When they tell you its gambling, explain it like this.

Paler don't be hard headed, poker is gambling period.

Zin said:

The game of poker before Moneymakers win 75% skill 25% luck, the game of poker after Moneymakers win 55% skill 45% luck. Its easier to beat good players than maniacs or donks, imho.

Click to expand...

pcgnome said:

I've heard that poker is 90% luck and 10% skill. You play a hand the best that you can, and you still can still suck out on the river . It happens all the time, and you have to get used to it or you have to go do something else.
Comparing poker to chess is a lot of bs. Chess is all about keeping several steps ahead of your opponent(You are only allowed one opponent). It's a strategy game that has nothing to do with chance at all.

Click to expand...

Opinions, like belly buttons, are shared by us all. I am not simply offering an opinion. If you think it is 90% luck and 10% skill (or whatever figure you are throwing out here), then by all means, I challenge you to back that up with more than just your opinion. Prove me wrong, if you can. Since I am using math, this should be easy.

And I have already provided links that clearly show both chess players AND poker players compare the two games. See the links in post number 11 of this thread. And try actually looking at it before you dismiss it as "BS". Then you can come back and admit you were wrong.

If, however, you still think it is BS, fine. Go start a thread stating why. Back that up with some facts. Answer those players of both games, master to master, how and why they are wrong.

Zin said:

Paler don't be hard headed, poker is gambling period.

Click to expand...

Did you read any of these posts? Did you notice the links I provided? The math? The clear explanations?

It is not a question of hardheadedness. At least not on my part. It is a matter of a belief I carry because I have proven it to myself first in fact. So instead of doing a drive by posting only providing jack and squat to back you up, by all means prove me wrong. I have proved my thesis. It should be easy to disprove it without relying on opinion and speculation and ignoring the provin statements.

It is a matter of a belief I carry because I have proven it to myself first in fact.

Click to expand...

Despite this.... you're 100% wrong. So again, I think you need to look at WHY you think this. Why would you think something isnt gambling when it is so obviously gambling to everyone else... maybe its because you dont WANT it to be gambling... you want to BELIEVE it isnt gambling so you make up all these rather mundane arguments and convince yourself they are solid and good.... but they arent. They are preventing you from seeing the truth.

Poker is gambling. Period. The first step is acceptance...

WhineyLobster said:

If youre having to justify to someone that poker isnt gambling.... maybe you have other issues most notably (and ironically) an addiction to gambling that your friends and family are trying to make you aware of.

Poker is DEFINITELY gambling...no matter how to try to spin it. You can play the game with skill but it is gambling.

Click to expand...

What a cheap shot. Maybe you are taking that cheap shot because the math and the proof are over your head. So do not assume I have a gambling problem because of your ignorance of this topic.

I am trying to support the legalization of it online. Not trying to justify anything to cover my azz.

But it sounds like you have had some problems that you maybe tried to cover up with nonsensical BS before you accepted you had a problem. That is certainly not what I am doing here. I, my friend, am a full grown man; I do not justify anything blindly. If you do, that is your business. So don't assume we are all like you, thank you very much.

WhineyLobster said:

Despite this.... you're 100% wrong. So again, I think you need to look at WHY you think this.

Maybe you could read why I am doing this? How about that, zippy? I have already covered this, Mr. Troll Why would you think something isnt gambling when it is so obviously gambling to everyone else... maybe its because you dont WANT it to be gambling... you want to BELIEVE it isnt gambling so you make up all these rather mundane arguments and convince yourself they are solid and good.... but they arent. They are preventing you from seeing the truth.

Poker is gambling. Period. The first step is acceptance...

Click to expand...

So by all means then provide your proof it is gambling. Or is this type of cheap weasley BS all you got?

Thought so. Maybe you need to accept you do not know how to back up what youre saying with anything other than a cowards unsubstantiated ramblings and childish accusations with no proof whatsoever.

