Is poker gambling?

[dividius]

yes. anytime you put up money with the risk of losing it, you are gambling. poker is gambling just like the stock market is gambling.

[Bantam222]

poker = gambloool

[Gonso]

Typical dictionary entry for gambling:

[ QUOTE ]
Gambling:

v.intr.
1. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
2. To play a game of chance for stakes.
3. To take a risk in the hope of gaining an advantage or a benefit.
4. To engage in reckless or hazardous behavior: You are gambling with your health by continuing to smoke.
n.
1. A bet, wager, or other gambling venture.
2. An act or undertaking of uncertain outcome; a risk: I took a gamble that stock prices would rise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Discussion board proposals and opinions about what people really mean when they say gambling/people’s opinion of the true definition of gambling:

[ QUOTE ]
However, when lay people discuss whether poker is gambling, they're obviously not talking about the same definition;

we have to be careful what we allow them to call "gambling", and be clear about how they are defining it

You should ask them to define it before answering their question.

Thats a language question.

We should really define what "gambling" means

My personal opinion is "gambling" is

So by your definition,

that poker is gambling under my definition

my humbly proposed defintion.

The reason I like my defintion is

Using this definition

the New Hamsphire Criminal Law definition of gambling

the strict sense of the definition of gambling

I don't think what they are doing is gambling

[/ QUOTE ]

If someone were to say, "the definition of 'gambling' means the exact same as 'talking on a cell phone'. They wouldn't be expressing an opinion, they would be incorrect.

When you are wagering on an uncertain event, you are gambling. There is no certainty, even for the top players (many of whom have had extended losing streaks). You can play poker without wagering, and that would not be gambling.

[Gonso]

Also, something to think about:

When Doyle Brunson sits down in a cash game, is he gambling? For those of you who say no, is he gambling when he sits down at a table with Chip Reese, Phil Ivey & Daniel N., Barry G. (etc.)?

[padore]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, something to think about:

When Doyle Brunson sits down in a cash game, is he gambling? For those of you who say no, is he gambling when he sits down at a table with Chip Reese, Phil Ivey & Daniel N., Barry G. (etc.)?

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't matter who Doyle's playing, if it's a cash game it's gambling, if there's no cash involved it's not. Just because he's got plenty of cash to play with and is highly skilled, doesn't mean that it's not gambling. The act of staking something of value in the hope/aim of winning more in return is gambling.

I played Doyle 3 years ago at VCPoker (before I knew who he was) and took $400 off him. At the time I would definetely be classified as a fish, and compared to him, I still am.

If it's a cash game, it's gambling, no matter who you are, unless you got some mirrors to see his cards, then that's called cheating [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] lol

[Skallagrim]

Gonso said "If someone were to say, "the definition of 'gambling' means the exact same as 'talking on a cell phone'. They wouldn't be expressing an opinion, they would be incorrect." Gonso is wrong and needs to read some linguistic philosophy. He should have said "if someone says THE COMMONLY ACCEPTED definition of gambling means the same as talking on a cell phone...." Then he would be right in characterizing that statement as "wrong."

Humpty Dumpty said: "words mean what I want them to mean." He was more insightful on the nature of language and definitions.

The point of my definition is, admittedly, to highlight the diff between poker and other forms of gaming for money. I think that helps the poker cause.

[winterGT]

Just agreeing with "poker is gambling" isn't right either, because the layman interprets that as "there is no skill involved". They'll equate it to buying a lottery ticket. It's more like the stock market, but you don't see the US government chase after online stock trading.

So even if it technically correct that poker is gambling ("wagering on an uncertain outcome"), you better well fight to redefine that statement, because the interpretation the general public has prevails and has big real life implications. Just ask those two neteller guys..

[SplawnDarts]

[ QUOTE ]
Gonso said "If someone were to say, "the definition of 'gambling' means the exact same as 'talking on a cell phone'. They wouldn't be expressing an opinion, they would be incorrect." Gonso is wrong and needs to read some linguistic philosophy.

[/ QUOTE ]

The postmodern philosophy forum is that way ->

[Skallagrim]

"The postmodern philosophy forum is that way ->"

What, no actual link? Seriously, linguistic philosophy only comes into play here because the connotations of words are usually more important to the conveyance of meaning then the simple dictionary defintion. WinterGT got it right.

[SplawnDarts]

[ QUOTE ]
"The postmodern philosophy forum is that way ->"

What, no actual link? Seriously, linguistic philosophy only comes into play here because the connotations of words are usually more important to the conveyance of meaning then the simple dictionary defintion. WinterGT got it right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if you want to believe that words have no fixed meaning, than there's no point in posting anything to you because our words aren't going to mean what we intended anyways.

I rather suspect you've whipped out the postmodern business because you don't like the answer to this question with respect to the real definition of the word, and you're now stuck because it's hard to argue with the dictionary. That's an annoyingly common move these days, and one that makes you intellectually insufferable. Whether that was your intent, I don't know.