poker and gambling - meant for ask TK

tiercel

Saw repeat of Mastercash last night where you responded to a topic I opened up last week - namely Is poker gambling ? You came out on the side of yes  it is and cited the legal cases. But the arguement and law ( which often gets it wrong ) is all based on cash play. Answer me one question TK . You are in a tournament and you have cashed . You cannot lose anything but you carry on playing to try to win the tourney and increase your winnings . You cannot lose what you have won and if there is no possibility of loss there is no gamble - but you are still playing poker. Ergo Poker is not gambling but a game that is used as a gambing medium.

Tikay10

In Response to poker gambling:

Saw repeat of Mastercash last night where you responded to a topic I opened up last week - namely Is poker gambling ? You came out on the side of yes  it is and cited the legal cases. But the arguement and law ( which often gets it wrong ) is all based on cash play. Answer me one question TK . You are in a tournament and you have cashed . You cannot lose anything but you carry on playing to try to win the tourney and increase your winnings . You cannot lose what you have won and if there is no possibility of loss there is no gamble - but you are still playing poker. Ergo Poker is not gambling but a game that is used as a gambing medium.
Posted by tiercel

Sorry Mr Tier, but that argument is seriously flawed. I have given evidence in two Court Cases on the "luck v gambling" issue, & in neither of them was the debate restricted to cash games.

The degree of luck in poker is open to debate, most reckon it to be between 60% & 80%, but whatever, we all know it includes a substantial luck quotient.

Personally, I'm not at all fussed whether it's deemed gambling or not, it matters not to me, but it's not possible to argue that luck does not play a part in poker. It does. So it must be deemed as gambling.

If you get all your money in pre-flop with two red aces, & your oppo calls with two black aces, & the board comes five spades - was that unskilful play, or (bad) luck? And there's never been a Tourney winner who has not got all his money in with A-K v Q-Q, or vice-versa. Again, relying on luck to hit or hold. We also hit sets or bust overpairs, having got our money in bad. Is that skill, or luck?

ckd

 that fact you have won money means nothing..... at the start of the tourny you was gambling to with money to win more money ..... even if you cash and carry on you are still gambling with your 1st stake to win more so yes its gambling theres no way round it playing poker for any stake is gambling regaurdless if you already made your money back

Tikay10

ckd gets it right.

ckd

 it would not be classed as gambling if it wasnt  , plus gaming commissions are alot more on it than us so if they have deemed it as gambling then it is

dav1964

Yes of course its gambling BUT i cannot think of a better way to gamble ;o)

PS if anyone wants the correct reult in englands next group game then look no further than dav1964 as i got
4-0 vs bulgaria correct at 12/1 and last nite i got the 3-1 away win in swissland at 16/1, dav

YOUNG_GUN

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

Yes of course its gambling BUT i cannot think of a better way to gamble ;o) PS if anyone wants the correct reult in englands next group game then look no further than dav1964 as i got 4-0 vs bulgaria correct at 12/1 and last nite i got the 3-1 away win in swissland at 16/1, dav
Posted by dav1964

SHOW OFF!!!!

dav1964

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : SHOW OFF!!!!
Posted by YOUNG_GUN

WHO ME??? ;O)))

waynec

It must be a game of skill, we have pro poker players. I agree there is a good percentage of luck in the game hence outdraws badbeats ect, however these Pros high skill factor over rides the outdraws which is why over the year they make money. The less skilful players lose over the year because they gamble more than the Pro which then makes it a game of luck.

We could say Doyle Brunson was lucky to win all those WSOP titles, millions of $ in cash game over the years but we all know he is one of the best players ever due to SKILL

I rest my case!

ckd

 alot of skill is involed but alot of gambling is as well 

 to me any game sport or anything else that you put money on in order to win more is gambling 

PKRPar

Of course Poker is a form of gambling. No matter what game your playing. Gambling doesn't have to be for money (although normally is) so using your example if you've already cashed in a tournament, your going to bet (gamble) 500 chips that you have a better hand than your opponent when you don't know what he/she has... thats called gambling. Your gambling chips!!!

Here's the official definition of gambling too:

Definitions of gambling on the Web:

• the act of playing for stakes in the hope of winning (including the payment of a price for a chance to win a prize); 
• Gambling is the of money or something of material value on an event with an uncertain outcome with the primary intent of winning additional money and/or material goods. Typically, the outcome of the wager is evident within a short period.
• An activity characterised by a balance between winning and losing that is governed by a mixture of skill and chance

There's nothing else to add. Thread can be closed

Tikay10

Yes, skill is involved, but luck is involved, too.

To test this theory, ask yourself this.

1) Who is the best Tourney player in the world?

