[Mendacious]

[ QUOTE ]


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


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

And as I have posted earlier, the better question to ask is, does chance determine the result over 50% of the time?


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



I don't quite get what you are saying here. It seems obvious that the answer to this question is a resounding YES. How could it be otherwise?


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



I will let you in on a little secret - I phrased the question this way because a) it fits the legal standard and b) because I hope everyone (even the non-poker playing general public) would see that the answer is indeed a resounding yes.

If everyone agrees (or at least the judges and juries, as the case may be) then poker is legally not gambling in about 30-35 states.


[/ QUOTE ]

If chance determines the result more than 50% of the time it is not gambling? Huh? This is the opposite of what you said before.

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of you guys are making good points bit missing the key issue as it relates to "saving poker." To save poker (in most states becasue of the state law) we need to show that poker is NOT MORE THAN 50% chance. I ask you to respond to that directly. Folks on these boards are here (mostly) because they are serious about poker. HOW MANY OF YOU FEEL THAT MORE THAN 50% OF YOUR RESULTS WERE DUE TO CHANCE (the random distribution of the cards)?


[/ QUOTE ]

There are so many ways to measure this 50% that I think it is almost meaningless. Ultimately I think poker will have to be specifically exempted from being a game of chance.