PDA

View Full Version : Poker is not gambling


Soupy12
06-23-2003, 03:57 AM
I just thought you guys might like to read a paper I recently wrote for a composition class. Let me know what you think!


Casino Poker is not Gambling

You are sitting down at a friend’s kitchen table with beer in hand playing a friendly game of poker with your buddies. The games may include draw, stud, and any variation thereof with a number of wildcards and house rules. The stakes are not very high and this poker game is designed to be a recreational night with your friends, not designed to make or break anyone’s bank. This is the typical image that comes to mind when the general population thinks of poker. However, another variation of poker exists and is growing rapidly in popularity. This is the poker that takes place in casinos and cardrooms around the country and includes games such as 7-card stud, Texas Hold’em, and Omaha. Players choose their game and stakes of choice and play against other players. The casino dealer deals the cards, regulates play, upholds the standard rules of the game, and in return, takes a portion of each pot, known as the rake. On the basis that this game is offered in casinos and that people win or lose money, the general population considers poker a form of gambling.
It is important to understand that poker is not gambling because of the implications it has. In our current economic situation, the unemployment rate has risen and people are out of work. There are more people looking for jobs than there are jobs available. Professional poker players can make a very good living without having another job, but only if they live in a state where poker is legal. In states in which poker is still prohibited, there are numerous underground games, however playing in these carry a risk that a lot of players are not willing to take. These games are also not consistent enough to have your livelihood depend on. However, if poker were legalized in more states, poker players could make their living in poker rooms freeing up more jobs for others. The additional dealers, floor personnel, chip-runners, cocktail servers, and security and surveillance workers required to run the poker rooms would also create new, well-paying jobs that do not require a college degree.
In order to pay these employees and make a small profit, the casino or “house” takes a small percentage of each pot known as the rake. However, even though most poker rooms are located inside of casinos, poker is not gambling, it is instead a form of investing. According to Webster’s New World Dictionary, “gamble” means “to play games of chance for money.” All of the games in the casino outside of the poker room such as blackjack, slots, roulette, crap, and three-card poker are all games in which the player plays against the casino for money. In all of these games of chance, the rules or game structure is set up so that the players will lose more often than they will win in the long run. These games yield a low percentage of success on the part of the player and a high percentage of success on the part of the house, thus explaining the abundance of casinos, and can therefore be classified as gambling.
Poker, on the other hand, is based on statistics, strategy, psychology, hand-reading, and people-reading. It is a game of skill in which each player matches skill and wit against the other players in the game. The casino does not win or lose money, only the players of the game can do so. In the long run, the most knowledgeable and skilled players will win the most money, and the less knowledgeable and skilled players will lose their money to the better players. For this reason, the majority of the final table at the World Series of Poker is comprised of the same group of elite poker players each year. These players are not the luckiest players in the game, it is not chance that they do that well each year, they are simply the best in their game. Due to the fact that poker is a game of skill and not chance, poker is not gambling, as other casino games are.
Poker should be regarded as an investment of a person’s financial resources in his or her own skills rather than a gamble taken at a casino. Webster’s New World Dictionary defines “invest” as “to put (money) into business, stocks, etc. in order to get a profit.” Poker more closely fits the definition of investment than gambling and is more similar to the stock market than to the roulette wheel, craps table, and slot machines. In the stock market, a person invests money into a company or collections of companies that compete with other companies to make money. If the company does well, the investor profits, and if the company does poorly, the investor will lose money. Poker follows the same concept except that the investor and the company are the same person. Eight to ten people sit at a poker table at any given time, and only some of them can win money while the others lose money. When one person at the table runs out of money, a different player sits down and puts his or her skills to the test in the market of the game. If they are outmatched, they will generally lose, and if they are more skilled than their opponents, in theory they should win money. Overall, those players who read about and study the game to become a skilled player will make a wise investment in themselves and will profit in the long run. Those who foolishly invest in their abilities without proper knowledge of the game will lose money in the long run.
One may argue that poker is gambling because there is a chance you will lose money. It is true that unfortunately, even the best poker players may experience short term losses in a session or series of sessions at a poker table, however, similar short term losses can be experienced in the stock market for even the best companies. The important fact in both the stock market and the poker room is that in the long run the best companies and the best players will show a profit.
Those few people who sit at a poker table with little or no knowledge of the game and try to compete with skilled players are gambling in the same way that a person who chooses to invest in a brand new company hoping its stock will rapidly increase in value so they can sell it for a quick profit are gambling. In either case, the person hopes that luck will prevail and they will make some quick money, but this strategy will not allow them to be successful in the long run in either market. However, those people who play poker on a regular basis are not gamblers, they are investors. They have developed a skill and are putting it to the test against the skills of others. Those who are best at the skill will win in the long run. If one consistently loses, the person must stop investing to further develop their skills to become better before investing any more money in themselves. Poker is not gambling and has little to do with luck. It’s believing that you are better at the game than those you are playing with and making a profit using the advantage you have developed.
Poker is more similar to the stock market than any of the other casino games and should be regulated as such. No state has outlawed investing in the stock market because of the risks incurred, and similarly, states should not have such laws forbidding poker. Poker players should be given the chance to capitalize on their skills without having to take the risk of playing in illegal card rooms. These players have worked hard to develop skills in the complex game of poker and should be rewarded and respected for their abilities.

