|
|
#41
05-08-2007, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
Agreed Engineer, but just so the debate does not get further muddied up, your statement "The IRS recognizes blackjack as a game of skill for a professional gambler" is correct because the IRS only demands a game have SOME skill to be so classified for tax puposes. For determining whether a game is gambling as legally defined, the test is MOSTLY skill with respect too the outcome of the game, or, more correctly, outcomes are determined less than 50% of the time by chance.
|
|
#42
05-08-2007, 07:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
I posted some musings in the NC (North Carolina) thread, but I thought I summarize them here.
Poker is a game of both luck and skill. The argument is how much luck, and how much skill? How may times have we seen a post in these forums where somebody is asking about results after 1000 hands, or 5000 hands, or even 10,000 hands? Pretty darned often. At least often enough to garner snotty responses, and instructions to read the FAQ, or sometimes some kind soul pointing out that even 10,000 hands is not enough to overcome luck? There is a clear belief by the majority of poker players that it takes a huge amount of hands for skill to overtake luck. I'm not sure that most poker players will play enough hands for their skill to overcome luck. It seems that whether or not poker is a game of skill depends on who is playing it, and how long they play for.
|
|
#43
05-08-2007, 09:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
"Poker is at heart a betting game in which players compete against one another for a growing pot of money. Players win either by getting the others to fold their cards or by having the best hand, ranked according to a hierarchy."
Arggghh, NO! Players collect MONEY by getting others to fold or by having the best hand.
|
|
#44
05-08-2007, 10:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
[ QUOTE ]
"Poker is at heart a betting game in which players compete against one another for a growing pot of money. Players win either by getting the others to fold their cards or by having the best hand, ranked according to a hierarchy." Arggghh, NO! Players collect MONEY by getting others to fold or by having the best hand. [/ QUOTE ] ??? Collecting money = winning, right?
|
|
#45
05-08-2007, 10:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
[ QUOTE ]
Agreed Engineer, but just so the debate does not get further muddied up, your statement "The IRS recognizes blackjack as a game of skill for a professional gambler" is correct because the IRS only demands a game have SOME skill to be so classified for tax puposes. For determining whether a game is gambling as legally defined, the test is MOSTLY skill with respect too the outcome of the game, or, more correctly, outcomes are determined less than 50% of the time by chance. [/ QUOTE ] That's where the debate gets tricky. Our goal isn't to prove to a judge that skilled poker players win long-term. Rather, we have to satisfy some legal definition of skill, which varies from state to state. I wonder if the PPA or some other organization will finance an experienced gaming attorney who can bring in some experts next time a case like this comes up.
|
|
#46
05-08-2007, 10:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Agreed Engineer, but just so the debate does not get further muddied up, your statement "The IRS recognizes blackjack as a game of skill for a professional gambler" is correct because the IRS only demands a game have SOME skill to be so classified for tax puposes. For determining whether a game is gambling as legally defined, the test is MOSTLY skill with respect too the outcome of the game, or, more correctly, outcomes are determined less than 50% of the time by chance. [/ QUOTE ] That's where the debate gets tricky. Our goal isn't to prove to a judge that skilled poker players win long-term. Rather, we have to satisfy some legal definition of skill, which varies from state to state. I wonder if the PPA or some other organization will finance an experienced gaming attorney who can bring in some experts next time a case like this comes up. [/ QUOTE ] This, surprise surprise, is exactly what I (an experienced criminal defense attorney) am preparing to do. Do not ask me for any specifics, but I have clients who may need this argument someday. If not me and my client then some other lawyer and his or her client. Whoever finds themselves in the spot to make the argument, we all win if they win, and we all should help. You help work the legislative side Engineer, I am helping work the litigation side, we all want to end up in the same place, we all need to support each other. Oh, but if the PPA (of which I am a member) would want to finance me, well I'd be a fool to say no .... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] . Skallagrim
|
|
#47
05-08-2007, 10:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
[ QUOTE ]
This, surprise surprise, is exactly what I (an experienced criminal defense attorney) am preparing to do. Do not ask me for any specifics, but I have clients who may need this argument someday. [/ QUOTE ] I had no idea. Sweet! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Best of luck if it goes to litigation. [ QUOTE ] You help work the legislative side Engineer, I am helping work the litigation side, we all want to end up in the same place, we all need to support each other. [/ QUOTE ] Excellent. I've supported your efforts to date and will continue to do so. I appreciate the support you've provided to my efforts as well. [ QUOTE ] Oh, but if the PPA (of which I am a member) would want to finance me, well I'd be a fool to say no .... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]. [/ QUOTE ] One never knows. Best of luck.
|
|
#48
05-09-2007, 08:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] "Poker is at heart a betting game in which players compete against one another for a growing pot of money. Players win either by getting the others to fold their cards or by having the best hand, ranked according to a hierarchy." Arggghh, NO! Players collect MONEY by getting others to fold or by having the best hand. [/ QUOTE ] ??? Collecting money = winning, right? [/ QUOTE ] No, not really.
|
|
#49
05-09-2007, 10:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] "Poker is at heart a betting game in which players compete against one another for a growing pot of money. Players win either by getting the others to fold their cards or by having the best hand, ranked according to a hierarchy." Arggghh, NO! Players collect MONEY by getting others to fold or by having the best hand. [/ QUOTE ] ??? Collecting money = winning, right? [/ QUOTE ] No, not really. [/ QUOTE ] So you can have -BB/100 stats and still be winning? What are you talking about?
|
|
#50
05-09-2007, 11:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSJ: Harvard Ponders Just What It Takes to Excel at Poker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Arggghh, NO! Players collect MONEY by getting others to fold or by having the best hand. [/ QUOTE ] ??? Collecting money = winning, right? [/ QUOTE ] No, not really. [/ QUOTE ] So you can have -BB/100 stats and still be winning? What are you talking about? [/ QUOTE ] Of course not- you answered your question for me. Think about what that -BB rate means, as far as the type of player and the number of hands involved in vs. won...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
