Is poker gambling?
 

Luck is apparent in most any game out there to varying degrees, but at what point does a game become gambling and stop being one of skill?

Certainly Poker allows for more skill than a game such as roulette, however, perhaps less skill than a game like chess? Has Poker reached a point where it can be considered a game primarily skill?

Personally, I see skill as being an integral part of poker. The fact that consistent winners (professional players) exist, is reason enough to deem it a game primarily of skill.

Assuming that it *is* a game of skill, potentially a case could be made should the whole legislative move against online gambling start enforcing itself on a larger scale.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Poker is a form of gambling for the majority of poker players. If a player is deemed to be a losing player due to a lack of skill, he is certainly a gambler, not a poker player. Although poker can certainly mastered enought to turn a steady profit, if a person does not posses the necessary skills he may as well be playing in the pit.

mike
TheRailbirds

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

It is a mistake to think that poker isn't gambling.

Why do you think gambling and skill are mutually exclusive?

Poker is ABSOLUTELY gambling. For everyone. Always. But just because it's gambling doesn't mean that there isn't skill, or that a skillful player can't be a consistent winner. There are many gambling games that involve far less skill -- or no skill. Poker, on the other hand, involves a high level of skill. But this doesn't mean that luck isn't part of the equation and it doesn't mean that it isn't gambling.


A skillful player will make many, many +EV moves while playing poker. Sometimes, he will still lose pots that he is favored to win -- bad luck. But, on average, over the long term, a +EV move will make him money.

Embrace the Power of \"And\"
 

Poker is a game of skill. And, poker is a gambling game.

Knowing when to drive the betting hard because you're getting an overlay on every dollar you put into the pot is a skill. You're still gambling on whether or not you will have the best hand at the showdown.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

On the contrary, I certainly don't think luck and skill are mutually exclusive traits in a game. My theory is that an amount of each is in all games, be it chess or dice. I do however, think that there are various and distinct amounts of each in the games. All games having a unique ratio of one to the other.

I mean to say, at what ratio of skill:luck does a game become one of skill or chance.

Sure, Poker certainly has elements of chance, and as you said there is also high level of skill. I am going past that it 'just has both', I am ascertaining wether one is more prevalent than the other. Also, if you can conclude that one is more apparent than the other, how much more does it have to be in order to make the particular game either chance or skill based?

You are saying poker is just a game of chance, that has elements of skill, I agree, however, surely one trait is dominant. If we can establish one as a dominant trait, how much more prevalent than the other does it have to be in order to associate the game with it?

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

The dealing of the cards and which ones will appear in your hand is 100% luck, however, the betting process would be almost 100% skill, as the amount you 'choose' to bet (or not bet) will have a direct result on how successful a player is, and unlike games such as roulette, the amount you bet can change the outcome. There is also the other aspect to the game of reading other players via tells etc.

The question could be is the aspect of the cards, or the aspects of bet decision and opponent analysis more integral to poker?

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

The degree of skill involved isn't relevant. So long as the outcome is uncertain and there is something of value at stake, it is gambling.

So is poker gambling? You bet it is.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

If you don't view poker as gambling then there is very little chance you can play it well.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Is investing in the stock market gambling?

Is playing poker much different than investing in the stock market?

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is investing in the stock market gambling?

Is playing poker much different than investing in the stock market?

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker is totally different then playing the stock market. First of all when playing the stock market...the market is the reason that your going to lose money and the decisions that are made in this world. You could lose all of your money in the stock market because you slept in one morning and didn't check the stocks. While poker you also control how much your willing to lose but the end result is totally random and you or anyone else has any control on what cards are going to be flipped. The stock market there are a board of directors or Alan Greenspan making the decisions that affect your money and it is very rarely random.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

With that theory, everything would be considered gambling, which is probably not far from the truth, but for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't make sense. When is an outcome of a game ever certain? and when is something of value, be it pride/glory, a trophy, money etc., not at stake?

Both elements are apparent in all games, so why is one game gambling and another one of skill?

Surely the amount of skill *is* relevant, if it weren't you would have to group a game of dice in with a game of chess.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Both are very similar. In both you are making decisions and predicting what something is going to do in the future. With stocks, a trader studies the companies and analyses managerial aspects and future prospects etc. and buys stock betting that it will either go up or down. In poker, a player will analyze his players looking for tells, analyzing their wagered amounts during various betting rounds and comparing the data to their own hands strength, finally betting on what will happen.

Both the stock prices and the cards that are dealt are random occurrences technically, however, in both stock trading and poker, players can develop a good idea of what will happen.

Both stock trading and poker are based around making educated guesses, analyzing the data in front of you and predicting what will happen.

