of environmental criminal law – where the fact that the elements of the offence are linked to administrative decisions is of substantially greater importance: Cramer/Steinberg-Lieben, Cramer/Heine, in: Schönke/Schröder, StGB, 2006, Vor §§ 324 et seq., par. 15 et seq.; Kloepfer/Vierhaus, Umweltstrafrecht, 1995, par. 31 et seq.; reaching the same conclusion: Paeffgen, in: Küper/Welp, Festschrift für Walter Stree und Johannes Wessels zum 70. Geburtstag, 587, 608 et seq.
[87] On the entire subject: Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 114 et seq.
[88] The first decision on games of chance can be found as early as in the second volume of the Reichsgericht decisions: RG, RGSt 2, 390. Further differentiations, for instance: RG, RGSt, 172, et seq.; RG, RGSt 25, 12, et seq.
[89] On the historic development of gambling law: Klam, Die rechtliche Problematik von Glücksspielen im Internet, 28 et seq.
[90] On the Allgemeines Preußisches Landrecht: Klam, Die rechtliche Problematik von Glücksspielen im Internet, 28 et seq.; on the act against games of chance, a tightening of the criminal law provisions regarding gambling law dated 1919: Lange, in: Jescheck/Lüttger, Festschrift für Eduard Dreher, 573, 574, and on the legislative intent of the last decisive amendment of the act: BT-Drs. 13/8587, 67.
[91] Argumentum e contrario from BVerwG, 24.10.2001 – 6 C 1/01, BVerwGE 115, 179; Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 116.
[92] Tettinger, in: Tettinger/Wank, GewO, Vor §§ 33 c et seq., par. 2; Korte, Das staatliche Glücksspielwesen, 24.
[93] RG, 07.12.1906 – V 473/06, RGSt 40, 21, 35 et seq.
[94] Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 118.
[95] For detailed information in this context, see: Hambach & Hambach Law Firm/TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH/Henze (Head of the Institute of Stochastics at the University of Karlsruhe)/Kalhamer (author of textbooks on poker), Poker study, 2008, 119 et seq.
[96] See, for instance www.pokerclubzwickau.de; http://www.cuxhavener-pokerlounge.de/; see, for instance http://www.deutscherpokerbund.net/. At present, 430,000 people play poker regularly: Forsa study dated 10.06.2008, http://www.bitkom.org/de/presse/8477_52665.aspx.
[97] http://www.pokermesse.de.
[98] At the moment, there are four German poker magazines with high circulation, see, for instance: http://royalflush.magnus.de.
[99] See, for instance: www.poker-bundesliga.de.
[100] See, for instance: www.pokerreing.com/.
[101] The test was carried out by TÜV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH.
Source: TIME LAW NEWS 4/2009 (www.timelaw.de) Hambach & Hambach Law Firm
VGH Baden-Württemberg: Eilverfahren zum Weiterbetrieb einer Spielhalle
Online-Glücksspiel – Spieler erhält Verluste in Höhe von ca. 45.500 Euro zurück
Rechtsanwalt Bernd Hansen erreicht gerichtliche Aussetzung der Vollziehung von Umsatzsteuern auf Geldspielgeräte
Bescherung für Spieler – Online-Casino muss ihm seine Verluste erstatten
Urteil des Landgerichts Traunstein: Verstoß gegen Verbot des Online-Glücksspiels
gambling-law poker rechtsanwalt Wulf Hambach


text:
Il singolare del torneo di tennis Challenger ATP Club Premium Open 1996, facente parte dell'ATP Challenger Series, ha avuto come vincitore Pablo Campana che ha battuto in finale Luis Morejon 6-3, 6-2.