Pirc Defense
06-23-2003, 04:09 AM
"For this reason, the majority of the final table at the World Series of Poker is comprised of the same group of elite poker players each year."

Are you able to prove this? I'm nitpicking, but I don't think this is true.

Grivan
06-23-2003, 04:41 AM
There is a key difference between the stock market and a poker table. It is the fact that poker in a casino is a negative sum game in which money is taken off of the table making it mandatory that there is a loser and even moreso that the majority of people are losers.
The stock market is opposite to this and money is actually added into the system. This causes the majority of investors to come out ahead and is why the stock market is considered a good investment by most people.

JasonM
06-23-2003, 08:15 AM
I agree here, I don't believe this is true. At least not for the final event. I do believe though that you could make an argument that the same guys are always high on the point system year after year. Also, I think you need to separate tournament play from ring-games.

Dynasty
06-23-2003, 09:01 AM
Poker definitely is gambling.

It seems that many poker players just don't want to accept that they are gambling. They don't seem to like the connotation which is connected with the word gambling.

It's their own loss because the best poker players are usually those who understand that poker is gambling and use their knowlege of gambling theory to their advantage.

bernie
06-23-2003, 10:54 AM
a better angle is that the stock market is a form of gambling. poker is gambling, and has alot of luck involved. it's a game of luck with an element of skill.

"These games yield a low percentage of success on the part of the player and a high percentage of success on the part of the house, thus explaining the abundance of casinos, and can therefore be classified as gambling.
Poker, on the other hand, is based on statistics, strategy, psychology, hand-reading, and people-reading. It is a game of skill in which each player matches skill and wit against the other players in the game"

and still is at the mercy of whatever the next card brings

poker also has a low percentage of success for most players. BJ is beatable as a form of gambling. more-so than poker in some degrees.

"However, those people who play poker on a regular basis are not gamblers, they are investors."

i disagree. most are longterm donators.

"If one consistently loses, the person must stop investing to further develop their skills to become better before investing any more money in themselves."

they dont have to stop. they have another job to supplement their poker losses. theyre not blowing their rolls fast enough to force them to stop in most cases.

"It's believing that you are better at the game than those you are playing with and making a profit using the advantage you have developed."

it takes alot more than just believing your the best in the game. many table coaches believe theyre the best, and lose longterm. it takes alot of hard damn work. many have read and studied their asses off, but still cant beat the game longterm for various reasons. one of the big ones is the boredom factor and players who cant handle the bad beats or streaks. longterm winning poker is a grind. like most other jobs.

