OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

Easier said that done, perhaps.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

Recently I read Chen and Ankenman's Mathematics of Poker and found myself thinking that that book, or at least some examples from that book, would be excellent for the purpose of showing poker to be a game of skill.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

It takes skill to bluff but when you bluff you are gambling your money.

Poker is gambling.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

I'm not sure what poker being gambling has to do with whether or not poker is a game of skill.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

Construct simplified poker situations with general and specific large differences in play skill between players at the table and derive the expectations of each player. Observe that the more rational/strategic players have positive expectation at the expense of the clearly irrational players.

Then supply statistically significant real-world evidence as to the existence of players with positive expected value in poker games.

Anyone who would not be convinced at this point would either be confusing the question at hand or presupposing that basic probability theory is voodoo.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

This would be a good topic in the "Sklansky forum"..IIRC he has come on this forum and said proving poker is a game of skill will be when he will become a major force..Or something like that..

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

this is sooooooooooooooooooo easy, some pro poker player took the irs to court back in the day saying that his $1 mill poker winnings should not be taxed the same as gambling winnings, the lawyers for the irs argued that there was luck involved so it was gambling, the judge said to the lawyers play the poker player heads up and then tell me what u think.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

Bring the person you want to convince to a big bookstore and show him the gigantic selection of instructional poker books and point out the strategy elements in them. Compare them to the chess books and the craps books and point out that while poker is still gambling it can be played 'properly' and that poker lies somewhere between a game of pure skill like chess and simple luck like craps.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

Money is involved so it's gambling.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Easier said that done, perhaps.


[/ QUOTE ]

I would start by proving that everything else in life is gambling, then I would add that skill can overcome luck in most things in life, poker is one of these.

[ QUOTE ]
Money is involved so it's gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, same with any other action with unknown variables affecting the outcome.

like stocks, golf, any profession, etc...

However, some things that are gambling, can have such a skill element as to be profitable over time, a profession is one of them, a sport is one of them, poker is one of them.

Pit games vs the house aren't.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Money is involved so it's gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]
Players win money in golf tournaments.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

i have an idea. take the random senator or so. ask him if he would like to sit in a game with 100k of his own cash with doyle, ivey, greenstein, etc. or the random game of clowns that normally play the .1/.25 game. lets see if it is skill or not.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Money is involved so it's gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ironically, money is involved for the same people who are trying to stop it from being played.

Southern Baptists must be gambling too, 'cause there's money in the church.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
i have an idea. take the random senator or so. ask him if he would like to sit in a game with 100k of his own cash with doyle, ivey, greenstein, etc. or the random game of clowns that normally play the .1/.25 game. lets see if it is skill or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
He'd probably say he doesn't gamble.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

However, if you told him he had no choice BUT to play...

Ask him if he'd rather play with the best players in the world or the worst players in the world. His answer should prove the skill.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Money is involved so it's gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]
Players win money in golf tournaments.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is always the thing I come back to. The only difference is that poker is an intellectual/mind game, golf is a physical game.

Hey, maybe this is a form of discrimination.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Money is involved so it's gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]
Players win money in golf tournaments.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is always the thing I come back to. The only difference is that poker is an intellectual/mind game, golf is a physical game.

Hey, maybe this is a form of discrimination.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes it is. A black man wins every golf tournament.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

Proving there is skill in a poker game like Hold'em is pretty simple. Just pit a mediocre player against a computer (or person) programmed to lose. The loser could play something like always folding or always calling or any destined to lose strategy. The mediocre player will eventually win.

Since one strategy is better than the other there must be at least some skill in playing the game.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Money is involved so it's gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]
Everything is gambling. Poker is most definitely gambling.

But that doesn't mean there isn't skill involved. Completely separate topics.

Does it really matter?
 

Will proving poker is a game of skill really help anything here in the U.S.? We have legalized wagering on games with and without skill. I realize sometimes lawmakers will use that term in their laws, but it obviously isn't a deciding factor.

Heads up gun fights are a game of skill. Russian roulette is a game of chance. Should gun fights now be legalized since they are a game of skill?

Re: Does it really matter?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Heads up gun fights are a game of skill. Russian roulette is a game of chance. Should gun fights now be legalized since they are a game of skill?

[/ QUOTE ]
Good logic.

Re: Does it really matter?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heads up gun fights are a game of skill. Russian roulette is a game of chance. Should gun fights now be legalized since they are a game of skill?

[/ QUOTE ]
Good logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, poker is a gun fight. The lottery is russian roulette. Seems like russian roulette is more likely to be legalized.

