What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
169 Comments
- idavidtang, on 05/03/2009, -4/+30I'd Poker.
- kostka, on 05/03/2009, -9/+27Well by the arguments in the description, horse racing is also not gambling and yet it is classified as such. Gambling is definitely not restricted to games with a "fixed statistical disadvantage."
- HappyScrappy, on 05/03/2009, -3/+20As a serious poker player for 17 years now I'll tell you, poker is gambling.
Absolutely it's a game of skill, skill matters a lot. But if the underdog couldn't win, there wouldn't even be a game, because it's the ability of lesser players to sometimes come out ahead that keeps them coming back to give the better players more money.
I'm for legalizing online poker. And it's already legal (and big) in my state (California). But saying it isn't gambling is misleading. - mohsenxp, on 05/03/2009, -1/+18There definitely is a degree of luck. Sometimes a huge amount is involved.
For me, the hardest player to beat is an absolute newbie.
You can play by the book, fold when you should fold, not call when you have bad cards etc. but when you call a $50 raise preflop on a pair of A's and a newbie doesn't fold but calls it too(because they feel 'lucky') with a 6/8 off suit, and the flop is a 668...you know luck just ***** you in the ass. - inactive, on 05/03/2009, -3/+18It's an issue because poker players are wearing sunglasses indoor.
- Mummo, on 05/03/2009, -0/+12Liquor in the front, poker in the rear
- HappyScrappy, on 05/03/2009, -0/+11Yes, that's what I'm talking about. There is a group who is trying to get poker exempted from "games of chance" laws. They do this by saying it is not primarily a "game of chance". However, the author of this article has morphed that into "is not gambling", which is not the same thing.
Poker is gambling. You can set out for an evening with all the same initial conditions each night and get a different result. It's gambling. - aphexcoil, on 05/03/2009, -2/+13Everything in life is a gamble. The trick is knowing when to fold and when to raise.
- inactive, on 05/03/2009, -0/+10Poker? I don't even know 'er.
- Diggnabbit, on 05/03/2009, -1/+11Of course it's gambling. You're betting money on the outcome of something. That's gambling.
You can gamble on all kinds of stuff, some of which are more based on skill and some of which are more based on chance. Craps is close to 100% chance. Poker has more skill involved. Golf is almost 100% skill (aside from natural chance like wind and stuff). Betting on any of these is gambling. - krc1, on 05/03/2009, -0/+8How to tell if someone is an idiot: When they type "loose" instead of "lose."
- mvest20, on 05/03/2009, -2/+10I think some of you are missing the point. The author isn't saying that there isn't an element of luck involved. In fact, he admits that there is in some cases a great deal of luck required to win. What makes poker different from every other casino table game (let's leave out sports and horse betting because they are a slightly different story,) is that the house has no advantage. The players play each other, rather than the house, and thus the amount of skill required is greater than any other game out there. Luck is and always will be a factor, but poker is not gambling in the same sense that roulette and blackjack require a basic strategy and a great deal of luck.
- JoeF8577, on 05/03/2009, -0/+7I'd give it to her straight. In a full house on the river.
- offon, on 05/03/2009, -9/+16It's a game of skill, but ...there is still a lot of luck needed.
- SpeedyThing, on 05/03/2009, -1/+8As a massive fan of poker I hate to argue with this article... but I will!
OF COURSE POKER IS GAMBLING!!
You can have skill at sports betting, but it is still a gamble. You can have skill at poker, but it still a gamble. The skill factor does not change the fact that you are risking money to possibly win more. The fact that poker is particularly affected by luck makes it more of a gamble than other sports' wagers. - HappyScrappy, on 05/03/2009, -0/+7Yes, if the outcome can be detailed by initial conditions it is considered deterministic.
Let's say I go into a test (like the SAT) on Monday. I take the test and get a certain score. For all the same initial conditions (duration of test, questions on test, how tired I am, etc.) I will always score the same result on the test.