Teste di serie

 Nicolás Lapentti (quarti di finale)
 Luis Morejon (finale)
 Roberto Jabali (semifinali)
 Eyal Ran (semifinali)

 Juan Antonio Pino Pérez (primo turno)
 Mosè Navarra (quarti di finale)
 Patricio Arnold (secondo turno)
 Miguel Tobon (primo turno)

Tabellone

Finale

Parte alta

Parte bassa

Collegamenti esterni

Challenger ATP Club Premium Open 1996

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Sir Alex Ferguson swore at 15-year-old down the phone for considering rejecting Man Utd
Daniel Marland
Published 18:49, 25 September 2022 BST
| Last updated 18:49, 25 September 2022 BST
Sir Alex Ferguson launched a huge rant at former Manchester United midfielder Darren Fletcher when he was 15-years-old - because he was considering rejecting the club.
Fletcher was a highly rated youngster and Ferguson was desperate to seal his signature.
The Red Devils made contact with Fletcher early, but the midfielder didn't make an immediate decision and it left Fergie sweating.
"I nearly signed for Newcastle United," Fletcher told the Lockdown Tactics podcast.
"I had been going to United from the age of 12 and Newcastle at this point were the second-biggest team. Everyone is telling you, 'look at all of these great Man United midfielders you'll never get in the team, difficult to break through, Newcastle is closer to home.'
Image Credit: Alamy
"I really enjoyed it there, great club, Sir Alex Ferguson at this point [2002] was going to retire."
The news got back to Old Trafford and Ferguson was less than thrilled - so he decided to sort it out himself.
"So the word gets back to Sir Alex and he phoned the house one night and my sister picked up the phone. 'Here, Darren. It's for you'. It's just the boss going absolutely mental.
"I'm 15, just chalk-white and he's f'ing and giving it to me down the phone. My mum sees me and grabs the phone and listens for a few seconds and goes, 'don't speak to my son like that ever again', and slams the phone down.
"So the next minute the phone rings up again, it's Sir Alex: 'really sorry, Mrs Fletcher but we really like your son, I'm coming up on the next flight to Edinburgh'.
'My mum's looking around the house thinking, 'I've not done the housework, I've got loads of washing'. She goes, 'no you're not, they'll come down and see you'."
It's no secret Ferguson wanted United to be the best and they were for most of his 26 years in charge.
Fletcher spent 12 years at United and he went on to explain the impact that conversation had on his career.
The former Scotland international added: "To be honest, deep down, I could tell my dad recognised that going to Man United was the best thing for me, Sir Alex doing that. Anyway it got sorted, you go to Manchester United at 15 and it's the best decision I've ever made and the manager, what an influence he was on my career."
Fletcher was struck down with ulcerative colitis in 2011 which had an impact on his final few seasons in Manchester.
Despite this, Ferguson was always there for him and his family which the 38-year-old will always appreciate.
"He's another one who was there for me every step of the way. He was the one who gave me my debut in the first team, seen me through injuries as a young kid, and more so than anything, that time when I was out ill, looking after me,' Fletcher explained.
"I was worried about my contract and he was like, 'do not worry about that, you've got to get yourself right for your family, you've got to get yourself right for the rest of your life, don't worry about football."
He is now back at United in a technical director role and works closely with Erik ten Hag.
SPORTbible Stories is the brand-new podcast from the SPORT team at LADbible. The latest episode features a chat with WWE legend Triple H who opens up on his long in-ring career, his rivalry with The Rock during WWE's Attitude Era and Logan Paul's fledgling wrestling career. You can watch the episode here.
Topics: Sir Alex Ferguson, Manchester United, Premier League, Darren Fletcher
Financial expert identifies worrying change at Man Utd since Sir Alex Ferguson's retirement
Man Utd broke Sir Alex Ferguson's golden rule when they gave Erik ten Hag his contract
Rare footage of Paul Pogba breaking down Sir Alex Ferguson's management style will get people talking
Sir Alex Ferguson's three strict Man United rules that Wayne Rooney enforced after he retired

