[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
Jimbo, poker is undeniably a game that involves BOTH Skill and Luck/Chance.

Your example of AK being beat by AK is countered by the hand where some one bluffs AK out of the pot with 2-7. How can you say luck/chance determined the outcome of that hand?

The key question is whether the luck or the skill is the more important factor. Some hands are decided by luck, some by skill. Same with the amount of the win. But if you really believe MOST results are the product of chance, why do you read these forums? What would be the point of trying to "improve your game" if it was mostly the result of chance anyway?

That is what makes poker different and what makes being a poker pro possible: MOST results in poker are the product of the player's actions, not simply the cards dealt. In my opinion, and in what should be the opinion of anyone who believes poker is entitled to be treated differently from slots and craps, games where the play of the players determine (for the most part) the outcome of the game, are NOT "gambling."

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

*Sigh*. Almost everybody, when talking about the luck component starts talking about when one hand beats another. You have to look at all the hands that were dealt in. My guess is that in a full ring game a very small percentage of hands that win, probably under ten percent, are the same hand that would have won purely by luck, that is if all hands stayed in to the river.

So if 7-2 sucks out on A-A on the river, a lot of people say, see luck won out over skill in that hand. But if somebody folded 3-9 off pre-flop which would have beat them both, the outcome of the hand has been completely changed by the exercize of skill.

And that's the basis of the argument for legalizing poker. But poker is still gambling by most resonable definitions of the word. Fortunately, most state statues that have "anti-gambling" statutes don't simply say "gambing" is illegal, they make a distinction between games of skill and game of chance. (Unfortunately, in my state the appellate courts have ruled that poker is a game of chance not a game of skill). Changing the popular defintions of the word won't have any impact on these state statutes.

And as far as trying to influence public opinion by a distinction between gambling and gaming? C'mon, most folks are going to understand gaming is a form of gambling. You need far more distinct terms. How about jousting, meaning contesting against an opponent for money? Or if you don't want an existing word, Contfomey. "Hey, I hear you're a professinal gambler! Well, no, actually, I'm a professional Contfomer - I play poker and pool for money."

Anyway, I just think thats a long slow process, with little chance of significant success, and I'd rather see poker legalized accross the country in, say, the next decade.