That's a bit off track though. It is the fact that the result cannot be told from the initial conditions that makes it ripe for wagering. In other words, the best player in the world can find people to play poker against him because some people who may not be quite as good still think they have a chance of beating him. And they do, because of chance itself. Lady luck can shine on you. - GaltShrugged, on 05/03/2009, -0/+7This is the wrong way to look at it because you're just sanctioning the moral standards of the people that have banned it.
Poker is gambling and you have every right to do it because it's your money. ***** rationalizing it as not gambling. - willhirsch, on 05/03/2009, -6/+13Gambling on your relative skill against other players is still gambling. Someone has to win money and someone has to lose money. Love it or leave it.
- orxor, on 05/03/2009, -0/+7A professional poker player can't beat random cards 9 times out of 10 what makes you think he'd beat an amateur that doesn't know when to fold?
- NOLUCKNEEDED, on 05/03/2009, -2/+9Poker is a game of skill but as Doyle Bruson said
(from my memory, not a direct quote) About being a professional poker player:
"It's like hitting the lottery, we have more tickets than everyone else, but you still have to get lucky"
A good player will always win in the long run and a bad player will always loose in the long run,
but in the short term luck is involved.
"In any case if you want someone to go jail for playing poker online or anywhere else, please raise your hand" - TheSkunkMonkey, on 05/03/2009, -4/+11Of course poker isn't gambling. I've played poker many times without using money to reward the winner. If your going to declare a card game gambling, then ANY card game is gambling.
I can see the raids on little old ladies bridge clubs now. /s
Wagering money on who is going to win something is gambling. It has nothing to do with whether or not chance is involved. That's misdirection whipped up by the politics of the industry. - dty2010, on 05/03/2009, -0/+6People need to stop using gambling and "game of chance" interchangeably. I don't see how you can reasonably argue that poker isn't gambling.
- LordVance, on 05/03/2009, -0/+6No... No they couldn't. I'm not saying it's not a skill based game, I'm just saying that they would absolutely have to look at their own cards. And even then, there is certainly a degree of luck to the game.
- oboshoe, on 05/03/2009, -1/+7Yes, but for a seasoned professional, poker is gambling just like insurance companies gamble.
- moirende, on 05/03/2009, -4/+10You do know that casinos make hardly anything off their poker rooms, right? Even the highest limit games they only charge per/hr time charges against occupying a seat... and the amounts are nothing the casinos are getting rich from. Seriously, the return on floor space from poker rooms pales in comparison to the same space occupied by slot machines or blackjack tables.
The only reason casinos like them is because they're hoping winning players will take whatever money they've won and blow it on craps or blackjack or whatever. Plus, they're good PR and points of entry for tourists to try a bit of gamble and then hopefully move on to other stuff where the casino likely will make lots of money.
Anyone who has spent any time actually playing poker knows that while luck can certainly wreak havoc on you over the short term, over the long term skill consistently wins out. If not, there wouldn't be such thing as "professional poker players" making their living it at -- they'd all be broke. Track a player's results over the long term (50,000+ hands, say) and you *will* see statistically significant variance comparing the good players against the bad ones. - speedryder916, on 05/03/2009, -1/+7LEGALIZE ONLINE POKER!
- willhirsch, on 05/03/2009, -1/+6Sure, and in poker the house just hosts the game for free.
- ngmcs8203, on 05/03/2009, -0/+5I'm not sure who is digging you down or why, but as random as your statement may be it is factually true. If pot odds+implied odds are giving me more than 4:1 and I'm on the come... I'll call sometimes.
- ell0bo, on 05/03/2009, -0/+5now that would be a pure game of chance my friend
- inactive, on 05/03/2009, -0/+5I love poker, though the poker culture is a bit too full of "come to my table, I'll take your money" fukheads, but it is gambling. Even the best players in the world are taking chances, placing bets with hoping the river has their card. There is some skill, but there still is alot of luck in poker, which makes it gambling when wagering money in hopes of making more is involved (the entire point of poker).
- Spade914, on 05/03/2009, -0/+5These comments suck
- starf, on 05/03/2009, -0/+4Except in poker, the cards are shuffled and dealt as part of the game, so the initial conditions exist prior to the randomization of the cards. With the SAT, the questions are already on the test you receive when you begin the exam.
