STORM2K

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7808131

this, IMO is beyond absurred! The players' funds are being siezed, not those of the sites, which is what is supposed to happen, if there is any seizure

besides, POKER IS A GAME OF SKILL, NOT LUCK! THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GAMBLING!

That's not the only reason it's beyond absurd.

I can't figure out why gambling (and games of skill ) is not legalized widely across the US. Think of the lost tax revenue.

Derek Ortt wrote:http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7808131

this, IMO is beyond absurred! The players' funds are being siezed, not those of the sites, which is what is supposed to happen, if there is any seizure

besides, POKER IS A GAME OF SKILL, NOT LUCK! THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GAMBLING!

POKER IS A GAME OF SKILL, NOT LUCK! THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GAMBLING!

If you play for $$ its gambling, otherwise its a game of skill...

DESTRUCTION5 wrote:

Derek Ortt wrote:http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7808131

this, IMO is beyond absurred! The players' funds are being siezed, not those of the sites, which is what is supposed to happen, if there is any seizure

besides, POKER IS A GAME OF SKILL, NOT LUCK! THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GAMBLING!

POKER IS A GAME OF SKILL, NOT LUCK! THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GAMBLING!

If you play for $$ its gambling, otherwise its a game of skill...

so, are you saying that professional golf tournaments are also gambling? Players have to pay a small entry fee (of a few hundred dollars). If so, we need to shut down professional golf, one of the most popular sports in the country

In the longer term, poker is obviously a skill game, as the same faces keep showing up at the final table at the WSOP and other televised poker tournies.

But there is also a luck element, for example, two players that both have flushes or boats, as just about nobody, not even the savviest pros is going to fold a flush or full house, even if the community cards suggest the possibility the other player also may have a good hand.

I've seen people knocked out of, or almost knocked out (short stacked) from tournaments on TV with very, very good hands, which happened to be very, very bad luck for them, as they weren't quite good enough hands.

Ed Mahmoud wrote:In the longer term, poker is obviously a skill game, as the same faces keep showing up at the final table at the WSOP and other televised poker tournies.

But there is also a luck element, for example, two players that both have flushes or boats, as just about nobody, not even the savviest pros is going to fold a flush or full house, even if the community cards suggest the possibility the other player also may have a good hand.

I've seen people knocked out of, or almost knocked out (short stacked) from tournaments on TV with very, very good hands, which happened to be very, very bad luck for them, as they weren't quite good enough hands.

it isnt QUITE that hard to fold a flush, Ed, especially if you have low cards

Derek Ortt wrote:

DESTRUCTION5 wrote:

Derek Ortt wrote:http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7808131

this, IMO is beyond absurred! The players' funds are being siezed, not those of the sites, which is what is supposed to happen, if there is any seizure

besides, POKER IS A GAME OF SKILL, NOT LUCK! THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GAMBLING!

POKER IS A GAME OF SKILL, NOT LUCK! THEREFORE, IT IS NOT GAMBLING!

If you play for $$ its gambling, otherwise its a game of skill...

so, are you saying that professional golf tournaments are also gambling? Players have to pay a small entry fee (of a few hundred dollars). If so, we need to shut down professional golf, one of the most popular sports in the country

Now your talking about a contest...There are 2 clearly different definitions.

DESTRUCTION5 wrote:
Now your talking about a contest...There are 2 clearly different definitions.

it actually is not. Poker tournaments are the same thing as golf tournaments. You pay a fee to try and win a greater return on your investment. Maybe you could argue cash poker games are gambling, but not tournaments

I have a poker group that plays once a month and the way they play I'm definitely not gambling. They really stink

Poker is a game of skill and to some extent luck. That can be said about sports in general.

My job is a gamble. We make money on some jobs and lose it on others. (skill and luck).