2) If he or she entered Sunday's Primo, what chance would he/she have of winning it? The answer is "a better chance than you & me, he/she has an edge of a few %, but that's all". He/she would probably win it 1 time in 200 or 300 hundred, despite the fact that he (or she) is clearly better than everyone else in the field.

And that is EXACTLY why we can all win Poker Tourneys - the luck quotient evens up the skill edge that some players enjoy.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

Of course Poker is a form of gambling. No matter what game your playing. Gambling doesn't have to be for money (although normally is) so using your example if you've already cashed in a tournament, your going to bet (gamble) 500 chips that you have a better hand than your opponent when you don't know what he/she has... thats called gambling. Your gambling chips!!! Here's the official definition of gambling too: Definitions of gambling on the Web: the act of playing for stakes in the hope of winning (including the payment of a price for a chance to win a prize);  G ambling is the of money or something of material value on an event with an uncertain outcome with the primary intent of winning additional money and/or material goods. Typically, the outcome of the wager is evident within a short period. An activity characterised by a balance between winning and losing that is governed by a mixture of skill and chance There's nothing else to add. Thread can be closed
Posted by PKRPar

+1

tiggerovnh

Tiercel, Like you say if your in a toruny and cashed and are carrying on to get more winnings, you have to pay in the tourny which imo is still gambling anyone who doesnt see poker as gambling is pretty stupid, but thats just my opinion.

ckd

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

Yes, skill is involved, but luck is involved, too. To test this theory, ask yourself this. 1) Who is the best Tourney player in the world? 2) If he or she entered Sunday's Primo, what chance would he/she have of winning it? The answer is " a better chance than you & me, he/she has an edge of a few %, but that's all ". He/she would probably win it 1 time in 200 or 300 hundred, despite the fact that he (or she) is clearly better than everyone else in the field. And that is EXACTLY why we can all win Poker Tourneys - the luck quotient evens up the skill edge that some players enjoy.
Posted by Tikay10

to answer your question

 rich orford is the best tourny cash stt player in the world and i think he would win it yes

ckd

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : to answer your question  rich orford is the best tourny cash stt player in the world and i think he would win it yes
Posted by ckd

sorry just had a bang to the head

ajs4385

poker is gambling and dont tell anyone any different especially the nice people at hmrc.

BrownnDog

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

poker is gambling and dont tell anyone any different especially the nice people at hmrc.
Posted by ajs4385

ROFL

beaneh

Poker isn't gambling. it should be taxed.

now wheres my lifelong reeeeeebate!!!?

ckd

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

Poker isn't gambling. it should be taxed. now wheres my lifelong reeeeeebate!!!?
Posted by beaneh

we regreat to inform you that you have not given us any info that we asked 4 and the amout you have paid in taxs is lower than it should be

 YOU OW US £7.777.777

 PLEASE PAY WITHIN 28 DAYS

 YOUR VERY BEST PAL

 THE TAXMAN

loonytoons

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

It must be a game of skill, we have pro poker players. I agree there is a good percentage of luck in the game hence outdraws badbeats ect, however these Pros high skill factor over rides the outdraws which is why over the year they make money. The less skilful players lose over the year because they gamble more than the Pro which then makes it a game of luck. We could say Doyle Brunson was lucky to win all those WSOP titles, millions of $ in cash game over the years but we all know he is one of the best players ever due to SKILL I rest my case!
Posted by waynecure

Would you say horse racing is gambling or skill? We have professional horse layers/tipsters, who make money using 'skill' to wager on horse race outcomes, and less skillful layers who lose over the year, would we say that jp macmanus who makes a fortune in horse race betting  is skillful or lucky? So if you think poker is skillful, its no more skillful than horse betting, which i think is gambling - i rest my case!

beaneh

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : Would you say horse racing is gambling or skill? We have professional horse layers/tipsters, who make money using 'skill' to wager on horse race outcomes, and less skillful layers who lose over the year, would we say that jp macmanus who makes a fortune in horse race betting  is skillful or lucky? So if you think poker is skillful, its no more skillful than horse betting, which i think is gambling - i rest my case!
Posted by loonytoons

wow

if you think horse racing is fair and that 'skill' wins through you're very foolish. skill is information not some teachable/learnable knowledge.

horse/dog racing is rigged!!! like actually proper RNG rigged not 'I lost a hand it's rigged'.

yb

Tbh I think horseracing and poker are both all about luck, unlike roulette.