- Richandler, on 05/03/2009, -2/+6Millions of people gamble every day why is this an issue?
- scuba7183, on 05/03/2009, -0/+4no one click this, phishing
- NeoTechni, on 05/03/2009, -0/+3"Yes, wagering on the unknown = gambling."
Exactly. It's not a hard concept to grasp - HappyScrappy, on 05/03/2009, -0/+3That's also true for a lousy poker player. The lousy player just has a lower expected return.
- Zap2, on 05/03/2009, -1/+4So soccer/baseball/tennis, etc are gambling?
- seanof, on 05/03/2009, -3/+6Definition A. " to play a game for money or property" fits poker was descried in the article.
- HappyScrappy, on 05/03/2009, -0/+3Yes, wagering on the unknown = gambling.
One could make an argument that many things in life are gambling. And what would your point be then?
I never said gambling was wrong. I just said poker is gambling. As you mention, people gamble every day, so what's wrong with playing a little poker?
As to your assertions about the order of the cards, the difference is that you don't know the order of the cars. Poker is designed to add randomness (no one is supposed to know the order of the cars) where as standardized testing is designed to minimize randomness (large numbers of people are given the same test to take, among other things). Poker is largely defined by there being a strong element of luck. - diggnidy, on 05/03/2009, -1/+4I'd pokerface
- LordVance, on 05/03/2009, -0/+3You can't play chess with five guys... (that said, if there isn't money on the table I also do not see the point)
- willhirsch, on 05/03/2009, -3/+6I think the point is that nobody in their right mind finds poker interesting enough to play it without cash stakes. I mean really. Play chess.
- Shawn4168, on 05/04/2009, -0/+3The thing that annoys me about this article is that he keeps bringing up this "fixed statistical disadvantage". But if you're playing in a poker room at a casino (which he explicitly mentions that he does), then there will always be either a rake or a tournament fee taken by the casino. So even if you win $10,000 in a few good hands, and then lose $10,000 in a few bad hands, you still come out behind. Maybe it's not statistical, but it definitely sounds like a fixed disadvantage to me.
- HappyScrappy, on 05/03/2009, -2/+5Agreed, they're trying to argue it isn't a "game of chance" and somehow someone turned that into "isn't gambling". But the two are not the same. Poker is definitely gambling. So is betting on horses (or other sports for that matter).
- Pschkqitzsough, on 05/04/2009, -0/+2The thing is virtually all forms of gambling have elements of skill including black jack and table games.
When money and luck are involved it's gambling. It isn't all chance, but luck is undoubtedly highly involved.
Case in point. I saw a hand where my noobie friend called all in first hand when 2 skilled friends of mine went all in; one had pocket aces the other had pocket queens. A queen fell on the flop for 3 pair, but my noobie friend had a King (maybe it was hearts?) and a 3 of clubs. A 4th club ended up falling on the river and he won with a flush since no one else had a club... So much for idiots huh?
When luck and money is involved it's gambling, especially considering skill is involved in virtually ALL casino games other than say slot machines... I've even found some very effective strategies with roulette. - inactive, on 05/03/2009, -0/+2One main purpose is for taxes. Winnings from 'gambling' and winnings from 'non gambling' are taxed differently. So defining what 'gambling' is has real implications for those that make a living playing poker.
- inactive, on 05/03/2009, -1/+3OK, Kenny.
- HappyScrappy, on 05/03/2009, -1/+3The good player won't always win in the long run. You're forgetting ruination. No matter how good you are, if you run out of money (through bad luck or poor bankroll management or both), you have lost with no chance of recovery to winning.
Mathematically, it can happen and therefore in the long run, with a large number of trials (players), it does happen to some good players. - oboshoe, on 05/03/2009, -2/+4Exactly.
its also why there is usually a wait list to get a poker table.
While waiting to play poker, they hope players will stop by the blackjack table or slots.
Its also why there is rarely a wait on a blackjack table (and NEVER a wait on a slot machine). There is always a seat available, even if its a higher limit that you would prefer not play. - Claverhouse, on 05/03/2009, -0/+2China.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 173 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is