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Sunshine Ball's our biggest yet.
It's a highlight in our calendars every year, and for 2020 we decided to go bigger and better than ever with this year's Sunshine ball. Each September we welcome a staggering number of guests to celebrate the best of the North East with us, on a night packed full of drinks, dancing, dinner and entertainment. Throughout the years our Ball has turned into a firm favourite amongst our supporters and every year we just keep on growing, so it made sense for us to set our sights high for our 2020 celebration.
Partnering with St James' Square Law Firm, this year we wanted to collaborate with a prestigious local name to ensure that we could impress with this year's event. St James' Square law Firm have recently announced that we are their chosen charity of the year and will be joining us in being our official partner for the ball.
"We're delighted that our staff voted to support the great work done by the team at The Chronicle Sunshine Fund." Said Deb Lons of St James' Square Law Firm, "As they receive no statutory funding, and rely solely on donations, we felt that they really needed our support. The difference the Charity makes in the lives of babies and children, living with disabilities, in our region is absolutely amazing and we want to help them raise even more this year."
Every year we like to wow our revellers with a new theme, so before making our big announcement we asked our supporters and social media followers to take a guess at what this year's theme could be. We had some fabulous ideas such as a Masquerade Ball, an under the sea themed event, a Roaring 20's inspired Great Gatsby and even a Saturday night fever showstopper.
Though nobody quite hit the nail on the head, we were thrilled to announce that this year's ball is a "Nocho Del Sol". Celebrating a night of Mexicana, inspired by traditional Mexican holidays, our Nocho del Sol ball translates as a Night of Sunshine.
Hosted at The Grand Hotel Gosforth, Friday 25thSeptember, Nocho Del Sol will be a dazzling evening of food, drink, entertainment and fundraising. Always packed with high class entertainment, last year we wowed audiences at our Glitterball with performers including Birmingham based female vocal trio, Glimmer, who transported guests us to Hollywood and Broadway.
Our raffle and auction on the night is sure to tempt many with unmissable, money can't buy prizes and experiences, but there is also a chance to win big with our opening quiz too.
The perfect evening for all looking for a night on the town to celebrate a much-loved local charity, supporting children with disabilities in our region. We cannot wait for Nocho del Sol!


text:
La route nationale 42 () est une route nationale estonienne reliant  à . Elle mesure .

Tracé
 Comté de Tartu

 Vasula

Notes et références

42


Great investment opportunity for an investor or homeowner. Live downstairs and rent out the 1 bedroom, 1 bath apartment upstairs, or rent out both upstairs and down. Full kitchens in both units, breakfast bar in upper and separate dining area in lower. Both units have washer/dryer hookups- lower unit has separate laundry room. Each unit has a private entrance. Inside storage room and outside storage shed included. Convenient to Veterans Parkway and Manchester Expressway.


Deals with trucking start-ups reached a record high in 2016, with 55 deals worth more than $750 million in aggregate, CB Insights said in a recent report.
DB Schenker, based in Germany, is one of the world's largest and oldest logistics companies. It will use uShip's technology in Germany and throughout Europe.
The company's investment in uShip is its largest equity interest in a digital company, and "demonstrates just how serious we are about our digitation strategy," Thewes said.
Launched in 2004, uShip spent its first nine years focusing on shipping for consumers, such as a car owner transporting a new vehicle across the country. It has expanded to commercial shipping and is focusing on areas such as high-volume enterprise shippers and small to midsize businesses shipping less-than-truckload, or LTL, freight.
"These are businesses that aren't yet big enough to demand a special rate from a [carrier]," Mike Williams, chief executive of uShip, told Trucks.com.
Anything from pallets, cars, tractors, boats, household goods, livestock or excavators can be shipped. Irregularly shaped items purchased from a single seller on eBay, for example, can be picked up.
About 20 percent of trucks are completely empty at any one time, most often during a "back haul" in which a driver is returning after a delivery, Williams said.
While there aren't a lot of trucks sitting around doing nothing — as there are in the sharing economy for cars and homes — it's common for trucks to be only partially full, Larkin said.
And that's an area truckers may not be taking advantage of often because they don't realize the potential to generate extra money, he said.
Truckers are immediately paid upon delivery, compared with waiting 30 to 60 days for payment from other types of shippers, Williams said.
Uber Freight, another on-demand freight brokerage, says it will pay drivers within a week of delivery. Freight brokers Transfix and Loadsmart pay for loads within 48 hours.
UShip wouldn't say how many drivers use its app but said it has 750,000 providers worldwide. Its European headquarters are in Amsterdam.
Williams said he considers the other 18,000 freight brokers as uShip's competition, including Uber Freight, and that uShip is differentiating itself through its phone app that lets truckers deal directly with companies looking for shipping services. While uShip still serves as the middleman, it's a technological one.
"Logistics and shipping is ready and ripe for it," Williams said of freight tech and the $700-billion U.S. freight industry.
Competitor Flexport — a tech-enabled freight forwarder that works with small- and medium-size trucking companies around the globe — firmly believes the industry will benefit from the disruption.
There are a lot of inefficiencies in freight shipping, starting with the paperwork required, said Sanne Manders, chief operating officer for the company.
"Technology can take away the paper side of freight and replace it with digital solutions," Manders said.
UShip hasn't penetrated large businesses but for now is focusing on small businesses or individual customers, Larkin says. Uber Freight, by contrast, is targeting bigger accounts — an area uShip is staying away from, he says.
"My guess is [uShip] would be smart not to try to move up and play with the big boys," Larkin said.
While Uber Freight may ultimately move into autonomous trucking, it's unlikely uShip will get into self-driving trucks, Larkin said.
Uship is doing a great job while there is no competition in car shipping marketplaces. I think that within 2-3 years period we will see a couple of competitors try to take the market % from Uship. So far sites like citizenshippier or verytried are not that successful though.
Another way of Monopolizing the industry and putting everything in the pockets of the Big Guys. Awesome.