There are elements of chance in both, but a great deal of skill is required to succeed consistently.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

There obv is gambling in it but id say it was more a skill game.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Both stock trading and skilled poker playing are exercises of value judgement. A successful investor finds a greater value in a stock than the current sale price. A successful poker player finds greater value in his hands than the price offered by his opponents and the pot. Poker is the equivalent of a specialized market for investing.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

What luck is involved in chess?

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
What luck is involved in chess?

[/ QUOTE ]

The other guy could collapse dead.

Poker is a calculated risk. Yes, there is skill involved in recognizing advantages, but once the money's in, it's all upto the cards.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Regarding an earlier post comparing poker and stock investing. Poker and "playing" the stock market are not that different. In fact, in both poker and stocks there is tremendous variance in the short-term but results are predictable in the long run. The market has averaged steady positive returns over the last several decades. As such, a long term investor with a time horizon of at least 5-10 years would have most likely made a strong profit. However, the day to day value of the stock or stock index would have been quite unpredictable. Up one day, down the next.... No matter how solid the poker player, they will experience quite a bit of profit/loss variance day to day; much like the day-to-day swings seen by an individual stock. However, over the long run a good company and solid poker player will yield profits. Both are gambling. Having reasonable certainty that the investment will yield a positive return in the long run or that you are a winning poker player does not change that fact.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
What luck is involved in chess?

[/ QUOTE ]
*Which color you are allocated.
*Which opponent you will face.
*Wether your opponent implements a strategy you are familiar with or not.
*As dano2769 said, your opponent could drop dead during a game.

There is an element of luck in all games, just more in some than others. The amount of luck and skill in each game is, however, unique; some possessing more of one than the other. Chess for example has a high amount of skill compared to luck, where as dice has a high amount of luck compared to skill. Both have an element of it though.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Poker is a game that involves a lot of skill. And yes, it is still gambling.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
With that theory, everything would be considered gambling, which is probably not far from the truth, but for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't make sense. When is an outcome of a game ever certain? and when is something of value, be it pride/glory, a trophy, money etc., not at stake?

Both elements are apparent in all games, so why is one game gambling and another one of skill?

Surely the amount of skill *is* relevant, if it weren't you would have to group a game of dice in with a game of chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to be thinking along one dimension only. Like this:
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
Low Skill poker chess High Skill
Low Certainty-------|-------|----&gt;High Certainty
Gambling Not Gambling

I say this is more realistic:

High
Stakes
^ poker chess
| ^ ^
| | |
| | |
| | |
|------------|--------------|-------&gt;High Certainty
Low Stakes High Skill
Low Certainty
Low Skill
</pre><hr />
Where the amount of "gamble" is the distance from the origin and can be anywhere along the separate vertical lines for poker or chess. So nonzero stakes are required for gambling to occur and whether or not there is anything at stake is separate from the amount of skill involved.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is investing in the stock market gambling?

Is playing poker much different than investing in the stock market?

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker is totally different then playing the stock market. First of all when playing the stock market...the market is the reason that your going to lose money and the decisions that are made in this world. You could lose all of your money in the stock market because you slept in one morning and didn't check the stocks. While poker you also control how much your willing to lose but the end result is totally random and you or anyone else has any control on what cards are going to be flipped. The stock market there are a board of directors or Alan Greenspan making the decisions that affect your money and it is very rarely random.

[/ QUOTE ]
You have a total lack of understanding of the stock market and poker.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is investing in the stock market gambling?

Is playing poker much different than investing in the stock market?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Poker is totally different then playing the stock market. First of all when playing the stock market...the market is the reason that your going to lose money and the decisions that are made in this world. You could lose all of your money in the stock market because you slept in one morning and didn't check the stocks. While poker you also control how much your willing to lose but the end result is totally random and you or anyone else has any control on what cards are going to be flipped. The stock market there are a board of directors or Alan Greenspan making the decisions that affect your money and it is very rarely random.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


You have a total lack of understanding of the stock market and poker.



[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for explaining why [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Regarding an earlier post comparing poker and stock investing. Poker and "playing" the stock market are not that different. In fact, in both poker and stocks there is tremendous variance in the short-term but results are predictable in the long run. The market has averaged steady positive returns over the last several decades. As such, a long term investor with a time horizon of at least 5-10 years would have most likely made a strong profit. However, the day to day value of the stock or stock index would have been quite unpredictable. Up one day, down the next.... No matter how solid the poker player, they will experience quite a bit of profit/loss variance day to day; much like the day-to-day swings seen by an individual stock. However, over the long run a good company and solid poker player will yield profits. Both are gambling. Having reasonable certainty that the investment will yield a positive return in the long run or that you are a winning poker player does not change that fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree and relates to my question "is poker gambling?" Trading stock is not referred to gambling as a technical term and it is a respected profession that you can take courses for at university etc. However, Poker on the other hand, which can be equated to trading on so many levels and is essentially no different risk:skill wise, is referred to as gambling.

