I'd like to discuss the issue of electromechanical devices. VDACS's rigid restriction on employing technology in poker operations negatively influences dealers, players, and charities. In the 21st century, technology serves to better all aspects of our lives. By incorporating technology software and hardware in the game's operation, it becomes more efficient, enjoyable, and precise. Relying on technology proves to be much more beneficial for preserving the game's integrity than manually recording everything and risking human mistakes. The proposed 11VAC20-20-90.O should be abolished.
I'd like to comment on concurrent tournaments. VDACS'; ban negatively affects players, dealers, and charities as it exceeds their authority and isn't supported by statute. This unwarranted limitation on legal poker events seems unjustified without a pressing regulatory necessity to protect charitable gaming. Why do the regulations forbid concurrent tournaments while the Code permits them? A sensible fix is to strike proposed 11VAC20-30-90.F.
I'd like to discuss the use of proceeds amount. VDACS insists charities follow 11VAC20-20-110 for its use of proceeds formula, which damages charitable poker. Charities would find it challenging to host tournaments, as they wouldn't raise enough money for expenses and the necessary use of proceeds. Reviewing a simple tournament budget demonstrates this formula's ineptitude. The resolution is to implement the newly accepted pull tab formula for poker.
