Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="rifflemao, post: 2326562, member: 98323"] That may be true of Joe Public, but you're attributing something about him to the game of poker as a whole, which is a [URL='[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition']logical fallacy[/URL]. I'll try to break it down: Roulette is predominately a game of chance. Poker is predominately a game of skill. Joe Public has no skill at poker, and relies on chance to win. Joe Public is gambling at poker; therefore, poker is gambling. :icon_scra You can exchange Joe Public with Phil Ivey and the fallacy is still there: [I]Phil Ivey has been gambling at poker all night by playing against the odds; therefore, poker is gambling.[/I] :icon_scra I'm not saying it's a bad argument, and it might actually be effective in court (or the court of public opinion who may also view Joe Public as a victim of the poker community, despite all the free information available to him), but imo it's flawed in the way that some antiquated legal definitions of gambling are when they don't take [I]predominance[/I] into consideration. As far as "skill" being a helpful point, a writer at [URL="http://www.law360.com/articles/463209/poker-game-of-skill-ruling-has-life-beyond-ny-reversal"]Law360.com[/URL] thinks that Judge Weinstein's skill-game ruling in the DiCristina case could matter in some US States (Google "poker game of skill" if necessary to see the full article): [FONT="Book Antiqua"][SIZE="3"]"...since the underlying framework on which IGBA cases stand or fall depends on how individual states treat gambling, judges in other states whose statutes take less stringent approaches toward what constitutes illegal gambling could find use in Judge Weinstein's opinion, according to Fleming. 'Whether poker is skill or chance does matter under other states,' Fleming said. [B]About 25 states, for example, have laws requiring that luck 'predominate' and not just exist in a material degree for a game to be considered gambling.[/B] 'We hope that, in other states, courts will be swayed by Judge Weinstein's opinion,' Fleming said. State lawmakers, too, could take cues from the 'game of skill' ruling, according to Daniels College of Business risk analysis and gaming professor Robert Hannum. 'Right now it's a gray, nebulous area as you go from state to state,' Hannum said. 'But I'm convinced that poker should be characterized as a game of skill.' "[/SIZE][/FONT] -Pete Brush I do see that as an uphill battle where I live (Texas), but I don't see Judge Weinstein's ruling as a legal dead end (for reasons stated in the article), despite the reversal in NY. Either way, it may not directly matter to the fight for legalization of online poker, but as I mentioned the PPA is well aware of that (even if I initially wasn't) and are promoting [URL="http://pokerfuse.com/news/law-and-regulation/ppa-clarifies-poker-skill-game-argument-not-key-to-regulation-27-09/"]more effective arguments[/URL] in the political arena. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us