What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
102 Comments
- xtmno3, on 10/12/2007, -4/+35"Why does this still seem like gambling to you? I mean, why do you think the same five guys make it to the final table of the World Series of Poker every single year? What, are they the luckiest guys in Las Vegas? It's a skill game, Jo."
- MaddDog, on 10/12/2007, -11/+39Poker may involve skill, but it is definitely a game of chance. Even the best player in the world will lose poker games on a regular basis, even if over time he will win more often than an unskilled player. But the premise of the game is based on chance, and money is being wagered, therefore it is gambling.
Shooting pool and throwing darts are games of skill because random elements are removed. Playing cards is by definition based on chance. When you play for money, you are gambling. - HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27Does this mean Ameritrade and all of the other "trade stocks online" companies will also be folding?
The stock market is a "game of chance" far more then it is a game of skill... - rnelsonee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26If it matters, if there is an element of skill, the law usually consideres it a skill game, as opposed to the other away around. That is, if the game is all chance (roulette, local lotteries... etc), then it's a game of chance. Obviously, you're going to get different results depending on the government making the laws, but that's usually shown to be the case. Chance certainly plays a part in each hand, but the best poker player in the world will win more often than not. Chance only plays in part of the game. Heck, even football involves chance. Ask any NFL team that lost the coin toss to begin overtime (if the opponenet scores on the first drive, the game is over - the team that lost the coin toss can't try to even the score).
- NICU, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26Hey anyone want to make a bet what the outcome of this will be?
- pauleric, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Mark Twain was right after all!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Atleast someone is trying to fight it. I got an email today saying that the place I played is sending me a check for my current balance and that I cannot play there anymore due to this act.
- SkyJedi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12If the law pertains to game of chance that wager money, wouldn't the stock market fall under the very board blanket they created?
- cl0r0x70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12The real shame is that this ban was snuck into the Port Security bill because it wouldn't have been passed on its own merit. The Republicans should be ashamed.
What the hell does poker have to do with Port Security?!? - TimmyGUNZ, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11@MaddDog
As you said, a skilled player will win more than an unskilled over the long run. That proves it's a game of skill.
Like rnelsonee said, every game has an aspect of chance to it, including professional sports. - rapptech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11@mka
You just proved poker players' point. Just like stock market, the good players win over the long term just like good investors make money over the longterm. Both systems involve more educated and disciplined people taking money from the less disciplined/informed.
The difference here in America is that Jesus apparently hates poker. - sonofagunn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I agree that lawmakers should be ashamed of tacking unrelated stuff onto bills, but you kind of imply that only Republicans do it. It's done all the time by both parties.
- dnite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I play online all the time (actually, as I write this comment). It's great fun. Reading people is a little tougher online, but you still get plenty by betting patterns and such. I suggest you give it a shot.
- gregdigg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10@MaddDog
Like every other game of skill, shooting pool also involves chance. If the player who breaks then runs the table on you, does that mean you are not a talented player? In the long run, the better poker players come out on top. That's all that matters when you do it for a living. - Chordonblue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9So... PokerStars are gambling that the Justice Dept. won't sue them.
10:1 those guys are shut down in less than a month - any takers? - anonatron, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13I say that I am exempt from speed limits, but that does not mean I won't get arrested for doing 75 in a 25.
- DougTanner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Relative to the cars going in the opposite direction, you're going (about) twice your current speed... BUT you are going zero kilometers an hour relative to the cars going in the SAME direction.
- warbird, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@matts: You don't need to have the best hand to win. Everyone else could fold.
- Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9"You see, your honor, the speed limit sign didn't specify what object the limit was *relative to.* Relative to cars travelling in the opposite direction, I was actually travelling backwards."
- fnaqzna, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Trying to legislate a multi-billion dollar industry out of existence is a bad bet, imho.
- OrangeSunshine, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Shut down Pokerstars?!? Do you even know what you are talking about? Why would the Justice Dept. sue them? The ban really has nothing to do with poker or gambling sites. It is just saying that US based financial institutions can't send or receive money to/from known gambling sites. The law is a restriction on banks, credit card, etc... not gambling sites. The gambling sites can't break this law. Even if it were made so that no American could possibly send money to Pokerstars, they wouldn't shut down. They would just provide for the rest of the world. So, in short, I will take that bet. Pokerstars will NOT be "shut down".
- swizzcheez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Hrmph... this is just the black market coercing the Evil Republicans into making online gambling go underground so that they can make more money from it.
Oh yeah, and by the way, it's really all _my_ fault. I'm the one that dooked in the urinal. - turnTaker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5this is all bunk when you consider the fact that the horse racing industry is exempt from all of this because the gov can tax it. ***** of the highest order.
- diggtard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I just thought I was unlucky and there was nothing I could do about it. But, after hearing this news it's time for another Western Union deposit.... I hope Maria Adalina Rodriguez-Martinez is standing by in Costa Rica for the pick up!
- TimmyGUNZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"Why are experienced brokers paid millions, and how do they outperform the others? Clearly there is a great deal of skill involved in the stock market."
You're taking his point out of context. He was talking about online stock trading companies. - Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Why is the government banning gambling in the first place?
