UK licensed poker sites: UKGC authorisation, rake structures, and Domain Scores

How UK poker licensing differs from other remote gambling categories

All online poker offered to UK players legally requires a Remote Casino Operating Licence from the UKGC. That puts poker in the same regulatory category as online slots and table games. But poker isn't a house-edge product. The operator doesn't have a position against the player. That structural difference carries regulatory implications that the licence type alone doesn't surface.

The UKGC's Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice apply fully to remote casino licensees, including those running poker exclusively. Social responsibility conditions under LCCP SR Code 3.4.1 require interaction monitoring, self-exclusion facility access, and affordability assessment where harm indicators are present. These apply regardless of whether the game is peer-to-peer or house-against-player.

Peer-to-peer gameplay and what it means for the licensed entity

In online poker, players compete against each other, not against the house. The operator's role is to provide the platform, deal the cards, and take a cut of each pot (the rake) or a tournament entry fee. That's categorically different from casino games where the house has a mathematical edge on every hand or spin.

The licensed entity is responsible for ensuring the games are fair, that the software operates as described, and that integrity systems are in place. It isn't taking losses when a player wins. But that doesn't reduce its regulatory obligations. The UKGC treats game integrity obligations with the same weight regardless of whether the game is peer-to-peer or house-edge, and collusion between players or software manipulation still falls on the licensed operator to prevent and detect.

What the Remote Casino Operating Licence doesn't distinguish

The UKGC licence register doesn't flag whether a remote casino licensee runs poker, slots, live dealer games, or some combination. A site running only poker and a site running only table games both appear under the same licence category code. That means the licence register is a starting point, not a conclusion, when trying to identify which operators are actually running UK poker operations.

Saferwager's site profiles include game type data that resolves this. Domain entries categorised as poker reflect actual product offering rather than the broad licence category those operators hold.

Rake structures and how poker operators make money differently

Poker operators generate revenue through rake, not from the outcomes of individual hands. That distinction matters for understanding the regulatory and commercial model of a licensed poker operation.

Rake is a percentage of each cash game pot, taken by the operator before the pot is awarded to the winner. Most operators cap rake per hand, and the exact structure varies by game type, stakes level, and whether the site is running a cash game or a tournament. Tournament entry fees replace rake in most competition formats, with the operator retaining a percentage as a fee.

Cash game rake versus tournament fees

In cash games, the site takes a small percentage from each contested pot, typically between two and five per cent up to a capped maximum. High-volume players at low stakes can find the rake percentage is a material cost relative to the expected value of playing. The cap structure limits operator extraction on large pots.

Tournament formats work differently. The entry fee includes a stated rake component, for example a £10 tournament might carry a £9 prize pool contribution and a £1 operator fee. Sit-and-go formats and multi-table tournaments both use this structure. The operator's revenue is predictable on a per-entrant basis, regardless of tournament outcomes.

Network poker versus standalone rooms

Most UK poker sites don't run their own independent player pool. They license software from a poker network and access shared player liquidity across multiple branded sites. The iPoker Network, the Microgaming Poker Network, and the GGPoker Network are the largest platforms serving the UK market. An individual branded poker room on one of these networks is typically operated by a UKGC licensee but isn't generating its own independent games.

This matters for regulatory accountability. The UKGC licences the operator running the branded site, not the network provider. If the network's software has integrity issues, the licensed operator is still responsible under UKGC licence conditions, because LCCP Technical Standards require that the software used by a licensee meets the Commission's requirements. A network integrity failure doesn't transfer liability away from the operator holding the UK licence.

What standalone poker rooms indicate about Domain Scores

Standalone poker operations that don't rely on shared network liquidity tend to be older, more established brands. PokerStars and 888poker both operate proprietary software with their own player pools. Their domains are typically aged, with long registration histories, and their technical configuration reflects years of infrastructure investment. That correlation between operational independence and technical maturity shows up in Domain Score data for established poker domains.

Rake cap

A maximum amount of rake an operator takes from a single pot, regardless of the pot size. Caps prevent the operator from taking disproportionate cuts from very large pots. Structures vary by site and stake level.

Rakeback

A percentage of rake returned to players as a loyalty incentive. Common in online poker, regulated under LCCP bonus terms and consumer terms requirements where offered.

