The best proof that poker is a game of skill...

StukOnStupid · #1 10-12-2006, 11:15 AM

is in the massive amount of data collected by the on-line poker sites. Party, Stars, FTP, et al should have lock tight statistical proof that poker is a game of skill and not chance. Forget entering senators in the WSOP (as proposed in another thread) we already have all the evidence we need.

I hope the on-line sites realize the gold mine of evidence they are sitting on...

We need a respectable champion to promote the cause, not a poker player, but a John Allen Paulos type person. Someone who can make the statitical evidence come alive for the dullards in congress.

Bco1/75 · #2 10-12-2006, 11:20 AM

Sorry bro...it's not about the principles and facts of the matter......it's about politics. This all about the Republican clensing campaign......not to mention. If we can't regulate it you can't have it.

Attention Poker Players...Stop voting Republican.......They are bastards.

otctrader · #3 10-12-2006, 11:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Someone who can make the statitical evidence come alive for the dullards in congress.

[/ QUOTE ]

The last thing you want to do is have poker sites open the books WRT winning/losing account ratios. I'm sure the number is pretty staggering, but no good can come of it.

StukOnStupid · #4 10-12-2006, 11:29 AM

You will admit though that long term, ending the "argument" that poker is a game of skill is beneficial to us, no?

I mean, the vast majority of people conflate poker with all casino games and this isn't good for us.

At the risk of hijacking my own thread, if you think the democrats will do anything helpful to on-line gaming, you're kidding yourself. Republicans aren't the only stupid party...

govman6767 · #5 10-12-2006, 11:33 AM

The question is would they do anything about the data even if it helped our cause?

If you were a politician who already was against Online poker would the data change your mind?

You would need something more simple I think to sway someone already on the dark side

It's too easy for someone against poker to say if it's skill explain why the world championship was won by varkoni,moneymaker,raymer,hachem,gould the last few years. It does not matter the astronomical fields odds of winning to them it'just the biggest tournament every year keeps being won by amatuers.

We look at the WPT every week looking to see what pro's are at the table or where or fav pro's cashed. The opponents are looking just for what rookies or lucky people are at the final table.

I believe poker is a game of skill and it helps to be lucky
but we have studied and played the game for a long time.

To joe squish senator who never played the game before it's no diffrent than craps that's where the problem is.

excession · #6 10-12-2006, 01:12 PM

Depends - if you are playing 250,000 cash ring game hands or 2500 SNG's within your bank roll it's almost a game of pure skill and your outcome can in theory be assessed quite accurately using your skill level.

But if you are playing big MTT's or 'taking a shot' without adequate roll then you are going to find your outcomes greatly affected by chance.

In short it's a 'mixed' game of chance and skill for most of its players.

excession · #7 10-12-2006, 01:14 PM

no I don't admit it - poker as a game of chance is the reaso it's tax free income in UK !

PartySNGer · #8 10-12-2006, 01:30 PM

Over 95% of all players who have opened a poker account are likely losers. I don't think any good would come of Congress finding out this statistic.

canada_dry · #9 10-12-2006, 01:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
no I don't admit it - poker as a game of chance is the reaso it's tax free income in UK !

[/ QUOTE ]

And tax free in Canada too. Let's keep it that way.

StukOnStupid · #10 10-12-2006, 02:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Over 95% of all players who have opened a poker account are likely losers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure where this figure comes from. I hear it alot.

I think there's a big difference between being a net winner and being a good player *at a given level of stakes*. i.e. there are losing players at high levels who were winning players at the low levels. I doubt that only 5% of the total pool of $25NL players (or $.25 - $.50 limit etc..) are winning players *at that level*.