Cancer Survivor's Guide, tweaked by Mary H.
This dish disappeared quickly at a potluck. Imagine chunks of root vegetables, crispy outside and soft within, combined with Indian flavors and beans.
Oil a large shallow baking pan or line it with foil.
Place all the chopped vegetables in a large bowl and toss with seasoning mix until well coated. Drizzle with a little olive oil and toss again. Spread vegetables in a single layer on the baking pan. Roast for 10 minutes.
Turn vegetables over and roast for 10-30 minutes longer until evenly tender.
Heat the beans and stir them in. Serve hot.


text:
Anti-Semitism of the Third Kind
The Palestinians, the Philistines and Anti-Semitism Today
A three Part Series by World Mizrachi Director-General, Rabbi Doron Perez
Part 1 – Anti-Semitism of the Third Kind
There are often fortunate times in one's life where one learns a text or has an experience which is totally transformative. The way one views the world thereafter can never be the same. One feels enlightened, a paradigm is shifted, and the world and our place in it is understood in a deeper more meaningful way.
I had such an experience a number of years ago, when I came across a phenomenal commentary of the great Gaon of Vilna, found at the end of his commentary in Aderet Eliyahu at the end of the book of Habakkuk (3:14). I found this to be a most profound and piercing categorization of the three distinct types of anti-Semitism. More specifically, it elucidated for me in a penetrating way the biblical roots, meaning, context and purpose of modern-day anti-Zionism, the Palestinian people and the grand systematic delegitimization campaign against Israel. It totally shifted my world view.
The Three Categories of Anti-Semitism
The Gaon sees in the three biblical nations who bordered the Land of Israel – the Moabites, Edomites and Philistines – three archetypes of anti-Semitism and opposition to what the Jewish People stand for. He comments as follows:
"אלה השלושה הם שלושה מצרנים של ארץ ישראל. מואב ממזרח, אדום מדרום, פלישתים ממערב. מואב הוא אבות הטומאה שנטמאו בו ישראל, ואדום הוא אבות הנזיקין שהזיקו לישראל ביותר, ופלישתים הצרו לישראל במאוד ולא הניחו להם שום ממשלה ושלטון כמ"ש ,'וחרש לא ימצא וגו' (שמואל א' י"ג, י"ט)'… והם כנגד ג' אבות שבקדושה שהן כלל הכל."
"These three are the three enemies of the Land of Israel. Moav from the east, Edom from the south, and the Philistines from the west. Moav is the root of spiritual contamination which Israel was contaminated by, and Edom is the root of destruction who damaged Israel the most, and the Philistines harassed Israel very much and did not allow them any government or sovereignty, as it says 'Not a smith was to be found [in all the land of Israel] (Shmuel I, 13:19)'… And they all parallel the three principles of holiness which encompass everything."
Each one of these three nations – Moav, Edom and Plishtim represent a distinct category of opposition to everything Israel stands for. Indeed, as he mentions at the end of the quote, their opposition parallels the three principles of holiness which encompass everything the Jewish People and Judaism are about. He defines sharply the unique focus of each category and what the essence of their attack on the Jewish People is. Let us examine each one.
Moabite Anti-Semitism
The first one, exemplified by Moav, is termed by the Gaon as טומאה – spiritual contamination. This means that the Moabites' main and consistent aim was to corrupt and contaminate the spiritual and moral foundations of the Jewish People. This refers to our Torah, our Jewish way of life. Let us cite a number of examples of this category.
First and foremost amongst these is biblical Moav as it appears in the Chumash; an incident which covers an entire Parasha of the Torah – Parshat Balak (Numbers, Chapters 22-25). It was Balak, King of Moav, who partnered with the prophet Bilaam of Midyan and who together aimed to place spiritual curses on the Jewish People. It is important to note that their attack was not of a physical nature, but rather a spiritual one. When the multiple cursing attempts failed, Bilaam eventually advised Balak to entice the men of Israel through the promiscuous and idolatrous women of Moav in a crude attempt to cause the men of Israel to both worship the Moabite gods and commit acts of sexual immorality. It is crystal clear that the Moabites were attacking our value system – our spiritual essence – and not our physical existence.