Grow up. And go troll someone else's post.

Gamble = Play a game of chance for money.

I'm not saying there is no skill. Poker in the long-run is a skill game with chance eliminated. But in the short-run, every hand of poker is a game of chance. And it is played for money. It is not 100% based on chance. But that is not a requirement in being called a "game of chance."

Scourrge said:

Gamble = Play a game of chance for money.

I'm not saying there is no skill. Poker in the long-run is a skill game with chance eliminated. But in the short-run, every hand of poker is a game of chance. And it is played for money. It is not 100% based on chance. But that is not a requirement in being called a "game of chance."

Click to expand...

Wow. You just clearly did not read one damn thing I posted or are just ignoring it. So, fine. Why not quote my post explaining where you are clearly wrong and type in where you think that I am wrong and why. Because you are so far off as to not be believed.

dudemanstan said:

Well not players, but my family members are never going to believe me when I tell them I know what I'm doing, and it is not gambling for me. My aunt said oh you will be a good player when you win a million.

They ask.. "well how did you do last night?" Oh I made the final table for the tenth time in a row. " oh how much did you win?" I got 1 dollar its a free buy in.. Then they just start laughing, and rolling there eyes. Man it makes me so mad!

Click to expand...

Well thanks for that. Nice to have a newer player make an honest, relevant comment. I am getting trolled now by newer players looking to hit enough posts that they can participate in the club, lol. Thank God they are limited to 10 a day.

Luckily for me (I am still learning) my family supports me having a cheap hobby that could make me rich someday. While I have yet to ever deposit any money online, I have won about 100-200 dollars online for nothing and occasionally venture out to a live game. They often come along and cheer me on, so it is nice.

Do not give up, do not get discouraged, do not stop learning. A dollar won for free is more valuable than a dollar won by spending any amount at all!

First of all, I read most of the thread until it got redundant. Second, do not hurl around your statements like stones - it's unnecessary and makes you come off worse than I think you mean to.

In response to your original post: The argument that chips are not money and therefore poker is not gambling is fundamentally flawed, since in real-money poker games, chips represent money. And just because you make multiple wagers throughout the course of a hand does not make them NOT wagers. Preflop I wager some amount of money that I will win the hand or forfeit my right to at a chance of winning the hand. On the flop I wager some amount that I will win the hand or forfeit my right at a chance of winning the hand - etc. These are all wagers, and once they are made, they cannot be changed based on the outcome. I can't take my flop bet back once the turn comes. The outcome of the turn card was uncertain, which made my flop bet a wager. Therefore gambling.

I won't argue against your second paragraph in the OP, because I believe poker is a skill game primarily, when played in the long run.

Michael Paler said:

Well thanks for that. I am getting trolled now by newer players looking to hit enough posts that they can participate in the club, lol. Nice to have a newer player make an honest, relevant comment.

Luckily for me (I am still learning) my family supports me having a cheap hobby that could make me rich someday. While I have yet to ever deposit any money online, I have won about 100-200 dollars online for nothing and occasionally venture out to a live game. They often come along and cheer me on, so it is nice.

Do not give up, do not get discouraged, do not stop learning. A dollar won for free is more valuable than a dollar won by spending any amount at all!

Click to expand...

I know this wasn't primarily directed at me (at least I hope not - I stopped attempting 25 quality posts ages ago ), but I don't think you were being trolled either. I think it was a case of strong opinions and misinterpretations of intent/meaning.

