POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

i've read threads on 2+2 b4 about whether poker is gambling and a lot of people say "you're an idiot if u don't think poker is gambling".

I can't understand how poker in the long run is gambling. Here are my 2 analogies, ASSUMING YOU ARE AN EXCELLENT PLAYER:

1. if u are an excellent player (better than 99%) of your opponents, you will ALWAYS win in the long run. And the long run isn't even that long.....if you play everyday, you should be in the black every month. So what's the difference between poker and a casino with slot machines and table games? I don't see any difference. On a bad nite, the casino may lose $2million bc somebody hits a mega JP on slots or whatever but by the end of the month, they ALWAYS make money.

2) Poker is like a sports team. In any given game, the Chicago Blackhawks can beat the NHL Allstar team, maybe even over the course of 10 games......but if they played 100 games, the allstars will always show a winning record.(assuming no injuries etc).

So how can poker be gambling in the long run?? Maybe it depends if your definition of gambling is for 1 seesion, but certainly not if you are talking about a lifetime.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

Who says you will not run bad forever?

Random is random, Its a gamble [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

But i see your point of view, I consider poker a "Calculated Risk" Rather than roulette for example.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

In the real world, it is impossible to run bad forever. If u run bad forever, then you are likely not an excellent or even above average player.

I think if u play everyday, it's very very very very unlikely to run bad even for 3 months......it's possible but hioghly unlikey. More likely, it'sur play that's deteriorated from the first few weeks of running bad.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
In the real world, it is impossible to run bad forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong choice of words, impossible, no, unlikely, yes.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

It depends on how you want to define gambling. If you are the 10th best player in the world and sit in a game with players 1-9, then it's gambling. If you sit down with fish then it's not. So---it depends on your skill level, I guess, which includes your ability to pick/remain in good games.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

No one is claiming that in the long run its gambling. Often people get mad because of the common way gambling is used on the forum. Gambling refers to signifcant chance over the short run. So that's why they call it gambling. In this light the stock or bond markets are also gambling.

The reason people use this term is because sometimes a new kid will play 10,000 hands, be a winner for a month, decide he can't lose, and start playing 15/30 (my friend). The poker is gambling terminology is used to protect these kids that don't properly understand variance or bankroll, just as a good broker will try to protect someone from loading up on all stocks if thier investment horizon is to short.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

You are implying that gambling with a positive expectation is not gambling. I disagree, but that of course depends and what you mean by "gambling".

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

Who are the "Chicago Blackhawks" ? And what is the "NHL" ?

NO SUCH THING AS GAMBLING
 

I suppose if you really think about it, there is no such thing as gambling if you look at long run. If you are a good poker player, you will always win in the long run. If you are below average, you will always lose in the long run. So even for a poor player, they are not really gambling, they are just giving their money away slowly over time.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

VERB:
gam·bled , gam·bling , gam·bles
VERB:
intr.


To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest. poker?... yes
To play a game of chance for stakes. poker?... yes
To take a risk in the hope of gaining an advantage or a benefit. poker?... yes
To engage in reckless or hazardous behavior: You are gambling with your health by continuing to smoke.
VERB:
tr.

To put up as a stake in gambling; wager.
To expose to hazard; risk: gambled their lives in a dangerous rescue mission.

It appears to me that poker is gambling.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

I have found that playing poker with 9 fish is has way more gamble than with 9 good pros.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Who are the "Chicago Blackhawks" ? And what is the "NHL" ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a couple more entries on the endangered species list...

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

VERB:
gam·bled , gam·bling , gam·bles
VERB:
intr.


To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest. poker?... yes ...... <font color="red"> </font> not really, outcome is certain in the long run
To play a game of chance for stakes. poker?... yes ....only a game of chance in the short run
To take a risk in the hope of gaining an advantage or a benefit. poker?... yes ....again, no risk in the long run
To engage in reckless or hazardous behavior: You are gambling with your health by continuing to smoke.
VERB:
tr.

To put up as a stake in gambling; wager.
To expose to hazard; risk: gambled their lives in a dangerous rescue mission.

It appears to me that poker is gambling.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
In the real world, it is impossible to run bad forever. If u run bad forever, then you are likely not an excellent or even above average player.

I think if u play everyday, it's very very very very unlikely to run bad even for 3 months......it's possible but hioghly unlikey. More likely, it'sur play that's deteriorated from the first few weeks of running bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Mason did some calculations showing that its is quite possible for a solid winning player to lose for 6 months.

-Scott

Re: NO SUCH THING AS GAMBLING
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you are a good poker player, you will always win in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]
So if you only play with Doyle Brunson, Phil Ivey, Howard Lederer, Barry Greenstein, T.J. Cloutier, and a few others of that caliber, you will always win in the long run?

