Gutshot Poker trial opens in UK,; Wish Derek Kelly well

[TruePoker CEO]

Link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...on/6248553.stm

Jury to rule on nature of poker

Derek Kelly says poker is a game of skill

A jury has been asked to consider whether poker is a game of skill, chance, or a combination of both.

Club owner Derek Kelly, 46, is accused of running unlicensed poker games at the Gutshot Private Members' Club in Clerkenwell, central London.

But he has argued that poker is a game of skill and he therefore does not require a licence.

Prosecutors say that merely shuffling the cards introduces an element of chance into the game.

Mr Kelly denies two counts of contravening the 1968 Gaming Act by organising poker games at his club in January 2005.


The act says a licence is needed to host games of chance such as blackjack and roulette but not games of skill, like chess and quiz machines.

Proscecutor Graham Trembath QC told the jury at Snaresbrook Crown Court it would learn all about poker during the trial.

He said poker was a game of "mixed skill and chance", and if the jury agreed with him, then they should find Mr Kelly guilty.

He argued that before any game of poker started, the cards were shuffled.

"We would submit that once these cards are shuffled then you have introduced an element, a significant element of chance," he said."

1. The issue of poker as a game of predominantly skill may not be decided. The fact that the poker games are multi-player and not against the House may exempt them under the UK 1968 Gaming Act and allow a "predominence of skill" argument to succeed.

2. If all the prosecutor will argue is that a shuffle alone suffices to show chance, Derek may prevail in any event. (Would this prosecutor argue that a coin flip before an athletic contest to decide who kicks off or defends what goal renders those games a matter of chance ?)

Mr. Kelly deserves accolades from the online poker community for standing up to this prosecution and bringing the skill/chance issue to a legal head. He could have pleaded out for a wrist-slap, but felt strongly that Gutshot had done nothing wrong in offering poker games.

[yeahright]

It may be an uphill fight....I wish him luck.

I will say the prosecutions claim that because the cards are shuffled, the game is a game of chance, is lame as hell. Obviously someone who understands very little about the game.

Of course there's an element of luck, but you could make that argument for just about anything.

[nuts]

There are three degrees in this case, that the game is pure skill / a mix of skill and chance / pure chance.

Clearly the game is not pure skill in the short term, nor pure chance, but will the jury just consider the short term, in which it is clearly a mixture of chance and skill?

I hope not, because if the gutshot wins there may be a lot more cardrooms to choose from.

[JPFisher55]

With some US Supreme Court justices stating that foreign law should have some precedence in the US, maybe a favorable outcome will help in the fight against the UIGEA.

[Mason Malmuth]

From my book Poker Essays, Volume II:

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, exactly what a proper structure is can be hard to define. But I will try. A proper structure is that which leads to a proper balance of luck and skill. Of course, you may now argue that I didn’t say anything, and I suppose that you are right. However, how poker games are structured is extremely important.

[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
For poker to be successful as a game, there must be a balance of luck and skill. Skill is important because it will allow the better players to win enough money in the long run so that they will return to play again and again. They will be available to start games and keep them going when they become short-handed. In other words, these people form the core of regular players that any poker room needs to be successful.

Luck is also important. Without it, the bad players would never win. And if bad players never won, there wouldn’t be any bad players at the poker tables. They need that positive reinforcement.

No positive reinforcement means no bad players — they’ll just stop playing — which means the good players wouldn’t be winners in the long run. There wouldn’t be enough bad players’ money to win. Which ultimately means there wouldn’t be any poker games. Yes, there is no doubt that poker is a “proper” balance of luck and skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
Now, I believe that standard structured-limit hold ’em is a very good game in terms of the balance of luck and skill

[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
Characteristic No. 1: A balance of luck and skill. All forms of poker contain elements of both luck and skill, but those forms that seem to thrive have a good balance of both. This produces two results.

[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
Prediction No. 5: In the short run, poker will continue to grow rapidly. The best forms of poker are a marvelous blend of luck and skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
D. What game structure is best? A cardroom should strive to spread games that offer a good balance of luck and skill. This balance will allow poor players to win often enough that they will continue to return. However, it will also permit the highly skilled players to do well in the long run

[/ QUOTE ]

MM

[Sciolist]

An interesting article on this here:

http://www.gutshot.com/e/article.php

[TylerD]

If the prosecutor only has to prove that there is a significant element of luck then Derek Kelly is screwed.

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
If the prosecutor only has to prove that there is a significant element of luck then Derek Kelly is screwed.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's my understanding that mixed games of skill and luck are not covered by the gaming act. Hence the quote in the article above about scrabble, or golf.

I don't know if it comes down to whether poker has a preponderance of luck or not though.

[PartyGirlUK]

Derek's a good guy.

[AC-Cobra]

[ QUOTE ]
Derek's a good guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

A great guy.

What him and Barry Martin have done (and are risking) for British poker is great.

I certainly hope they succeed and not just because if they dont I'll lose my favourite card room.