The level of skill vs. chance in poker will always be a matter of opinion, but the chess pieces will always always start at the same position at the beginning of the chess match so things are fair and equal for both players.
Who are you trying to kid? How long have we been playing poker?
You have to make your decision about what to do with the hand that is dealt to you , and you won't be dealt the same hand every time.
In a tournament your opponent might decide to go all the way to the river with his AJo vs. your pocket aces no matter how hard you bet into him, and there is still a 7.4% chance that you might lose.
There is absolutely no variance involved in chess. You will never hear a chess player give the excuse that they lost a match because of bad luck. It doesn't work that way.

pcgnome said:

The level of skill vs. chance in poker will always be a matter of opinion, but the chess pieces will always always start at the same position at the beginning of the chess match so things are fair and equal for both players.
Who are you trying to kid? How long have we been playing poker?
You have to make your decision about what to do with the hand that is dealt to you , and you won't be dealt the same hand every time.
In a tournament your opponent might decide to go all the way to the river with his AJo vs. your pocket aces no matter how hard you bet into him, and there is still a 7.4% chance that you might lose.
There is absolutely no variance involved in chess. You will never hear a chess player give the excuse that they lost a match because of bad luck. It doesn't work that way.

Click to expand...

What if the best player in the world's wife died the morning of a big match? The 10th best in the world might beat him that day when on a normal day there is no contest. I'm not saying there is a HIGH level of chance, but there is ALWAYS a level of chance in literally everything.

Scourrge said:

First of all, I read most of the thread until it got redundant. Second, do not hurl around your statements like stones - it's unnecessary and makes you come off worse than I think you mean to.

In response to your original post: The argument that chips are not money and therefore poker is not gambling is fundamentally flawed, since in real-money poker games, chips represent money. And just because you make multiple wagers throughout the course of a hand does not make them NOT wagers. Preflop I wager some amount of money that I will win the hand or forfeit my right to at a chance of winning the hand. On the flop I wager some amount that I will win the hand or forfeit my right at a chance of winning the hand - etc. These are all wagers, and once they are made, they cannot be changed based on the outcome. I can't take my flop bet back once the turn comes. The outcome of the turn card was uncertain, which made my flop bet a wager. Therefore gambling.

I won't argue against your second paragraph in the OP, because I believe poker is a skill game primarily, when played in the long run.

Click to expand...

Scourrge said:

I know this wasn't primarily directed at me (at least I hope not - I stopped attempting 25 quality posts ages ago ), but I don't think you were being trolled either. I think it was a case of strong opinions and misinterpretations of intent/meaning.

Click to expand...

No, it wasn't directed at you. It was directed at the troll who tried to make it sound like I was simply trying to justify a gambling addiction, lol, for a response as to why he disagrees that poker is not gambling. If I have that, I better start depositing money right away. Otherwise I won't be able to qualify for gamblers anonymous, or wherever they go. (GA?) So, I think trolling is applicable in that instance, don't you? You wouldn't go into the Zimmerman trail thread, for example, and say that someone is posting this only out of guilt because they maybe also shot someone in self defense? That really does not add ot the subject at hand, and is instead just a accusation. IMO.

Anyway, I just do not agree with you that the chips you are wagering make it gambling. I already stated why you have these chips and the difference presented in a tournament vs a cash game. This, IMO, renders this just simply how you play the game, making a wager-move. Not just simply a wager. Or you can play at home using chips that have zero value as well. Thus the amount of your wager made during your move is no less than it is with a move in chess. In chess it is the strength of the piece being moved and the threat it poses by location as well that makes it strong, weak, etc. If you attached a value to chess pieces it would have to run from most valuable (arguably the King as that can lose your game when trapped or the Queen whose moves are the strongest) down to the weakest piece, the pawn.

Let us not forget I am not simply out in the wind here. Several countries, courts and the like have already ruled poker is a game of skill, not gambling. So I am not making shots in the dark.

I rest my case with you. We either agree or agree to disagree. I just cannot find a compelling argument against my original hypothesis from anyone other than speculation.

pcgnome said:

The level of skill vs. chance in poker will always be a matter of opinion, but the chess pieces will always always start at the same position at the beginning of the chess match so things are fair and equal for both players.
Who are you trying to kid? How long have we been playing poker?
You have to make your decision about what to do with the hand that is dealt to you , and you won't be dealt the same hand every time.
In a tournament your opponent might decide to go all the way to the river with his AJo vs. your pocket aces no matter how hard you bet into him, and there is still a 7.4% chance that you might lose.
There is absolutely no variance involved in chess. You will never hear a chess player give the excuse that they lost a match because of bad luck. It doesn't work that way.