THATS SO DUMB
 

First of all, that's totally unrealistic to be ALWAYS playing with poker legends. You're justsaying that for arguements' sake bc u know that wouldn't happen.
Secondly, even if you could play with Brunson and the like all the time ,and u voluntarily chose to do so, then you are obviously NOT a good player bc u lack the game selection skills of a moron. But if u were better than Brunson and Ivey etc and played with them all the time, that wouldn't be gambling bc u would be guaranteed to win in the long run.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually Mason did some calculations showing that its is quite possible for a solid winning player to lose for 6 months.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is even more true live.

b

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
And the long run isn't even that long..... if you play everyday, you should be in the black every month.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necesarily.

Define longrun. It's alot longer than you think given your above statement.

b

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

This argument sucks. If you do not think poker is gambling you are a fool. It is just really easy gambling.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have found that playing poker with 9 fish is has way more gamble than with 9 good pros.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, playing with 9 good pros isn't gambling. You know you're going to lose, so there's no element of chance involved at all. . .

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

An argument about whether poker is gambling or not is really just an argument about the definition of gambling. So stop already.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
So how can poker be gambling in the long run??

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, it's gambling -- but it's gambling with an edge.

I think most people associate "gambling" with some sort of -EV activity. However, it's absolutely possible to "gamble" while having a mathematical advantage.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

ICE BURN

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, it's gambling -- but it's gambling with an edge.

I think most people associate "gambling" with some sort of -EV activity. However, it's absolutely possible to "gamble" while having a mathematical advantage.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the above 100%. A good player will always (or MOST always) make +EV decisions. Almost any poker literature you can think of states that, to win, you need to continue to make those +EV decisions. However, please note that EV is "EXPECTED" value, and not "GUARANTEED" value. Mathematically, it can easily be proven that, after 1000 coin tosses, the probability is NOT 100% that "heads" will turn up at least once. By the same token, one would be a fool not to take an even bet on such an occurrence. That would be a +EV bet, but NOT a certainty, and therefore it is a gamble.

As another poster already stated, it's all in how you define the word. Unless you have a nuts hand, you always stand the chance of losing that hand. Statistically, there is a very minute chance that you will NEVER have the nuts hand eventually, but the uncertainty still exists. Statistically, there is a very small chance that you will NEVER get everyone to fold and thereby win the pot, but the uncertainty still exists.

Maybe this is splitting hairs, but precision is important to most of us.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
An argument about whether poker is gambling or not is really just an argument about the definition of gambling. So stop already.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

[ QUOTE ]
VERB:
gam·bled , gam·bling , gam·bles
VERB:
intr.


To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest. poker?... yes ...... <font color="red"> </font> not really, outcome is certain in the long run
To play a game of chance for stakes. poker?... yes ....only a game of chance in the short run
To take a risk in the hope of gaining an advantage or a benefit. poker?... yes ....again, no risk in the long run
To engage in reckless or hazardous behavior: You are gambling with your health by continuing to smoke.
VERB:
tr.

To put up as a stake in gambling; wager.
To expose to hazard; risk: gambled their lives in a dangerous rescue mission.

It appears to me that poker is gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I predict a lucrative career as a lawyer for you.

Re: POKER IS GAMBLING?
 

It seems to me that many on the posters have touched on various parts of the answer, but not the entire answer.

First the question should be re-stated as, is poker gambling or skill.

The answer is that in the short term there is much more luck than skill. For instance, on 1 hand you can bet before the plop with AA, and end up losing to any number of hands by the river. That is bad luck. So betting with a good hand like AA is gambling, because the outcome is far from certain. Likewise, in any "short term" the likelyhood of being ahead or behind can be calculated. Note however that it is the likelyhood, or probability of being a winning, or losing player. The probabilty will be less than 1, the outcome is uncertain, so it is a gamble.

The longer the "long run" is, the less involvement luck has, and the more involvement skill has. The reason for this is that skill means, in part, betting when your expected value is positive, and passing when it is not. Over thousands of such decisions, if you constantly bet on +EV situations, the wins should start to accumulate.

This is how the casinos make their money. They play games where they have +EV, a probability edge. In the short term, someone can get lucky and win a big jackpot. In the long term, thousands of people making millions of bad decisions, to bet on -EV situations, make the casinos a lot of money.

An example often used is the coin flip. If you flip a coin, there are only 2 outcomes, and those outcomes are equally likely. If you bet $1 on heads and someone else bets $1 on tails, you have a 1:1 chance of winning and a $1 to $1 bet, so the bet is 0 EV and is neither a bad bet nor a good one. If the other person puts up $2 to your $1, you now have a +EV bet and you should take it. Note that nothing has changed in the probability of the coin flip. it is still a 50/50 proposition. The skill is in recognizing that the bet is a good one because you have and edge. The luck involved is that you can lose for a long time as that coin comes up tails over and over.