YoureToast
06-08-2007, 06:31 PM
With all the threads re: the hearing today, this is a bit out of place, but I just keep asking myself this question and there must be a good answer. Help me out so I can move on.
Why is there so much focus on whether poker is a skill game? Rather, shouldn't the distinction be made between games played against the "house" and games in which the "house" simply provides a mechanism for consenting adults to play a gambling game?
Wouldn't the answer to that question get us to where we really need to be? That is that games such as blackjack and craps, which have a house edge and which pit the player against the house directly, are "bad" gambling games in which the "house" is taking advantage of the unbeknownst player. Whereas games like poker, backgammon and sports betting are games in which the house is providing a service to allow others to battle against each other? (Yes, I know that you could argue sports betting falls into the former category, but it is more like a market than a battle between you and the book).
Why is there so much focus on whether poker is a skill game? Rather, shouldn't the distinction be made between games played against the "house" and games in which the "house" simply provides a mechanism for consenting adults to play a gambling game?
Wouldn't the answer to that question get us to where we really need to be? That is that games such as blackjack and craps, which have a house edge and which pit the player against the house directly, are "bad" gambling games in which the "house" is taking advantage of the unbeknownst player. Whereas games like poker, backgammon and sports betting are games in which the house is providing a service to allow others to battle against each other? (Yes, I know that you could argue sports betting falls into the former category, but it is more like a market than a battle between you and the book).