Click to expand...

When you start a game of chess you sit down and the board is set up prior to making a move. In a poker game you are seated and the board is set up with all your chips in front of you and you are dealt two hole cards (depending on game, of course).

You start a game of chess when the guy sitting behind the white pieces makes his first move. That is called the opening move, is it not? In poker you await the first move by the guy UTG. In Poker that is called the first to act, is it not?

As for variance, there most certainly is lots and lots of variance in chess. There are 20 opening moves, for a total of 400 different positions after each player makes one move apiece. There are also 318,979,564,000 possible positions after 4 moves.

That is not variance?

In poker you might get any two of 52 cards to start a hand of poker, but you might make one of 400 opening moves in chess. Sounds awful similar to me.

Did you check out my poker-chess links? You agree or disagree with the industry professionals?

Yeah, and when your seated at a poker game you will often have to pay a certain amount to the game room or casino for the seat or for each hand depending on the type of game you are playing, and the outcome of each hand is often determined by chance no matter what the industry professionals say or how much math you use.

poker is gambling definitely because money is involved but to me is a game where you sometimes play your opponents mind not his cards

Michael Paler said:

Anyway, I just do not agree with you that the chips you are wagering make it gambling. I already stated why you have these chips and the difference presented in a tournament vs a cash game. This, IMO, renders this just simply how you play the game, making a wager-move. Not just simply a wager. Or you can play at home using chips that have zero value as well. Thus the amount of your wager made during your move is no less than it is with a move in chess. In chess it is the strength of the piece being moved and the threat it poses by location as well that makes it strong, weak, etc. If you attached a value to chess pieces it would have to run from most valuable (arguably the King as that can lose your game when trapped or the Queen whose moves are the strongest) down to the weakest piece, the pawn.

Click to expand...

It's not the chips that make it gambling - I could pretty easily accuse you of not reading my post just as you did of me. It's the MONEY involved that makes it gambling. Since you seem compelled to dwell in details, I'll give an example:

In a cash game, chips have a 1:1 relationship with dollars. $1 in chips = $1 in money. You are wagering the MONEY that the chip represents. Outcomes are uncertain.

In a tournament, the only wager that truly happens is BEFORE the tournament begins. You pay an entry fee, wagering that you can place ITM of that field. Again, the outcome is uncertain.

Your argument about "strength of move" isn't valid at all to this debate. It's valid as a statement - obviously certain moves in poker represent strength more than others - but it is not analogous to chess since in chess you are moving pieces that don't represent wagers... If you have an entry fee for a chess tournament, then yes, that too would be gambling.

Do you consider sports betting to be gambling? What about if you are on the team playing? The outcome is still uncertain and you are still wagering money. Is this any different from a poker tournament? You can't really refute that as an analogy since the only true difference arises in team vs. solo play. But if you don't believe sports betting is gambling then I have to give up here.

Edit: One last thing I thought of. If you play poker with no money involved, ie JUST chips, it is NOT gambling. Once you put money in, it is. And I already said I AGREE that poker is a skill game. "Skill-game" and "gambling" are NOT mutually exclusive.

Michael Paler said:

As for variance, there most certainly is lots and lots of variance in chess. There are 20 opening moves, for a total of 400 different positions after each player makes one move apiece. There are also 318,979,564,000 possible positions after 4 moves.

That is not variance?

In poker you might get any two of 52 cards to start a hand of poker, but you might make one of 400 opening moves in chess. Sounds awful similar to me.

Click to expand...

And no, a large number of possible spots within a game tree does not suggest high variance in an outcome of a game.