It's essentially a stigma that has been attached to the game of poker as it's played in casinos. If stock trading was a casino game, I'm sure it would be labelled as gambling too [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Is all that determines something as being gambling or not where it is played?

Poker has just been labelled because of its context.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

The stock market is gambling if you have all/most of your money in stocks poker is gambling if you have all/most of your money in poker.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What luck is involved in chess?

[/ QUOTE ]
*Which color you are allocated.
*Which opponent you will face.
*Wether your opponent implements a strategy you are familiar with or not.
*As dano2769 said, your opponent could drop dead during a game.

There is an element of luck in all games, just more in some than others. The amount of luck and skill in each game is, however, unique; some possessing more of one than the other. Chess for example has a high amount of skill compared to luck, where as dice has a high amount of luck compared to skill. Both have an element of it though.

[/ QUOTE ]

you seem really really dumb.

ness

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The stock market is gambling if you have all/most of your money in stocks poker is gambling if you have all/most of your money in poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid. If Ted Turner offers to flip a coin against Bill Gates under the condition that if it's heads Ted wins $1 and if it's tails Bill wins $100 then they're still gambling even though an insignificant amount of money is at risk for both of them.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

It is, or can be, gambling with an edge, IMO. That's a good point about the internet ban threat not being applicable to poker. Many casino games contain skill though, so don't know why it would apply differently to poker.

Except for this: The IRS acknowledged the existence of professional gambling some time back, establishing it, potentially, as legitimate as selling cars. Since qualifying is most widely recognized for poker, banning internet poker, it could be argued, is like banning any other business from the web.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

The difference between poker and the stock market is that poker is a game of incomplete information, and picking stocks is (in an ethical business environment) analysis with complete information.

There is an element of luck in investing (9/11 happens) but that is "external" to the picking of individual assets, balancing portfolios etc. The element of luck is intrinsic to poker.

Poker is gambling, investing isnt (again in perfect, ethical capital markets).

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

In finance class in college we were taught the distinctions between investing, speculating and gambling. There is a difference as murky as it might seem. The major reason the stock market is investing is that for a majority of long term investors, historically the market is +EV. This is clearly not true of poker. It doesn't matter that for a small percentage of poker players, playing is +EV.

So, it falls into either speculating or gambling. The line between these 2 is much harder to draw. Speculating is usually riskier than investing and has a negative EV. but with a chance of making excessive profits. It also contains an element of using knowledge.

Gambling is usually defined as an activity with little or no skill and almost all luck.

I guess you can say that different players fall into different categories, but the game itself falls somewhere between gambling and speculating.

P.S. I do not think that there is enough luck in chess worth discussing. It is a game of skill.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

That's a good explanation, candyman.

Between gambling, speculating, and investing, I think chess would be speculating. It's a game of no luck whatsoever, but if you're very very good at it, you'll win nearly every time and thus, +EV.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

yes

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

in the short run luck can be a huge factor in poker, even more than skill, but in the very very long run luck is not a factor.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Before to decide if poker is gambling, you have to define these Term. Lets define it as a game where the the winner is not the best player seperate the person who had luck. In the short run this is it, but on the long run the player who playes better Poker as his opponents will be the winner.

Re: Embrace the Power of \"And\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is a game of skill. And, poker is a gambling game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any event of which the outcome is not predetermined and there's money on the line is gambling.

Playing chess isn't gambling because you aren't risking money.

If you play chess for money, you are gambling though. No matter how much better you are than your opponent.

There's no question that poker is gambling. Any argument against this fact is based in a misuse of the concept of gambling.

As long as there's an element of chance involved and a wager on the line, the thing in question is gambling, whether there's skill involved or not.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

Yes, but it's all about definitions.

I think the meaning of the word gambling is not just "wagering money or something of material value on an event with an uncertain outcome with the primary intent of winning additional money or material goods" as e.g. Wikipedia defines it. With this definition, most of our economic activities would be gambling.

In addition to this definition, "gambling" usually refers to some "abnormal risky activies", i.e. situations where the outcome is uncertain AND the stakes are very high considering what would be considered as normal business / investing by the very same person defining the activity as gambling.

In this sense poker would be gambling when you play with an insufficient bankroll. The definition, however, does not answer the original question.

As I see it, the word gambling, in the meaning it's used by the general audience, usually also refers to playing a game where the outcome is so uncertain, that most people would consider it a game of luck.