This continued in the time of the Greeks who attempted to acculturize and assimilate the Jewish People through the enticing values of Hellenism. Antiochus, who issued the harsh decrees against so many values of the Torah (such as Brit Milah, observing Rosh Chodesh, the festivals, etc.) was not opposed at all to having Judah as a distinct province within the Seleucid Greek empire. It's just that he wished for them to follow the culture and value system of the Hellenist Greeks. Rebelling against this value system was akin to a decree of death and destruction. It is for this reason that the festival of Chanukah focuses less on the military and political victories, as great as they were, but rather on the miracle of the פח השמן – the pure and untainted oil which was found in the temple and used to light the menorah. The eternal lights of Chanukah symbolize the spiritual nature of the battle –the Light of Torah – and this particular victory over the Greek empire.
Over the last thousand years, a similar expression of Moabite anti-Semitism can be seen in the forced Christian conversions in the time of the Crusades and Inquisition. Once again, the Christians did not have a problem with the physical existence of the Jewish People, but rather with their value system – embracing a belief in Christ as the savior, and other foundations of the Christian creed. The root of all of these examples is one – an acceptance of the Jews' right to exist as a People but not to function as a distinct culture with their own Torah lifestyle and moral value system. To put it in another way, one could say that the Moabite prototype of anti-Semitism accepts the right of the Jewish People to exist and may even respect and love the Jews, provided that they live according to the Moabite/Hellenized/Christian culture and value system of the time.
The arrowhead of this type of Anti-Semitism is a hatred of תורת ישראל – the Torah of Israel
Edomite Anti-Semitism
The second and perhaps most diabolical and destructive type is that of Edom, of which Amalek himself is a descendant. The Edomites, as the Vilna Gaon explains, are the prototypes of those who cause נזק – physical damage and destruction – to the Jewish People. It was the Amalekites – whom we just remembered on Parashat Zachor and Purim – who attacked us when we came out of Egypt. They attacked innocent men, women and children, the weak and the infirm for no apparent reason but to cause death and destruction. The roots of this type of anti-Semitism can be found in the Midrashim about King Nimrod who wished to persecute and kill Avraham at the outset of his spiritual odyssey. Our sages also attribute this to Lavan, Yaakov's father-in-law, as we will read soon in the Haggada of Pesach. As it says in the Haggada:
"צא ולמד מה בקש לבן הארמי לעשות ליעקב אבינו. שפרעה לא גזר אלא על הזכרים, ולבן בקש לעקור את הכל…"
"Go and learn what it was that Lavan the Aramite wished to do to Yaakov our forefather. Pharaoh only decreed death on the males, whereas Lavan wanted to uproot everything…"
It is clear that Lavan, and to a lesser extent Pharaoh (as he 'only' wished to kill the males) wished to annihilate Yaakov and his descendants, and hence the Jewish People. Of course, the clearest example in Tanachic literature of Edomite anti-Semitism is the story of Haman and Purim. As we all know, Haman convinced Achashverosh to decree that every single Jew, men, women and children in all 127 countries of the kingdom should be killed at the same time. It was to be an unparalleled massacre of epic proportions, G-d forbid. In more recent times there have been two such attempts. The Chmielnicki massacres in the 1600's which left hundreds of thousands dead, and of course the most diabolic of all – Nazi Germany who's final solution left 6 million dead in the most unthinkable fashion. The Nuremberg Laws basically defined the Jewish People as a race, and as such even the most tenuous connection to Jewish race and identity was a death warrant to all; young and old, religious and secular, pious and assimilated. What unites the above expressions of Edomite anti-Semitism is a sinister and single-mindedness to physically annihilate the Jewish People – to kill each and every Jew regardless of their background or value system. A Jew has no right to exist physically, and must G-d forbid be annihilated.