Scourrge said:

It's not the chips that make it gambling - I could pretty easily accuse you of not reading my post just as you did of me. It's the MONEY involved that makes it gambling. Since you seem compelled to dwell in details, I'll give an example:

In a cash game, chips have a 1:1 relationship with dollars. $1 in chips = $1 in money. You are wagering the MONEY that the chip represents. Outcomes are uncertain.

Click to expand...

So if you pay a fee to enter into a chess tournament, then you are gambling? So by that reasoning, just about every single contest and game played is gambling. If someone has a contest for the best underwater picture taken off the coast of california, I will need to rent a snorkel and a camera to do it, so therefore I am gambling? No, I read your post, you are simply trying to make this equation: money = gambling. You are not gambling on chess if you pay an entry fee. That is just silly. Nor could you say poker is not gambling only when it is online and a freeroll. It either is or it is not. By your reasoning money is what determines if something is or is not gambling. That is just flat out wrong. Again, courts of law have already established it takes more than money involved for it to be gambling. Namely, if the game is one requiring a high degree of chance or "luck", like roulette. Skill is required for success in poker, not luck. In order to make you understand, that snorkle and camera is simply the equipment you must buy/rent in order to partake in this contest. Just like poker chips. Or pads and uniforms required in a football game. Are you going to say that playing football is gambling? You must, as you have to buy that stuff to play.

In a tournament, the only wager that truly happens is BEFORE the tournament begins. You pay an entry fee, wagering that you can place ITM of that field. Again, the outcome is uncertain.

Click to expand...

Yet that outcome is not solely based on luck or chance, rather on level of skill. How else do you explain the same faces always showing up at final tables? All outcomes are uncertain, in everything. That renders your argument a moot point. Sorry.

Your argument about "strength of move" isn't valid at all to this debate. It's valid as a statement - obviously certain moves in poker represent strength more than others - but it is not analogous to chess since in chess you are moving pieces that don't represent wagers... If you have an entry fee for a chess tournament, then yes, that too would be gambling.

Click to expand...

So I was right. Not surprising. This proves my reasoning was sound; you actually think playing a chess tournament is gambling. I just do not know how to respond to such an obtuse statement.

As a chess player, I disagree about your dismissal of "strength of move" This most certainly is a type of wager-move within my (correct) reasoning that poker is not gambling. Again, since you (incorrectly) put money=gambling into all of your equations, you therefore cannot see this because it is a chess piece, not a chip. In other words, you are proceeding from a false assumption in your argument. Under my correct equation, it is basically the same thing and logically so. You are making a wager move each time in chess. Or perhaps you simply do not understand chess. That is fair enough. Know that, however, I really recommend learning chess. It can really improve your poker game.

Do you consider sports betting to be gambling? What about if you are on the team playing? The outcome is still uncertain and you are still wagering money. Is this any different from a poker tournament? You can't really refute that as an analogy since the only true difference arises in team vs. solo play. But if you don't believe sports betting is gambling then I have to give up here.

Click to expand...

No, sports betting is gambling. However, you are gambling outside of what is happening. You have no control over it. If you bet on the outcome of a poker game, you are doing the exact same thing. Your analogy only strengthens my argument, and here is why; when you are the one playing in the game, you are not gambling. You are a merely a player. In sports, you are not allowed to make bets on the outcome of the game if you are a player, for obvious reasons; you might throw the game in order to make your bet pay off. Yet if playing poker is gambling, as you incorrectly insist, are you not committing the same offense as the sports player? You are playing in the game and gambling on an overall outcome you have control over (you could lose on purpose). You just defeated your own argument here. Thanks.

Edit: One last thing I thought of. If you play poker with no money involved, ie JUST chips, it is NOT gambling. Once you put money in, it is. And I already said I AGREE that poker is a skill game. "Skill-game" and "gambling" are NOT mutually exclusive.

Click to expand...