Lots of good thoughts in this thread. Anything impacted by chance with something at risk is gambling. That applies to both poker and investing in the stock market. Any skill based game or sport has some element of chance. I tell my people that I view poker as investing, not gambling.

Re: Does it really matter?
 

get someone's database who has grinded one level for a long time and perform statistical analysis on it. what is the percent chance that this person could be a winner after 100K hands or something if poker was not a game of skill. that would be able to prove with reasonable statistical certainty that skill was involved.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Easier said that done, perhaps.

[/ QUOTE ]

is there really anyone who doesn't think there is a skill element in poker? i thought the ruling in the recent british case was totally reasonable - there is significant luck and significant luck. (it was just stupid that under british law that makes it a luck game).

if you really needed to prove it one way would be tell the courts: we're picking these 10 guys, and we're going to track their results for 3 months. then after three months they'd show up with 150k hands and all be way ahead and you get a statistician to say that if these are actually breakeven players the odds of this happening is 1/100000000000000000000000.

Re: Does it really matter?
 

This should be really simple, I have no idea why they've had so much trouble doing this.

First you demonstrate a +EV bet. Use the coinflip example. "If I'm offered a bet where I am paid $1.50 if a coin lands heads and I pay another $1 if the coin lands tails it's obviously a good bet for me. My expected return on each flip is $0.25."

Then demonstrate how betting in poker works on exactly the same principle, except instead of relying on a coinflip the variables are 1) the deck and 2) your opponent(s). Since you have to assign values to the likelihood of your opponents' actions and since this will affect your monetary expectation poker is therefore a game of skill. You could further mention that you also have to machinate the series of actions that will produce the highest yield based on your assumptions, and, frankly, most people are terrible at doing this.

Re: Does it really matter?
 

[ QUOTE ]
OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hand them a copy of Theory of Poker and tell them to read it.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

I think the problem is that the courts are trying to decide whether poker is a game of skill or luck. Obviously it is a skill game that involves luck. I've never understood what exactly they are trying to decide. Chess is a game involving all skill and no luck, while baccarat involves all luck and no skill, and poker is in between--along with things like betting on horses.

Re: Does it really matter?
 

Pretty easy really have 2 tables of player deal exactly the same cards to the players on both tables in the same position have the same flops, turns and rivers. Play for say one hour and compare the chip stacks between the players on each table. If player A on table 1 has bust but player A on table 2 has doubled his stack this would prove that player A on table 2 is more skilful, if he is more skilful then there is skill involved. You could use more tables to demonstrate different skill levels and the results they achieved. I would have the cards generated by computer for ease of dealing the same cards to the different tables.

Re: Does it really matter?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If player A on table 1 has bust but player A on table 2 has doubled his stack this would prove that player A on table 2 is more skilful

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't exactly accurate due to the way their opponents act. One guy is at a table full of tight players while the other is at a loose table it will impact the winnings dramatically. You can't use an example involving random events (the other players) to prove skill based on one example

Using math and EV is really the best way.

Re: Does it really matter?
 

If skill is a factor it seems very reasonable to consider it a game of skill, since luck is a universal factor. You can't rightfully say poker is gambling because of the element of luck, and then say he stock market isnt. maybe a horrible and irrelevan example, but there are examples out there that I'm sure you could think up.

Both elements are present and strong in poker, how can a person disinguish between gambling and he opposite when both are true? Who decides what is predominant or not? It comes down to morality. If those 60 year old polititians liked playing poker online, they wouldn't be forcing their morals on others through government, or letting others do so. It's rediculous, really.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

The problem with poker is that the game involves both skill and luck. A skill/luck duality, if you will. Assuming one plays well against his or her competition at a rate higher than rake+toke, then luck (or bad luck) is just noise in the short run whereas skill is the signal that shows up later. The larger the hand sample, not allowing for changes in competition skill, the closer the win rate a particular player will converge to asymptotically. At some point, the confidence interval will be close to 100%.

Players also vary in skill at particular time intervals (e.g. tilting, getting better, etc).

Skillful poker, in terms of positive monetary gains, is a game of taking advantage of inefficiencies of betting patterns against the competition during the present time.

What's odd to me is that people can perceive derivatives trading as a skill game whereas poker a game of luck. I guess something involving Fortune 500 companies or market indexes gets respect whereas a casino card game does not.