As such, poker is gambling. But there are good and bad gamblers, not just lucky and unlucky ones. Since everyone should be as lucky as everyone else in the long run, skill will prevail.

The failure to understand that gambling may also involve a certain amount of skill is why the word "gambling" means different things to different people.

btw: The stock market is of course very similar to poker it's just somewhat "easier" than poker, since the winner / loser ratio is not 1 but somewhat bigger due to economic growth in the long run (in a world where alternative investments are not considered and investments are compared to having you money under your pillow). "Unskilled stock market investors" use this to their advantage by choosing how long a "game" will last (by e.g. keeping their stocks and waiting for an upswing). By reducing the amount of "games" (i.e. making very long 10-15 year investments well diversified) the overall economic growth will usually generate positive returns. In poker the skill factor will dominate much faster since you are able to play (or have to play) many hands in a relatively short period of time. This is why most stock-market investors are small winners while most poker players are small loosers.

Re: Embrace the Power of \"And\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
Any event of which the outcome is not predetermined and there's money on the line is gambling.

Playing chess isn't gambling because you aren't risking money.

If you play chess for money, you are gambling though. No matter how much better you are than your opponent.

There's no question that poker is gambling. Any argument against this fact is based in a misuse of the concept of gambling.

As long as there's an element of chance involved and a wager on the line, the thing in question is gambling, whether there's skill involved or not.


[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough, poker is technically gambling, however, I think the whole issue comes from the fact that the skill element of poker is actually derived from the 'gambling' element of it. It's almost a contradiction in itself and somewhat obscure.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The difference between poker and the stock market is that poker is a game of incomplete information, and picking stocks is (in an ethical business environment) analysis with complete information.

There is an element of luck in investing (9/11 happens) but that is "external" to the picking of individual assets, balancing portfolios etc. The element of luck is intrinsic to poker.

Poker is gambling, investing isnt (again in perfect, ethical capital markets).

[/ QUOTE ]

Picking stocks even in a perfectly ethical environment (which we don't have by the way), but even if it was, we still don't have complete information. If we had complete information then everybody would have stock market returns like Warren Buffet.

Re: Embrace the Power of \"And\"
 

The problem becomes, you can have too broad a definition of gambling. If I am playing the World Champion at chess, just because we are betting on it doesn't make it gambling. And why does 'betting' become the key factor. Aren't you gambling every time you get into a car or ask a girl out. All of life is risk taking for rewards.

Re: Is poker gambling?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The difference between poker and the stock market is that poker is a game of incomplete information, and picking stocks is (in an ethical business environment) analysis with complete information.

There is an element of luck in investing (9/11 happens) but that is "external" to the picking of individual assets, balancing portfolios etc. The element of luck is intrinsic to poker.

Poker is gambling, investing isnt (again in perfect, ethical capital markets).

[/ QUOTE ]
It sounds like you're making both points. I agree with the 50% of what you said that said poker is the same as the stock market.

Picking stocks is also about incomplete information. If you knew what the weather would be like a week from today, I'm sure you could make much more intelligent stock picks today. Same with 9/11. Same with a CEO resigning. Same with a product scandal in the news. However, seasoned investors and market managers always seem to make more $ picking stocks than those people that pick stocks "at random" (how a lot of people actually "invest").

The element of luck is only intrinsic in the short term. This goes for poker as well as the stock market. Much like your success picking one stock to buy for one day (then sell) would also involve a ton of luck.

What\'s in a name?
 

To answer this question properly you need to define what you mean by gambling.

A reasonable definition could be “to participate in a venture where the outcome is uncertain, but could be favourable or adverse.” This could also be defined as taking a risk.

The level of skill involved has little bearing on the risk, only on the balance of risk/reward.

Risk-taking covers a broad spectrum of events including getting out of bed in a morning or placing a bet on a sporting event. It could be argued that because the outcome is not certain, these activities are gambles, irrespective of the probability of an adverse outcome.

Because poker is a game of incomplete information, as in my opinion is investing in stocks, you need to make a calculated assessment of the risk/reward (EV) and decide your actions from this.

IS RISK-TAKING GAMBLING ?

Its not really a worthwhile argument. The only reason to have the argument, as far as I can see, is due to the stigma associated with being a ‘gambler’. If a professional poker player is seeking to persuade someone that what he does for a living isn’t a degenerate activity he could define gambling in whatever way suits this end. He could point out the similarities poker has with other ‘legitimate’ business activities such as investing in stocks or real estate.

Poker needs the element of uncertainty, so that bad players can be persuaded that they are good players. Without this there would be far fewer bad players.

You either take the view that RISK-TAKING is GAMBLING, or you don’t.

What’s in a name?