Network liquidity

The shared player pool across multiple branded sites running on the same software network. Determines how many active tables and tournaments are available at any given time.

Game integrity standards specific to online poker

Poker introduces integrity risks that don't exist in house-edge games. Collusion between players, use of automated bots, real-time assistance software, and hand history manipulation are all threats to fair play that a licensed operator is required to detect and prevent.

The UKGC's Technical Standards require that game outcomes are fair and cannot be manipulated by the operator or by players. For poker, that obligation extends to active monitoring for player collusion patterns, detection of software assistance tools that give individual players advantages, and logging of hand histories in a form that enables investigation.

Collusion detection obligations under LCCP

Collusion in online poker means two or more players sharing hand information in real time to gain an advantage over others at the table. It's a breach of the operator's game fairness obligations under LCCP Technical Standards condition 1. Operators are required to have systems in place to detect statistical anomalies that indicate coordinated play.

Chip dumping is a related variant, where a colluding player deliberately loses chips to a partner. Detection relies on network-level analysis of play patterns across accounts, often cross-referenced with shared registration data (email addresses, IP addresses, payment methods). A licensed operator that doesn't run this kind of active monitoring isn't meeting its licence conditions.

Bot policy and software assistance restrictions

Automated bots that play poker with no human input are prohibited on all UKGC-licensed platforms. Operators are required to detect and suspend accounts using automated play software. Beyond full bots, the question of real-time assistance software (programs that calculate pot odds or opponent ranges during live play) is contested. Most UK-licensed sites prohibit these tools in their terms but detection is technically challenging.

The UKGC's position on player assistance software is that the operator's own terms must be clear and enforced. An operator whose terms prohibit assistance software but takes no steps to detect its use isn't meeting the spirit of its licence conditions on fair play. Enforcement against operators for software assistance failures is relatively rare in public UKGC records, but the obligation is real.

Hand history access and player verification

Licensed operators must provide players with access to their hand histories on request. This is a transparency requirement, not just a customer service feature. Hand histories enable players to verify that cards were dealt randomly and that the outcome of each hand is consistent with the cards shown. Operators using independently certified random number generators meet the base requirement, but the ability to audit outcomes at the player level is a separate and meaningful access right.

1. Players can request hand histories for any session played on a licensed UK site.
2. Operators must retain hand history data for a minimum period sufficient to support player complaints and regulatory investigations.
3. Third-party RNG certification doesn't remove the operator's obligation to provide individual session data on request.
4. Disputes about hand outcomes are handled under the ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) framework required by UKGC licence conditions.

How Domain Scores read for UK poker sites

UK-licensed poker sites show distinct patterns in Domain Score data compared with casino or betting operators. The sector has a relatively small number of active licensed operations, and those that do hold UKGC authorisation tend to be established brands rather than newer entrants.

Domain age is a consistent differentiator. Poker sites that have been operating in the UK market for a decade or longer carry domain registration histories that score well on the age component of the Domain Score. Newer casino brands launching under the same remote casino licence typically don't carry that history.

What older domain registration reflects for poker operations

Domain age in the Domain Score rewards continuous, uninterrupted registration history. A poker domain that has been registered for many years, with consistent WHOIS records and no ownership breaks, accumulates age points that newly registered domains can't replicate immediately. The largest UK-accessible poker brands have been trading for long enough that their domain history reflects decades of continuous operation.

This is partly a function of the poker industry's structure. There are fewer UK-licensed poker operations than casino or sports betting sites, and the established names haven't been replaced by a rotating crop of new brands at the rate seen in casino. The relative stability of the sector means domain histories in the poker category tend to be older than the site distribution average.

SSL and technical configuration across poker domains

Poker sites handling real-money transactions and player account data are required to maintain secure connections. The SSL and DNS security components of the Domain Score reflect how well individual sites have configured their infrastructure. Established poker operators running proprietary platforms typically score well on SSL grade because they're running dedicated infrastructure that's been professionally maintained over time.

Smaller or newer poker operations sometimes run on shared hosting or third-party platforms where the operator has less direct control over SSL configuration. Where those technical gaps appear in Domain Score data, they reflect the infrastructure reality rather than any deliberate decision to reduce security.

How WHOIS transparency appears in poker domain records