Is poker gambling?

[roxtar]

A buddy of mine got into a discussion the other day about whether or not poker is a form of gambling. I say it is not due to the fact that there are definate mathmatically correct ways to play the game that if followed correctly = a long term win (+EV).
He hasn't gone so far as to say it's a game of TOTAL chance such as the lottery or bingo but he claims there's way too much chance involved to make it a game of skill.

Just wondering what you guys thought.

-Rox

Poker is gambling.

[dirty moose]

[ QUOTE ]
A buddy of mine got into a discussion the other day about whether or not poker is a form of gambling. I say it is not due to the fact that there are definate mathmatically correct ways to play the game that if followed correctly = a long term win (+EV).
He hasn't gone so far as to say it's a game of TOTAL chance such as the lottery or bingo but he claims there's way too much chance involved to make it a game of skill.

Just wondering what you guys thought.

-Rox

[/ QUOTE ]

i see the Theory of Poker in your future

-miss cleo

[Tuben]

Skalansky says it is a "Gamling game" [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I agree whit that [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[pzhon]

Skill and chance are not opposites. Tictactoe has little of either. Poker has a lot of both. Poker is gambling.

Poker is gambling unless you take an unrealistically long term view.

Cheers,


MidGe

[Student]

The other day a poker expert was quoted on TV as saying something to the effect that he expected, in 90% of long terms, to be a net winner. This was his way of answering the same question. Presumably by long term he meant a month, or a quarter of a year, or something.

Stock brokers will say a monkey shooting darts at the Wall Street Journal would have been profitable in any 10 year period selected, since the Great Depression (1929). If poker is a gamble for the expert above, then the stock market must be a one wild crazy bet, by comparison with poker!

In life, in a sense everything is a gamble. Poker for an expert is one of the smaller ones, JMHO.

Can you and I become expert enough? Yes. With a bit above average intelligence and years of hard work, most people can. Would one have to be a mathematician? No. Could one hate math and prosper with poker? Not in my opinion. Will it be easy to become an expert? Definitely not. Are the books adequate? Probably. Can one do it with thousands of different styles? Yes, though they will work with varying success rates. Have I arrived at expert status? Definitely not. Will I in a year? Yes, JMHO. Is it fun, even while bucking against the brickwall? Yes. These are just some random thoughts contributed to encourage discussion within this thread.

Dave

Poker is minimizing your losses and maximizing your wins. That doesn't mean you will never lose, and if you can lose, then you are gambling that you won't. There are weeks, months, and sometimes years that top poker players have losing streaks. If that isn't a gambling lifestyle, I don't know what is...

[AKQJ10]

I don't have a very strong opinion. To me it's a semantic argument. I believe it's gambling, but it's gambling you can get the best of over time.

i just wanted to point out that this thread on the B&M forum digressed onto the same topic.

[kleos]

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is minimizing your losses and maximizing your wins.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe something along these lines if not a better fundametal, is the secondary fundametal.
[ QUOTE ]
I believe it's gambling, but it's gambling you can get the best of over time.

[/ QUOTE ]
You can actively do a lot to control the odds, and manipulate them to your favor. I don't know that any other game lets you do that without getting banned from casinos.