[repulse]

Right, Skall; in fact I think the backgammon precedent strengthens your argument a lot. The case this gaming site cites implies that the following quote from Magriel was the crucial point of the decision: "The decision where to move your men after the dice have been cast - that is the essence of the game. Chance is not a material factor."

So backgammon is skillful because it is about the moves you make, and your argument for poker as skill is similar... but in poker, you can make any move REGARDLESS of the random component (your hand) while in backgammon your move choices are CONSTRAINED BY the random component (your roll). Poker is even more skillful, in that sense. This ties pretty neatly into the other skill-based factors... no bluffing in backgammon, surely a perfect information game involves less skill than an imperfect information game, etc... a pretty compelling case, IMHO.

(and you've got my vote for being the one to make the presentation of poker to a modern court)