Again, you made this statement already and are still wrong in it. You are incorrectly equating money to gambling. Money does not make it gambling, the amount of skill involved in the game or the lack thereof is what makes it/deos not make it, gambling. Think about your reasoning here. It is way off base. You cannot say the exact same game is and is not gambling. Either it all is, or it is not.

I think I have done a very good job destroying your argument, here. Sorry.

1.) You state that gambling = money. I have proven it does not. I am supported in case law and will once again below in dictionary definitions, if that will help you to understand;

gam·bling [gam-bling]
noun
1. the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.
2. the act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly: If you don't back up your data, that's gambling.
The above is from dictionary.reference.com

Her is another, from collins dictionary;

noun

the act or process of playing games of chance to win money ⇒ He thinks gambling is wrong. ⇒ Gambling is a form of entertainment. ⇒ He likes gambling.

2.) I have established that gambling = overall element of luck or chance involved + money bet on the overall outcome of said luck or chance occurring. Pretty much just as the dictionary defines it.

So, unless you plan on accusing me of using semantics, which is about your only come back as far as I can see, which will simply ignore known dictionary references as well as established law concerning what the word does actually mean, we should be done here.

There's no telling what's going to happen. Almost no sure thing.

jolubman said:

There's no telling what's going to happen. Almost no sure thing.

Click to expand...

Hopefully once people realize just what gambling is and is not; that to be gambling it requires a bet made on an overall outcome without being able to control that outcome in any meaningful way (not along the way as is done in poker), they will have to come around. Semantics is not a valid argument here and that is often the only argument put forth against it. Thank God words do have meaning as far as the law is concerned.

And they are starting to come around, slowly but surely. Still, those totally unaware of what poker is as well as weak players and fish who think luck is the major factor in winning at poker (and therefore "gambling") are the ones standing in the way. Eventually they will be ignored as they just cannot refute the facts.

That is why I have created this post. I hope to educate and correct those who have fallen for the misconceptions of what poker is and that it is indeed a game of skill with no more luck involved than any other game of skill, much like chess.

For me, poker is obviously gambling. That is not to say that is is not a game of skill where a good player will win in the long term, just that you wage money on chance. Even though you have a good idea of the odds and know it will swing in your favor in the longterm in many situations, it can go against you. Yesterday there was a raise UTG and I shoved AA from middle position. He called with AJ and hit broadway.

My favorite comparison to use with poker is investing. It fits perfectly. Someone should write a book about it.

Reptar7 said:

For me, poker is obviously gambling. That is not to say that is is not a game of skill where a good player will win in the long term, just that you wage money on chance. Even though you have a good idea of the odds and know it will swing in your favor in the longterm in many situations, it can go against you. Yesterday there was a raise UTG and I shoved AA from middle position. He called with AJ and hit broadway.

My favorite comparison to use with poker is investing. It fits perfectly. Someone should write a book about it.

Click to expand...

No offense, but do you realize that money bet alone does not make something gambling? It is money placed on an overall outcome that you have little or no control over; money bet in a game that is one of primarily luck and chance, not skill. You are halfway there, my friend! You already know poker is more skill than simple luck. The money you are betting during play is not the same as betting on the overall outcome. This makes the chips a required and necessary part of the game, no different from chess pieces you simply must have to play chess or the football and safety equipment you must have in order to play football! Since those chips actual value vary greatly (no value at home or in a free roll, diminished value in an MTT, exact value in a cash game), you have no choice but to determine what exactly is gambling and what it is not; this is because it cannot sometimes be gambling and sometimes not be gambling. It either is or it is not.

We cannot let people get away with using semantics here (not that you are rep) and simply dismissing it because of that. Gambling has a clear definition and that is what the courts are using to come to the same conclusions; poker is not gambling! Read the definitions of gambling in my post number 46. I am not just making this stuff up (I do not think you are claiming I am, either).

Its a skilled game, but, with a small amount of luck. To win you have to know when to hold em and also when to fold em.