"For this reason, the majority of the final table at the World Series of Poker is comprised of the same group of elite poker players each year. These players are not the luckiest players in the game, it is not chance that they do that well each year, they are simply the best in their game."

take this from 'rounders' did ya? this is a powder keg. and it's wrong. they are not the best at their game. how many repeat players on the final tables have you seen in the last 5-10 years? not many. although one poster made a point with the point system. THAT may be worth looking into. but when bringing up tourneys, there is a lot of luck involved in them. much, much more than in a ring game.

to be honest, this looks like it was written by someone who has read a couple books, saw rounders a few times, but really hasnt played for an extended period of time. never really ground it out nor explored why many losing players actually play the game. (i could be wrong, it's just an observation. not meant to offend you) anyone who has played for an extended amount of time, grinding away in a cardroom, will agree.

you do make some good points though, but you do realize there are some limits that, given the rake size, even good players cant overcome and beat the game. even though theyre better than anyone else on the table. it's not enough to just be a little better than the other players.

anyway, composition-wise, it's good.

just a little off on the realities of the game

b

DKNY
06-23-2003, 10:56 AM
Poker is definitely gambling. Even though there's skill involved and you don't have to deal with a house advantage like blackjack or craps. It is still gambling. I heard or read somewhere, poker is 2/3 luck and 1/3 skill.

PuppetMaster
06-23-2003, 10:58 AM
Lets compare Hold'em and Boxing.
There is no "luck" in boxing, you control your everything.

In Hold'em you can not control what card comes up next. I don't like to use the word luck when talking about poker, lets just say you can't control eveything, therefore you are gambling.

PuppetMaster
06-23-2003, 11:00 AM
I would say 9/10 skill, 1/10 luck.

Kurn, son of Mogh
06-23-2003, 12:01 PM
I believe the reverse is true. 65% skill, 35% luck. If the reverse were true, it would be virtually impossible to be a long-term winner.

Roy Munson
06-23-2003, 06:16 PM
Your reference to "Rounders" was right on the money. Since its release one can not sit at a poker table without listening to some kid who just started playing make references to this very misleading movie. Watching some wannabe pro get cleaned out by a clueless local or tourist is one of the most entertaining sights in the game. This is usually the person who claims that poker is not gambling.

At least when I play golf and people make the inevitable "Caddyshack" references, there is some levity involved.

TonyG
06-23-2003, 11:20 PM
I agree with your point that poker isn't at all like other casino games, in that there is skill involved. But it is still gambling, you are gambling that your skill is greater then the skill of those that you sit down with. I would say that poker is more like fishing than investing. Some people fish for a living, and some fish for recreation. You catch more fish, the more you know and the better you are. But even the best fishermen, even professionals go through dry spells. And even the worst can accidentally land there hook on top of a big hungry fish, and wind up thinking that they are better than they are. The main similarity between poker and fishing is the chance or "luck" involved. The main similarity between poker players and fishermen is that they are the type that are willing to take the gamble that their skill can beat the chance.

Thought provoking essay

Nottom
06-24-2003, 01:07 AM
Unless of course you are unlucky enough to have your eye busted up and are force to resign from a fight you are winning.

CrackerZack
06-24-2003, 09:05 AM
-You take drugs danny?
-everyday
-good.

Al_Capone_Junior
06-24-2003, 01:55 PM
Must agree. The fact that skill is a part of poker does not take away the fact that there is a high degree of luck. Someone who calls with the worst hand is gambling, just as someone who bets with the best hand is doing the same. The difference in poker is that it is possible to play with a positive expectation, unlike most other gambling games such as craps or let it ride. You CAN say that poker is a skill game, but you CAN NOT say that poker isn't gambling.

al

Al_Capone_Junior
06-24-2003, 02:07 PM
I do not think this is true either. In gambling theory and other topics, the ratio of standard deviation (statistical measure of luck) vs. EV (i.e. skill) is discussed, and I believe the ratio of an "optimal" game is about nine parts luck and one part skill. This is why the "long run" is so long. To find the exact figures, look it up in the book, mine is lent out right now so I can't. I do not believe these figures are anything near the same for no limit, as the skill factor is much higher.

al

microlimitaddict
06-24-2003, 08:14 PM
I enjoyed many of the observations made in the paper but, like most of the posters so far, had some diagreements.