The arrowhead of this type of Anti-Semitism is a hatred of עם ישראל – the people of Israel.
Philistine Anti-Semitism and Its Particular Relevance Today
These two forms of anti-Semitism were not new to me. Indeed, the way the Gaon presented them with short and sharp definitions and attributed them to Moav and Edom respectively I found to be quite ingenious. But at the same time, these are well known forms with ancient historical and biblical roots. For me, the great חידוש – novel idea – lay in the third category of anti-Semitism, which also has ancient roots, and I have to admit I had never seen it in this light before. An amazing paradigm shift, a new category of Anti-Semitism – The Philistine kind. The Vilna Gaon explains that the biblical Philistines had a single minded dedication to deny the Jewish People any ממשלה ושלטון – any government and sovereign presence in the land of Israel. Remarkably, throughout biblical history, spanning over a thousand years, the Philistines' main spiritual role was to oppose the Jewish People's claim to ownership, and therefore sovereignty, in this land. It was the Philistines and their King Avimelech who caused great challenges to both Abraham and Isaac as they sought to fulfill G-d's promise and establish a presence for their family in the land. Amazingly, it was the first two kings of Israel, Saul and David, as mentioned in both books of Samuel, who were consistently opposed by none other than the Philistines themselves. Both Saul and David attempted to create out of the disparate and disunited tribes of Israel one sovereign entity under a united kingship. It was this attempt at governance which evoked such harsh opposition from the Philistines. They refused to acknowledge any form of government and sovereign presence. Indeed, Saul and Jonathan his son were killed in this first War of Independence of the nascent kingdom, and David was miraculously saved from his confrontation with the Giant Philistine Goliath. He was to battle constantly during the entire time of establishing his Kingdom with the Philistine threat.
Incredibly, this is exactly the form that the modern-day Palestinian opposition to Zionism and Israel has taken. It bears the same name – Palestinian – from the ancient Philistines, as we will explore in next week's article. In so many ways, as we shall examine, the modern-day Palestinians and the anti-Zionist delegitimization campaign are a direct spiritual continuation of the ancient biblical role of the Philistines that the Vilna Gaon so sharply defined. There are layers of depth to this connection that will form the basis of next week's article.
This acute and uncanny insight of the Gaon sheds tremendous light on the systematic delegitimization campaign of Israel, the 'plight' of the Palestinian people, as well as the global trend of anti-Zionism today. Simply put, it is a hatred of the Jew because of their claim to ownership of the land and to be a sovereign presence within it.
Save children from #Hamas http://t.co/BwOoErP4UK
— ((I'mAHumanBeing)) (@x1Mmejor) March 22, 2015
Perhaps let me put it this way, as indeed Yasser Arafat once did. He articulated that he and the Palestinian people have nothing against the Jews. Indeed, he was admirable of the Jewish contribution to humanity and the similarity between Jewish and Muslim religious beliefs. He also pointed out how the Jews lived better under Muslim countries over the last thousand years than they did in Christian Europe. Indeed, it was difficult for the Jews in Arab countries to be the Dhimmi, a second-class citizen in Muslim countries. But in truth, compared to being banished from almost every single European country over the last thousand years, including pogroms, massacres, and culminating in the horrific Shoah, it is fair to say that Jews living in Muslim countries fared far better than those in Christian Europe. It was certainly the lesser of two evils.
