Is poker gambling?

[Gonso]

That's just it, a lot of people want to go redefining "gambling".

If you start altering the definition, and then make a whole bunch of exceptions and assumptions (as Megenotia did above), then you can say it's not, but then you're just playing semantics.

For certain people in certain situations, poker can be +EV gambling, but that's still gambling. Most definitions have it as 'wagering on an uncertain event' or something similar.

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is poker gambling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]


What is it with this community, that people can't just give a basic, helpful answer to someone without being derogatory? Does this really make you feel better?

[/ QUOTE ]

This question has been asked at least a hundred and fifty times.

Yes, poker is gambling, period. The fact that it is +EV for most of us doesn't mean it isn't gambling.

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
If it were sheer chance, how does that explain Brunson or Hachem or Negreneau's continued success at winning??? Is there an element of chance? Yes, of course. But skill at knowing what to do, when to do it, against whom to play a strategy, for what stakes, etc. - THAT is skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't mean it aint gambling.

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
Gambling is wagering on an unknown outcome. Of course poker is gambling. Even if you play a +EV game, it is still gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

Many many outcomes in poker are expected. You just don't know which way the little rat bastard is going to suck out on you this time. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Skallagrim]

[ QUOTE ]
Gambling is wagering on an unexpected outcome. Of course poker is gambling. Even if you play a +EV game, it is still gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then there isnt much in life that isnt gambling - your definition includes the stock market, working on commission, insurance contracts, commodity and real estate trading etc...

[Skallagrim]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You all do realize that this is much more an argument over how to define the term "gambling" than an argument over what is poker. Poker is a game of skill and luck - how much of each is a matter of debate.

The fact that playing with significant skill can turn it into the only +EV game in the casino makes it different from ALL other casino games.

Games such as slots, craps and roulette have virtually no skill (a betting system is not the same as playing the game with skill). Games like blackjack have some skill, but it is never enough to overcome the math that gives the house the edge.


[/ QUOTE ]

Error Alert!

The amount of luck vs. skill in poker is not really up for debate. The bounds of how well someone can run over a long period in various games are pretty well explored, as is the expected variance average winners encounter. Much of this info is in 2+2 books if you're curious.

And there are at least 2 other beatable games in the average casino - +EV blackjack is everywhere (the difficulty is to get them to let you keep playing) and the sportsbook is an obvious one as numerous people have proven they can beat it over the long haul. The racebook is potentially vulnerable as well.

Roulette has been legally beaten in the past, but the laws have since changed. It might be possible to do again in the future if you could find a person with the rather bizarre talent for accurately estimating embedding theorem predictors in their head. That would be a pretty special find though.

You are correct about craps and slots, although there are definitely slots that can be beaten when comps are factored in.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is additional info and does not make my post an error.

So you know the answer as to whether Poker is more skill than chance? Please further enlighten us! If you convice me I will gladly hire you as my expert witness in the next illegal poker/gambling case I have - and the PPA will want to use you for congressional testimony. Seriously, all I said was its a subject of debate, and that is a clearly true.

If you can get away with card counting and do it perfectly, yes it does make Blackjack slightly +EV (if you find the casino where you can do this please send me a private message).

Sports betting I am not so sure about - Of course if you really are able to predict the outcome better than the odds the house gives you - but so much UNpredicitable happens in sports - I dont bet on sports myself, or study it, and I didn't mention it originally, so I'll accept your point here.

Roulette is pure chance unless, as you say, you can determine and calculate the speed, motion, etc. of the ball and wheel at the time of release. Even then you only narrow the number of possible results. And, since you have to use banned electronic devices to do this, its cheating in every casino.

Comps can make video poker +EV if you find the right video poker game (pretty hard to do these days). I've never seen this be the case for slots (spose its possible with those special promotion 99% or more payback machines).

My personal opinion is "gambling" is wagering on future events subject to an element of chance and not under the wagerer's control or influence. That makes poker NOT gambling (of course we influence the outcome at poker), but that is just my opinion as to the best way to use the word gambling.

Skallagrim

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gambling is wagering on an unexpected outcome. Of course poker is gambling. Even if you play a +EV game, it is still gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then there isnt much in life that isnt gambling - your definition includes the stock market, working on commission, insurance contracts, commodity and real estate trading etc...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. They are all gambling.

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gambling is wagering on an unexpected outcome. Of course poker is gambling. Even if you play a +EV game, it is still gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then there isnt much in life that isnt gambling - your definition includes the stock market, working on commission, insurance contracts, commodity and real estate trading etc...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. They are all gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, working on commission might not be if you can't lose your initial stake but any sort of investment is a gamble and insurance is absolutely a gamble.

[SplawnDarts]

[ QUOTE ]

This is additional info and does not make my post an error.

So you know the answer as to whether Poker is more skill than chance?


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes.
[ QUOTE ]

Roulette is pure chance unless, as you say, you can determine and calculate the speed, motion, etc. of the ball and wheel at the time of release. Even then you only narrow the number of possible results. And, since you have to use banned electronic devices to do this, its cheating in every casino.


[/ QUOTE ]
Unless you can get a person to do what the device does. I don't have any more to say on that topic.
[ QUOTE ]

I've never seen this be the case for slots


[/ QUOTE ]
Sit down at penny slot. Play one line. Get free drink. +EV.
[ QUOTE ]

My personal opinion is "gambling" is wagering on future events subject to an element of chance and not under the wagerer's control or influence. That makes poker NOT gambling...

[/ QUOTE ] In poker you wager on three things: the contents of your opponents un-revealed cards, the cards to come, and the behavior of your opponents. The first two you have no control over. The third you have very little control over (ie they are fundamentally inc control of their actions, not you). So by your definition, poker is gambling.

[Skallagrim]

Well Splawndarts, I guess you didnt have the time to provide the definitive statement on how much of poker is skill and how much chance. You should, being an expert witness is a lucrative profession.

And I have yet to sit at a slot and get my free drink with only one spin (please name the casino!) - but you are right about the free drinks if you stop before you have lost the value of them.

But you are quite wrong that poker is gambling under my definition. Note that I said "influence" the outcome. When you make that raise, and depending on the amount of that raise, you are influencing your opponents actions (call, raise or fold), and of course, you influence the outcome EVERY time you (or anyone else) folds before the final card and bet. Poker is, of course, not won by simply what the cards are (which is the chance part we do not influence) but by who remains at the end or has the best hand at the end if more than one remain. Every action influences who that will be. So poker, because the player influences the ultimate outcome of the hand, is not gambling - by my humbly proposed defintion.

The reason I like my defintion is because it nicely illustrates the differences between poker and what most folks think of when they hear the word gambling (Slots, Roulette and Dice).