I would agree with the observation that poker is around 2/3 luck or 90% luck or whatever. Indeed, as observed previously, that is why it takes so long to get into the long run...and why the fish across the table from me always seem to rack up the chips playing nothing but J2o. My favorite was the lady who played her 9-4 because she had observed that the "4's had been hitting a lot lately" (as in, showing up on the flop....what is this, roulette??). Naturally, she flopped trip 4's.

Interestingly, when I played in chess tournaments I used to call it a form of gambling and many other chess players agreed with me. Yes, they agreed it was more akin to gambling even though chess is typically considered to be all skill-based.
For those who do not know...chess tourneys are not unlike poker tourneys in some ways. The bigger chess events cost $200-$300 to enter and last for a few days. many players make observations about how lucky one player or another got in their particular game (bad-beat stories) and also how lucky one has to get to win a given tournament...or win in their class with such things as tough draws ("I had to play higher rated players in 6 out of my 7 rounds" or "I got stuck with the black pieces in my most crucial games" or even "I was winning...but time-control caught up with me" or "he played an opening i had never seen before and it caught me off-guard")

Surely if a chess tournament can be viewed as a form of gambling (not all agree with me of course) then poker must be viewed in a similar light.

For the record, I have a US chess rating around 1400 which basically means I suck. But like all 1400's, I just know I could be an 'expert' (2000 or higher) if I only had the discipline to study. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

I would also be interested in learning how many other chess-players lurk on this forum. I saw on WPT that Howard Lederer is quite competent at the game and suspect there are many other who share an affinity for both.

I also concur that the stock market is more like gambling than poker is not gambling. There have been the various studies where a monkey has thrown darts at a financial page and the stocks that were hit wound up performing better than the best investment firms...etc etc....but that would be only over a month or a year or a specific period of time and was clearly just plain lucky. I would choose to listen to the advice of the best firms and invest in the most solid mutual funds before I go lurking around my local zoo in efforts to determine whether or not to buy 3M or Microsoft. However, which is truly the lower-lever primate, the broker or the chimpanzee?? I'll leave that up to the reader to decide.

Unrelated note - my mom once tried to place an order with her broker using a touch-tone phone system and she accidenta;lly entered the wrong key (or the same key twice or something).....turned out that stock that she "accidentally/luckily" bought shot up 500% in that month....and the stock she tried to buy took a nose-dive.

Indeed, there is skill involved in poker....but if I were only playing for a short period of time I would not rely on that skill to guarantee a winning session.

andyfox
06-24-2003, 11:49 PM
Poker is gambling because 1) it is a game that involves both luck and skill; 2) it is a game of incomplete information; and 3) it is a game where there is a human factor involved.

1) While skillful players will do better in the long run than less skilled players, there is no guarantee that skillful players will win. They will do better than less skillful players. Where I play, I pay $18/hour to play. Thus is I play 40 hours a week, it costs $37,440/year. I can play skillfully, and win, say $25,000, and still be a loser. A player who plays better than I do will do better, but he still might end up in the red.

2) I can be skillful and still lose because I am still guessing what my oppponents have and what cards will come next. Skillful players have better ideas about these things, but they are still uncertain. So they are gambling about the ensuing events.

3) If two computers took over a chess game in the middle of the game, they would be able to play perfectly and the computer who had the advantage would win. In this case, the game would be a game of complete information, it would be a game that is 100% skill and zeo percent luck, and each computer would play optimally, without any human factor (fatigue, a misread, etc.) coming into play. But when people play poker, they make mistakes. Again, better players make fewer mistakes, but they still play less than 100% optimally.

Any time one can lose money on a bet, one is gambling.

Jimbo
06-25-2003, 10:54 AM
Great explanation Andy. You echoed my thoughts but expressed it so much better than I might have done.

Rook1
06-25-2003, 08:11 PM
I enjoyed your fishing take on poker, just wanted to add that the same can be said for any profession where skill is invoved. Doesn't chance and skill come into play in most aspects of life. Just wondering also what class this is for, what your teacher thought, and what grade you received?