I've found a system....

beaneh

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

Tbh I think horseracing and poker are both all about luck, unlike roulette. I've found a system....
Posted by yb

horse racing is easy

know either jockeys/or owners.

find out if the horse is trying/its been prepared to win this race bet if so do not otherwise lol,

so ridic how it's given any respect when everyone knows it's dodgy.

the mini horses are even worse, oh look the massive favourite is about to win quick hit the button that breaks the rabbit so the race is voided. oh look how regularly that happens lol (also tbf I have a brilliant strat for mini horses, watch for the one that does the biggest poo on the walk round the track at the start - never fails!)

dav1964

This thread is gettin away from the fact i stated in my 1st post

DOES ANYONE WANT THE CORRECT SCORE FOR THE NEXT ENGLAND GROUP GAME?

loonytoons

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : horse racing is easy know either jockeys/or owners. find out if the horse is trying/its been prepared to win this race bet if so do not otherwise lol, so ridic how it's given any respect when everyone knows it's dodgy. the mini horses are even worse, oh look the massive favourite is about to win quick hit the button that breaks the rabbit so the race is voided. oh look how regularly that happens lol (also tbf I have a brilliant strat for mini horses, watch for the one that does the biggest poo on the walk round the track at the start - never fails!)
Posted by beaneh

Thats why i only bet on the virtual horses, much more skill involved

tiercel

You may call me stupid but a degree in maths says I'm not.  You may consider me wrong but provoking a discussion is part of the fun and calling me stupid says more about you than me.

My point is simple. If you cant lose anything you're not gambling. Simple . You may not agree but that is how I see it .

Because the established opinion is against you doesn't mean you are wrong.  People once believed the world was flat. Many churches will tell you Adam and Eve were real. Over and over the established authority is proved wrong.

 The arguement that you are gambling from your original stake ( actually a buy-in ) falls because once you have cashed you cannot lose. You have that money back.
 
The point from there is that when you cant lose, your strategy is freed up and you are totally committed to the strategy of your opponents and not on the odds related to an event.  The game has changed. The important thing is to think it through . Its the difference between probability and odds.  

I know I am on a limb but it is not the first time and last time in the end I was proved right. 





n Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

Tiercel, Like you say if your in a toruny and cashed and are carrying on to get more winnings, you have to pay in the tourny which imo is still gambling anyone who doesnt see poker as gambling is pretty stupid, but thats just my opinion.
Posted by tiggerovnh

Gavinxxxx

IMO Poker is gambling, theres no getting around it.

I think its 85% luck and 15% skill

That 15% skill seems little but infact when your playing it matters a whole lot.

yb

On that basis tiercel the lottery is also not gambling, because once the first 4 balls come out correctly for you you know that you cannot lose. Honestly your argument saying that cash poker is gambling but tournament poker is not makes no sense I'm afraid.

yb

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:

In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : horse racing is easy know either jockeys/or owners. find out if the horse is trying/its been prepared to win this race bet if so do not otherwise lol, so ridic how it's given any respect when everyone knows it's dodgy. the mini horses are even worse, oh look the massive favourite is about to win quick hit the button that breaks the rabbit so the race is voided. oh look how regularly that happens lol (also tbf I have a brilliant strat for mini horses, watch for the one that does the biggest poo on the walk round the track at the start - never fails!)
Posted by beaneh

LOL

whenever you get this dodgy info send me a quick PM, I want some easy monies!!!! lol

tiercel

With all respect to the grand master you don't answer  my fundamental . Inherent in the term " Gambling" is the risk of loss . If you have cashed in a tournament and have at least got your money back , there is no risk of loss therefore no gambling except in the the general sense of taking a chance. If you are knocked out of a tournament after cashing you have not lost anything. This debate is not about luck v skill ( that depends on the players and I absolutely bow to your understanding of it ) its about the nature of the tournament and the way you approach the game especially when you reach the money - When you place a " bet " are you gambling on his hand versus yours or are you challenging him to a fight ?
Me , I don't think there is necessarily a right answer either way. I know that when I get knocked out of a tourney I have lost the game - not the money - that was gone as soon as the tournament started. so I am not gambling I am playing to beat the other players.  

n Response to Re: poker gambling:

In Response to poker gambling : Sorry Mr Tier, but that argument is seriously flawed. I have given evidence in two Court Cases on the "luck v gambling" issue, & in neither of them was the debate restricted to cash games. The degree of luck in poker is open to debate, most reckon it to be between 60% & 80%, but whatever, we all know it includes a substantial luck quotient. Personally, I'm not at all fussed whether it's deemed gambling or not, it matters not to me, but it's not possible to argue that luck does not play a part in poker. It does. So it must be deemed as gambling. If you get all your money in pre-flop with two red aces, & your oppo calls with two black aces, & the board comes five spades - was that unskilful play, or (bad) luck? And there's never been a Tourney winner who has not got all his money in with A-K v Q-Q, or vice-versa. Again, relying on luck to hit or hold. We also hit sets or bust overpairs, having got our money in bad. Is that skill, or luck?
Posted by Tikay10