You go into work and hope you still have a job. (lotsa luck)

I think law enforcement should have better things to so

My daughter used to play poker online. Her funds were frozen. She had to set up an offshore account to retrieve the money......and still didn't get it all back. It's clearly risky. I play online for "points" with Yahoo....I'm up to 73K....started with 1K. It's fun, although playing for points is entirely different than real money. I play for the "river"......and seldom fold before. I really don't know if it's skill or luck or just paying close attention to detail.

Dionne wrote:My daughter used to play poker online. Her funds were frozen. She had to set up an offshore account to retrieve the money......and still didn't get it all back. It's clearly risky. I play online for "points" with Yahoo....I'm up to 73K....started with 1K. It's fun, although playing for points is entirely different than real money. I play for the "river"......and seldom fold before. I really don't know if it's skill or luck or just paying close attention to detail.

That is skill.

So explain how a random shuffle of cards distributed to X number of people is skill? I view it with about as much skill as picking your nose. A more skillful picker can get a bigger bugger perhaps? And, I guess it is skill when a player bluffs another too?.....MGC

MGC wrote:So explain how a random shuffle of cards distributed to X number of people is skill? I view it with about as much skill as picking your nose. A more skillful picker can get a bigger bugger perhaps? And, I guess it is skill when a player bluffs another too?.....MGC

There's skill in calculating the probabilities and also in judging the proclivities of your opponents.

Query: How much of the skill involved in regular poker is eliminated by the lack of interpersonal contact experienced in online poker?

Squarethecircle wrote:Query: How much of the skill involved in regular poker is eliminated by the lack of interpersonal contact experienced in online poker?

Well, you can't watch for visual tells - mannerisms and such. But against skilled players I'm skeptical of the value of that - they know enough to conceal and/or fake them.

Betting tendencies - whether they're tight or loose, their willingness to bluff and so on are still there to discern. And the card probabilities are the same, of course.

Personally I don't think it's a huge difference. But I do think an online player is at a disadvantage when playing a live game, because they haven't had to learn to conceal their own tells or spot those of others.

So doing a quick mental calculation is skill? Humm...three aces showing that means one left...there you go, I should bleach my hair blond and join the tour!...so simple a blond can do it!.....MGC

To provide an arbitrary example (and an unhelpful one), there are 25 out of 52 cards out, and 13 are showing, with five players (thus two cards up out of a five card hand). Three aces are showing. Out of the other 39 cards, there is one ace. Every player picks up 2 cards, and one picks up one's cards last. The chances that the ace is in the cards not drawn is 12/39, but the best way of demonstrating this is multiplying the probabilities that it is not in any of the other cards, or 38/39 by 37/38 ... by 12/13, which cancels to the above. So the chances that it is in the draw pile are 27/39, or to simplify 9/13. We may treat the 8 cards before one's turn (this is arbitrary, because while the probability that the ace is still in the pile goes up as one's turn becomes earlier, the probability of one drawing it if it is in the pile goes down, both by the same proportion giving each player an equal chance of the following. Selecting only one example proves the others by a provable theorem) as the same entity since the effect will be the same on the player. Since there are 27 cards left (and this is quite important), and the ace is guaranteed to be in the draw pile (because we will later multiply the 9/13, the amount of times it is guaranteed as above), there is a probability of 19/27 (i.e. 26/27 * 25/26... * 19/20) that these card won't be eliminated. Multiplying this with the above, we have 19/39 (obviously) that the card is still in the pile when one draws. On the first draw, there is a 1/19 chance that one will draw the ace, or 1/39 total probability. On the second draw, there was an 18/19 chance that one did not draw the first time (since we are invoking the second time), and a 1/18 chance that one draws the ace, simplifying to, again, 1/19. Thus, there is a 2/39 chance given the original conditions that one draws an ace the next turn. This can be done effectively in one's head, as a lot of the math (i.e., the (18/19)/18, or equivalence to 19/27, or even the reasoning for a 19/39 probability) can be shortened by common sense or already proven mathematics.