You see stock touts like Jim Cramer on TV ironically saying things like "gambling is the opiate of the masses" for his internet gambling company picks. Pretty funny.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

I think poker has a lot in common with aggressive forms of banking. I know a hedge fund manager who will take major positions "short" or "long" in ways to hide his total position from competitors. His competitors do the same. There are rules, and within the rules, if one player has a big hand but plays it badly, then the other players can dilute or even destroy his winnings. But if he plays the hand well, he can clean up - usually at the expense of some of the other players.

Is high stakes investing a form of gambling? I think it has a lot in common, that's for sure. There is definitely an element of chance. The weather for example. The profitability of my position in June on heating oil or oranges, for example, will very depending on the weather over the winter and spring.

But options trading and similar banking activities is obviously a game of skill in which people spend their lives trying to get the most money in on +EV situations, maximize wins, and minimize loses.

Just like poker.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think poker has a lot in common with aggressive forms of banking. I know a hedge fund manager who will take major positions "short" or "long" in ways to hide his total position from competitors. His competitors do the same. There are rules, and within the rules, if one player has a big hand but plays it badly, then the other players can dilute or even destroy his winnings. But if he plays the hand well, he can clean up - usually at the expense of some of the other players.

Is high stakes investing a form of gambling? I think it has a lot in common, that's for sure. There is definitely an element of chance. The weather for example. The profitability of my position in June on heating oil or oranges, for example, will very depending on the weather over the winter and spring.

But options trading and similar banking activities is obviously a game of skill in which people spend their lives trying to get the most money in on +EV situations, maximize wins, and minimize loses.

Just like poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this analogy. Pretty much everything in the world is subject to some element of chance. Poker does rely on it more heavily in the short term than a lot of things.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Easier said that done, perhaps.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I think it is actually quite simple.

Any game that is not house-backed and a player can gain an edge based upon unaided skill is a game of skill. So we all know you cannot beat roulette, craps, online blackjack and most slot machines in the long run without cheating. Sports betting is a game of skill but it is house-backed.

The reason for killing the house-backed games is because usually legislation tends to lean much more in favor of skill games if they are paid by other players. This is why in LA we have tons of poker rooms on non indian land, and they offer blackjack and pai gow but it is a mutant, player backed version.

Now, this would open the door for peer to peer sports betting (something that began to take off last time I poked my head into that area of the gambling world, but I have not checked up on that lately).

That's at least, how I would go about it.

DW

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Money is involved so it's gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

stupid !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I could argue getting up in the morning and driving to work is a gamble a much more dangerous gamble than losing my buying for a sng.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

Provide 500k+ hand graphs of winning players. Its obvious when you look at the steady upward slope over this many hands that luck isnt the deciding factor in poker.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]

I think the problem is that the courts are trying to decide whether poker is a game of skill or luck. Obviously it is a skill game that involves luck. I've never understood what exactly they are trying to decide. Chess is a game involving all skill and no luck, while baccarat involves all luck and no skill, and poker is in between--along with things like every single sport on earth.

[/ QUOTE ]


ball bounces on way or the other...

wind...

etc.



I think there is also a case that "luck" plays a role in chess. If there was literally no luck, why would two players playing together have different results from one game to another?*



(*luck in the normal sense of the word - no one has sufficient information to predict the outcome)

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

this legislation is not about wether the game is skillfull or not. the stock market is a more disturbing form of gambling in a sense. and the racetrack certainly isnt skillfull. the law affected somebody in a positive way. that somebody paid off alot of suits to get it through. just like in my state how drinking tickets have gone up and cigarettes are taxed alot. trust me they dont want us to quit smoking or drinking under age, they just want to get more money from things certain to happen.
we have new seatbelt laws because the insurance companys hate medical bills and wrongfull death suits
trust me there is an invisible hand in play here, we just need to find out who it is.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

and investment of anything that result in an uncertain outcome is gambling. almost every thing we do has some kind of gamble to it.

Re: OK so how would you go about showing poker is a game of skill?
 

[ QUOTE ]
this legislation is not about wether the game is skillfull or not. the stock market is a more disturbing form of gambling in a sense. and the racetrack certainly isnt skillfull. the law affected somebody in a positive way. that somebody paid off alot of suits to get it through. just like in my state how drinking tickets have gone up and cigarettes are taxed alot. trust me they dont want us to quit smoking or drinking under age, they just want to get more money from things certain to happen.
we have new seatbelt laws because the insurance companys hate medical bills and wrongfull death suits
trust me there is an invisible hand in play here, we just need to find out who it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't understand what this has to do with how to prove poker is a game of skill.