View Single Post
  #22  
Old 11-14-2007, 11:29 PM
budblown budblown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Smelling the 6 ft Kush plant
Posts: 450
Default Re: GPSTS conference 11/10/07 at Harvard Law School: My Thesis

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its still gambling right? Even blackjack is a game of skill albeit with a negative expectation, exclusive of counting, but you have to play it with basic skill to minimize the -ev. I just don't think the luck vs. skill arguement does any good, everybody here knows that for a skilled player to profit off of poker 9 out of 10 players must be overall losers. You are going to make the arguement that it should be legalized for that 1 in 10 skilled player? I just want to be able to gamble legally, whats wrong with that? The bottom line to making it legal is to show someone in power the money and that they are not getting it when they could be.

[/ QUOTE ]

There difference is this. No matter how optimal a players performance at a game like Blackjack, they are ALWAYS going to be looking at a negative expectation, over the long run. Keep in mind, the long run is what matters, both in poker and in life. Anyone can get lucky and pick up a 10 one night at a bar in their lifetime, but it is a combination of the luck involved with personal traits and the experience to take advantage of these situations over and over. Refer to the Nash Equilibrium. I would argue that on any given night in a bar, there are several players all using their abilities to reach the same goal. However, in most cases anyways....lol, only one player can be successful. I attest to you that the winner of this game is such because his SKILL was superior over his villain's. Agreed or not?



[/ QUOTE ]

A. Randomly taking a 10 home is lucky, getting her to make breakfast in the morning is skill.
B. What bar do you go to where there's only one chick?
Reply With Quote