NC, USA determines poker = chance

[ekdikeo]

http://www.wral.com/news/news_briefs/story/1370975/

"Raleigh — The North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that poker is a game of chance, not skill.

Howard Fierman wanted to open a poker parlor at a house in Durham. Under North Carolina law, betting on games of chance is illegal, but Fierman argued poker is a game of skill.

A Durham County judge disagreed and rejected the club.

The state Appeals Court ruled that while skill can enhance a player’s chance of winning, the luck of the draw means poker is ultimately a game of chance."

[Our House]

LOL luck of the draw.

[Dire]

I'd agree, and poker is my primary source of income. The skill argument is terrible. The game is hugely dominated by chance, by variance in the short run -- and even in what most reasonable people would consider the long run. This is a game where 10,000 hand samples mean very little. That's not a huge concern to those of us playing thousands of hands per week - but the average player doesn't play thousands of hands per week.

When a player decides to go to a casino or poker parlor on the weekend, his results are going to be drastically influenced by chance and modestly weighted by skill. He's not going to reach the 'longrun' that weekend, and he probably never will in fact. And that is what this ruling says: that poker is ultimately a game of chance for the average player.

[PokerAmateur4]

So what constitutes a game of skill which you can bet on?

Whatever it is, right as your about to play you could have a heartattack, or whatever else could happen due to chance making you lose.

Where do you draw the line then?

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd agree, and poker is my primary source of income. The skill argument is terrible. The game is hugely dominated by chance, by variance in the short run -- and even in what most reasonable people would consider the long run. This is a game where 10,000 hand samples mean very little. That's not a huge concern to those of us playing thousands of hands per week - but the average player doesn't play thousands of hands per week.

When a player decides to go to a casino or poker parlor on the weekend, his results are going to be drastically influenced by chance and modestly weighted by skill. He's not going to reach the 'longrun' that weekend, and he probably never will in fact. And that is what this ruling says: that poker is ultimately a game of chance for the average player.

[/ QUOTE ]
Take a game like craps with "optimal" strategy (pass/don't pass line bets) and 100x times. 10000 rolls of the dice mean very little. The outcome is largely determined by chance.

Now, tell these judges and juries to think about it from the casino's side of the table. When a bettor steps up and proceeds to use this strategy, is the casino running a business or are they engaging in a game of chance?

The problem is getting them to understand EV

If they were able to explain WHY the casino wins, they would also understand why winning players win. It's pretty simple. You just need a judge who's a math geek.

[Elijah Bailey]

I have this discussion on a regular basis. From my perspective, poker involves less risk than investing in the stock market. A key principle from a legal perspective is the view of the "common man". From the "common man" perspective, gambling is gambling and there is little distinction between poker and roulette.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
Take a game like craps with "optimal" strategy (pass/don't pass line bets) and 100x times.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oops...that should read "100x odds."

[jschaud]

i don't know how to say it in a legalese manner, but take $10k. Give it to a judge. Tell him he if can turn it into $50k he can keep it. Offer him a seat at a table of partypoker .25NL regulars or the lineup at highstakes poker where everyone has $10k in front of them. The table of .25NL may be a game of chance, but his chances of beating a table of negreanu, aba, brunson, et al is negligible.

[OutRaced]

The argument I like to take is this:

If poker is a game of chance, then how can I win $$ from betting my opponents out of the pot? Where does CHANCE come into that equation. I read my opponent as weak, push all in, he folds. I WIN $$ from my action, nothing to do with the random draw of the cards. I can make that action with anything in my hand and on the board.

Which game of CHANCE can your action win you $$?? sure don't work in craps or blackjack. You can not bet the dealer of his hand.

[Skallagrim]

I will wait to formally comment until I can read the actual opinion.

At this point I will say 2 things:

1) There is still one more level of appeal.

2) Judges are often motivated by things other than the facts in front of them (despite what they say).

I will also say that if this ruling stands players in North Carolina, even internet players, even "home game with the buddies no rake" players, are now criminals (misdemeanor offense). And that is why the whole skill v. chance argument is so important. If we players lose that argument, the DOJ and/or state authorities will come after us, one way or another. SO STOP SAYING "LUCK IN THE SHORT RUN, SKILL IN THE LONG RUN." YOU ARE ONLY GIVING OUR ENEMIES AMUNITION.

Poker is mostly skill, period. Even in one hand, the cards will dictate the outcome less than 1/2 the time. Its what you do with your cards that decides who wins and looses most of the time. Chance only determines the outcome when there is a showdown and the worst hand gets lucky and wins. And that happens less than 1/2 the time.

Skallagrim

PS - Right on, Outraced, you, unlike the judges and the "this argument sucks" crowd get it.