Who We Are and What We Stand For
Poker is one of the most analytical games in the world, and we think writing about it should meet that same standard. This platform exists to give US players a reliable, no-nonsense resource for navigating the online poker landscape, from choosing the right site to understanding the fine print on bonuses and rakeback deals.
The US market for online poker is unlike any other. It’s a patchwork of state-by-state legislation, competing software ecosystems, and platforms that range from genuinely excellent to ones players are better off avoiding. Our job is to help you tell the difference.
The Editorial Team
Leading our editorial operation is Hal Petrosian, a poker industry writer and analyst with 13 years of experience covering everything from live tournament circuits to the regulatory shifts reshaping online play across the US. Hal got his start writing hand analysis columns for a respected gambling trade publication, and his work has since appeared across several well-regarded iGaming outlets.
His focus areas include Texas Hold’em and Omaha strategy, poker site reviews, bonus and rakeback analysis, and the evolving framework of state-level online poker legislation. He holds a bachelor’s degree in communications with a minor in mathematics, a combination that shows in how he translates complex equity concepts and software auditing into language real players can act on. Hal plays recreational live poker and follows the tournament circuit closely, which keeps his perspective grounded in actual player experience rather than theory alone.
The wider team includes editors and analysts who share the same commitment: honest evaluations that prioritize the reader’s interests over surface-level promotion.
What We Actually Do
Every poker site we cover is assessed through a structured process. We look at game traffic and variety, tournament schedules, software performance, security credentials, banking options, and the real value of promotions. Nothing is taken at face value, we dig into the details that affect day-to-day play.
Our content doesn’t stop at first impressions. The online poker space moves quickly, with platforms updating their software, adjusting rake structures, and entering new regulated states on a regular basis. Our team revisits reviews and updates them when the facts on the ground change.
Transparency on How We Operate
This platform earns revenue through affiliate partnerships with poker sites and related operators. We think it’s important to be upfront about that. Some of the platforms we review may pay a referral fee if a reader signs up through one of our links.
That said, commercial relationships do not determine how we rate or recommend platforms. Our editorial team assesses every site on its own merits, and we’ve declined to promote platforms that didn’t meet our standards regardless of the commercial arrangement involved.
The goal is always to give players an honest picture so they can make informed decisions. We believe that approach is better for readers, and better for the long-term credibility of this platform.
Why This Resource Exists
There’s no shortage of poker content online, but a lot of it is marketing copy dressed up as editorial. Players researching where to put their money deserve better than that. The founding principle here is simple: useful, accurate information about the US poker market, written by people who understand the game and the industry.
Whether you’re a recreational player looking for a low-stakes home game, a grinder evaluating rakeback programs, or a tournament player trying to find the best Sunday schedule, this platform is built to give you what you actually need to know.
Editorial Independence
Our reviewers are not paid by the platforms they assess, and ratings are not negotiable. Every recommendation reflects the team’s honest evaluation of a site’s strengths and weaknesses for US players. When a platform falls short on security, player protections, or game integrity, we say so.
We also take reader feedback seriously. If our assessments are wrong or outdated, we want to know. Accuracy matters more than consistency with a previous position.