Arafat continued that his problem with the Jews is not their existence as a people or their religion that he lauded, but rather their 'false' claim to the Arab lands of Palestine that they have stolen from the Palestinians. If the Jewish People would just leave their Zionist aspirations alone, relinquish sovereignty and any form of government between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, indeed they will be immediately accepted and embraced by the World Nations in general and the Palestinians in particular. It is clear that this type of anti-Semitism is unequivocally a hatred of the Jew as being a Zionist – claiming an ownership of and sovereign presence in the land of Israel.
The arrowhead of this type of Anti-Semitism is a hatred of the Jewish People's claim to ארץ – ישראל the Land of Israel.
The Land , People and Torah of Israel
So here we have it. The unique 3 pronged attack against the 3 major tenets of Jewish fate and destiny – the Land, People and Torah of Israel. These were the same 3 tenets of Mizrachi's Religious Zionist ideology – The land of Israel, the people of Israel and the Torah of Israel.
Remarkably as the Gaon said in his commentary above
"And they all (the 3 pronged attack of Moav, Edom and Plishtim) paralled the 3 principals of holiness which encompass everything (the Land, People and Torah of Israel)."
Astonishing!
The Blue Star and the Yellow Star
This modern anti-Zionist form of anti-Semitism has expressed itself over the last hundred years, with increasing ferociousness and fury, in a most hateful, barbaric and destructive way. It is so trenchant and acerbic that I would like to make the following observation which I do not believe is an exaggeration. I believe that it is as dangerous today for a Jew, particularly one who supports Israel, to be in Islamic cities around the world as it was for the Jews in Berlin and Warsaw in 1940. Imagine a Jew walking down a main public street, carrying an Israeli flag in Damascus, Beirut, Riyadh, Tripoli, Tunisia or Baghdad, not to mention Tehran, Gaza or Ramallah. What would be the fate of this Jew? It would probably be no different than the fate of the Jews in Warsaw, Berlin, Vienna, Munich and Krakow of the 1940s. The blue star, the Magen David of the Israeli flag, evokes today in much of the Arab world and beyond as much diabolical hatred as the yellow star of Nazi Germany and her environs in the 1940s. Incredibly, we are barely 70 years since the end of the Shoah, and this new-old irrational discriminative and destructive face of anti-Semitism has reared its head. All it has done is change color. The yellow star and Magen David of shame that has become the symbol of Jewish victimhood in the face of terrible Nazi hatred is now the blue star of the flag of Israel and the symbol of modern-day Zionism and Anti-Zionist hatred.
The Zionists and supporters of Israel, by their very beliefs, have created their own license to be discriminated against, killed and destroyed. They are portrayed as vermin, lowly thieves who have stolen the land of others, barbaric human-rights violators and the murderers of innocent women and children and therefore legitimate targets for ongoing annihilation. The great insight of the Vilna Gaon is that this seemingly new form of hatred in its current anti-Zionist Palestinian Israel-hatred guise is but a reincarnation of an ancient Philistine form going back thousands of years.
As mentioned we will explore in the article next week this new/old phenomena of a Palestinian people, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the delegitimization of Israel in light of the role of the Philistines throughout biblical history. This will enable us to get a clearer understanding of who the Philistines were, their spiritual heirs today – the Palestinians and their supporters, and indeed what is needed in order to appropriately respond.
As this article is part of a series entitled "Leadership Nuggets", I think it is critical to point out that one of the salient roles of a leader is to provide context to life's experiences. So often things which happen to us confuse and perplex us. The role of a leader is to penetrate the depths of these experiences and to create clarity through identifying trends and creating a historic context and a spiritual framework within which to place them, understand them, and better deal with them.


