Why does 2+2 call poker gambling?

[RGL]

If you look at the forum topics to the right, you'll see gambling in exactly four places.

General Gambling - Includes sports betting, other gambling games, entertainment betting, probability and psychology

Internet Gambling - Included Internet Gambling (entirely about internet poker), Internet Bonuses (almost entirely internet poker), Affiliates/Rakeback (entirely internet poker) and Software (entirely internet poker).

Given the discussion on this and other threads, it's clear that the distinction between poker/skill based games and luck/non-skill based games is important to members of this forum. More importantly, it may be important for the ultimate resolution of the issue.

Back to the OP, why not change the name on the list to Internet Poker to clearly separate it from General Gambling?
What do we lose? Or am I missing something?

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
To get legislative change we need to show the average person who does not really understand the depth of the game of poker that playing poker for money is more like playing chess than it is like playing craps.

I smiled when I read this if for two reasons. First, this is the exact opposite of what we want to do when we're playing. Personally, I prefer it if my table has some people at it who view poker like roulette.

Second, the thing we need to do to get legislative backing is to show that a) internet poker will not dilute B&M casino revenue, and b) that the tax revenue from legal gambling will outweigh the nebulous "societal costs" of gambling.

Here is a link on the Boston Globe site that has compiled all the editorials and op-ed pieces on casino gambling. Note that the entire discussion (except Jeff Jacoby's piece) focuses on tax revenue vs. impact on society.

If we're going to appeal to politicians, we have to speak their language.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is an interesting article about the ultimate effects of a fully implemented UIGEA pushing on-line gaming further out of reach of regulators. The net effect of which is to create money flows even more likely to be misused by criminals.

Most Amercians are willing to pay taxes when they percieve a benifit. Right now under-reporting gaming winnings seems to have reached the tipping point in the equation.

The Gov't faces a choice, IMO, they can continue to attempt to stick their fingers in a very leaky dyke (the internet) or let us player legally draw the water from the lake.

Take e-pass for example, that is a 5% tax on deposits that goes uncollected although imposed by Congress. If the UIGEA is fully implemented that tax rate will go up.

Prohibition is the perfect example. All attempts to ban led to more crime and a lousey product, no body was saved, many died. Taxes and regulation led to the elimination of the criminal element and a much safer, even cheaper product.

D$D

[Impact]

Is playing poker with play money gambling? Doesnt seem like it. But its still "poker" right?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

[ QUOTE ]
Is playing poker with play money gambling? Doesnt seem like it. But its still "poker" right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah. The wagering is the key part of the game. Play money is not real poker.

[Lottery Larry]

Maybe there's something in using a word, or argument, that makes it clear:

- Certain forms of gambling, skill has little chance of affecting the outcome and almost no chance of changing a negative situation into a positive one.

- Other forms of gambling, such as our favorite card game, are where skill can change results, which are normally determined by mere odds/probability. You might have to fend off the craps sharpshooting crowd a bit....

I have NO idea what word to use for the second type of gambling, however....

We should also ban the term "luck" and talk about probability instead... but that's probably asking for too big a leap.


Sidebar- Can we reasonably consider stock market trading "gambling", or not (what exactly IS "hedging a market position")? What about insurance policies?

Is creating a new business not "gambling", when supposedly 80% fail in 5 years?

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
Play money is not real poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

.... because play money affects how people actually play poker, so it's not quite the same thing.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

We should also ban the term "luck" and talk about probability instead... but that's probably asking for too big a leap

We can use the poker term, "variance" or the statistical representation of variance, "standard deviation."

All just semantics to me...

Spock: "It appears random chance has operated in our favor."
McCoy: "You mean we got lucky."
Spock: "I believe I said that."

[Skallagrim]

Its really just all about getting the folks unfamiliar with poker to recognize that its different from the kinds of gambling they are familiar with: lotteries, bingo halls, raffles, slot machines...

The way to start that "discussion" is to stop them and argue with them when they call poker "gambling." We really dont care if we change their words, we really do care that we change their attitudes towards poker. And arguing about whether poker is "gambling" or not, as you can easily see from this thread [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] , is a good way to provide the education needed to provoke the attitude adjustment.

Skallagrim

[whangarei]

I originally thought poker should not be called gambling. I heard Negreneau say that he's not gambling when he plays poker, his opponents are. Just like a gambler playing craps, the house (Negrenau) has the edge. But since most players are gambling in that sense then that may be the appropriate term. "Gaming" is the best term for how I view the game.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Its really just all about getting the folks unfamiliar with poker to recognize that its different from the kinds of gambling they are familiar with: lotteries, bingo halls, raffles, slot machines...

The way to start that "discussion" is to stop them and argue with them when they call poker "gambling." We really dont care if we change their words, we really do care that we change their attitudes towards poker. And arguing about whether poker is "gambling" or not, as you can easily see from this thread [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] , is a good way to provide the education needed to provoke the attitude adjustment.
Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]


At first I thought this was a pretty useless thread.

But Skall makes a very important point that has a good political foundation.

When poker is played well there is very little luck involved.


D$D<--still requires luck to win