text:
Proposition 2 goes into effect at midnight and Utah patients can legally use some kinds of medical cannabis
Posted 5:21 pm, November 30, 2018, by Ben Winslow, Updated at 10:35PM, November 30, 2018
LOGAN, Utah -- At midnight, Hestevan Hennessy will legally be able to use medical cannabis.
"This is a big moment!" his mother, Desiree Hennessy, told FOX 13. "It's hard to maybe understand if you haven't been waiting. We fought hard. We fought hard with a lot of sick patients."
Desiree Hennessy (left) and her son, Hestevan, in an interview with FOX 13's Ben Winslow. (Image by Doug Eldredge, FOX 13 News)
Desiree Hennessy has managed to get some cannabis in a form legally allowed under Proposition 2, which goes into effect on Dec. 1. She said it may be able to treat some of her son's many medical conditions. Hestevan, 24, has cerebral palsy, seizures and nerve pain that some traditional medications don't help.
"We're excited to use it," she said.
Frustrated by the legislature's Proposition 2 replacement, medical cannabis patients may seek relief in West Wendover
Even though no dispensaries have opened in Utah and medical cannabis isn't readily available, patients like Hestevan can use it under what's called "affirmative defense." A legitimate patient who would be a candidate for medical cannabis as a treatment option can use under Prop. 2 without serious fear of prosecution.
But that may last for only the next 48 hours or so.
On Monday, the Utah State Legislature will vote to replace Prop. 2 with a "compromise," crafted by opponents and supporters of the ballot initiative. Under the bill, it will further limit the types of cannabis that patients can use and it would be distributed through a state-run system.
Smoking marijuana wouldn't be allowed, but vaping is. Oils, tinctures and creams are allowed. So are gummies, but only if they are in a cube shape. Buds must be sealed in blister packs.
In the final public hearing on Prop. 2 replacement bill, medical cannabis advocates blast 'compromise'
But until the state sets up a medical cannabis system by 2021, "affirmative defense" affords patients the ability to obtain cannabis (however they do) and not have to worry they are breaking so many laws.
Desiree Hennessy, who recently became the director of the Utah Patients Coalition (which sponsored Prop. 2), urged patients to "be smart."
"Use your medication. Use the right type. Don't smoke it," she said.
Prosecutors statewide are trying to figure out how they will handle "affirmative defense," both under Prop. 2 and the replacement bill being considered by the Utah State Legislature. Earlier this year, lawmakers made simple marijuana possession a misdemeanor crime (still punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine).
Medical marijuana sponsor Utah Patients Coalition transitions to a PAC
"People who are in need and hurting and ailing, we want them to be treated," said Cache County Attorney James Swink, who is also the president of the Statewide Association of Prosecutors.
Swink said prosecutors are looking closely at what will be allowed. They will also be training police officers on what to do. Marijuana for cannabis patients must be in a medical dosage form recognized by the state, he said.
Utah has previously legalized a "right to try" medical cannabis for terminally ill patients, and a form of oil for children with certain types of epilepsy. CBD oil has also been legalized as of this year.
People seeking to use an affirmative defense must have an established relationship with a physician who can recommend medical cannabis.
"The DUI laws will still be in effect, distribution laws will be in effect, possession laws will be in effect," Swink said.
But rather than haul a cancer patient before a judge and risk a public backlash, Swink also conceded that prosecutors will use discretion on who to prosecute.
People line up to pick up yard signs at a kickoff party in support of Utah's Proposition 2. (Photo courtesy Connor Boyack, Libertas Institute)
"If they meet the requirements of the statute? Absolutely, there won't be any charges filed," he told FOX 13.
Hennessy said patients anxious to try a form of medical cannabis need to be aware that they could be pulled over by police.
"The affirmative defense doesn't give you free access to be able to use cannabis. You have to obey the laws," she said. "And it only protects you in court. If you're driving around with medication and it's not the right type, it's not the right kind of oil, you're trying to smoke it, those things aren't protected."
Topics: cannabis, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, Proposition 2, utah, Utah Patient's Coalition, utah state legislature
Utah farmers worry they'll be squeezed out by 'Big Weed' for medical cannabis licenses
Utah Senate confirms medical marijuana board members
Utah police officers are getting new guidance on how to deal with medical cannabis
New plaintiffs in Prop. 2 lawsuit push for medical cannabis access in court and internet memes
Utah farmers are applying to grow medical cannabis
Medical cannabis plaintiff goes into hospice, Utah asks for Prop. 2 lawsuit to be dismissed
Odds of a settlement 'poor,' so lawsuit over medical cannabis ballot initiative headed for trial
Utah will treat medical cannabis just like any other prescription drug
Utah delays deadline to pick medical cannabis growers
All things marijuana at Utah cannabis conference
81 farmers apply to grow medical marijuana for the state of Utah
Utah says no collusion with LDS Church over medical cannabis initiative


text:
Diplocercidae is an extinct family of prehistoric coelacanth fishes which lived during the Devonian and Carboniferous period.

See also
 Serenichthys kowiensis (sometimes placed in this family)

References

Devonian bony fish
Carboniferous bony fish
Prehistoric lobe-finned fish families
Devonian first appearances
Carboniferous extinctions