Land of the free my ass. - spraguep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It's called a state run monopoly. It's illegal unless the government is doing it.
- HP844182, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Is gambling really that bad? I mean why is gambling illegal now?
- fatb0b, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@OrangeSunshine
Dude you appearently having read the bill. Here is a summary and it is in no way limited to only financial institutions.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?tab=summary&bill=h109-4411
It's a rewrite of the Wire Act of '63 and officially makes online gambling illegal. - spraguep, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I was reading this http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/006444.html and someone made a random comment that I though was funny.
""Why is on-line Gambling Illegal?"
The Stock Market doesn't like competition?" - fatb0b, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's hard to say that though. If they wanted to collect taxes they could allow legit US casinos to start their own online gaming sites, which they have already expressed interest in doing. Then that 17 billion dollar a year industry could pay their share of taxes and the US could benefit from it. I think it is more to please the Christian Right than anything else. Am I the only one that thinks this nearly nationwide outlawing of gambling is complete *****?
- rapptech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It all depends on what type you play. Reads are more important in no limit, but in limit where the bets have a set value, basic math skills are the only read you truly need. Physical tells are overrated, anyways...hard facts (such as how many hands a person plays) play more into reads more than some dude licking his oreo after going all in.
- aschwartz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Poker is a game of skill and chance.
The chance is the draw of the cards.
The skill is in how you play them. If they can get that across, then they will win. Besides, I am doing very well on several sites, and it has been supplementing my income for over a year now. I dont want to lose that... - HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Poker is officially considered a game of skill in California.
This might just work. - azzkicar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4From a business standpoint, poker is not gambling because poker companies, unlike most casino games, gain no benefit whatsoever by rigging the odds. They get more than enough $$$ by rakes alone. In poker, you are not betting that you have better odds of winning than the house.
Of course poker is a game of chance, so does anything else really (besides games like chess). I mean, if you see a hockey sniper hits iron 5 times in a game (without scoring), most of us would consider that unlucky, and not the player sucks.
In poker sites, you are playing against other players. In casino games, you are playing against the house. Big difference. - Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I beg to differ! My good friend Jesus LOVES to play a game of poker with his cerveza.
- polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Sick money hungry f*cks aren't getting their share, so of course it's gone....
- TimmyGUNZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Glad to see the government spending their time from keeping those evil gambling websites from making any money while many pedophilia sites are up and running.
- wacki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Poker is a game of skill. There is no debate on that one. If there is any doubt just look at all the people that are making a living at it. Heck I used poker to help pay my tuition.
- dnite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5This is the direction the Poker Alliance is going to try and keep Poker legal. They've been working to try and keep this act from being started at all, but now that it is, their next step is to make sure it's known that poker is a 'skill' game and shouldn't be included in the online gambling act. *crosses fingers*
- WillyMF1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What about gambling with fake money inside of a program like Second Life? That money can be converted in and out of real money. Does that mean that Second Life is now banned? If not does it mean that it may be a great place for partypoker to setup shop? Think of the development money that linden labs could get out of that!
- jlgosse, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4how much are you willing to wager?
- fatb0b, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@LakersCentral
You are right but there is one exception to that. Tournament play. In a tournament rigging the game would give them absolutely no benefit whatsoever because there is no "rake" like in cash/ring games. You pay it upfront as part of your buy-in. They don't make any more or less no matter who wins or how big the hands are.
You could say that they could rig the cards for bigger hands so the tournaments would go faster and they could run more tournaments with their limited server farm of game machines but I think that would be a pretty shaky argument. - LakersCentral, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Online poker sites could indeed gain revenue from rigging the odds. Their revenue is driven by the rake (i.e. a percentage of each pot). If they drive the size of each (or an "occasional") pot up, they would increase their take. One way they could go about doing this is to deal more "action cards", cards that cause people to stay in the pot longer. Ever feel like you get more "bad beats" online than in real life?
Since all online gambling companies by law are off-shore, there is no way of positively regulating / verifying the legitimacy of a poker site. And, of course, there always is the off-chance that, if a company wasn't making a profit, they could close shop and run with all your account money, and there wouldn't be a thing you could do about it.
I'm not saying that all or any of the online poker sites aren't legit, just that they stand to profit if they cheat. Unless, of course, people feel like they are being cheated, and stop playing on the site. True, these companies do make large sums of money by running a legitimate poker site, but never underestimate the greed of a man. - rolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The spirit of the law is that politicians are not happy that gambling money is going out of the country.
They think that gambling is okay, but that you should do it in state sanction (read: taxed) facilities.
In my homestate, they are opening casinos left and right. The federal government clearly has no problem with this. - Chordonblue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Of course, the GREAT thing about this bill is that it might slow down Golden Palace's takeover of the advertising world...
- fnaqzna, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3FWIW, the state of California allowed card rooms even before the indian casinos became commonplace. They did so for the same reason that PokerStars pointed out.
Poker is a skill game. - fatb0b, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah I agree that is retarded and doesn't make much sense. It's not just online though. I live and Florida and now they do allow card rooms at the dog tracks around the state. The state law sets the limits at a max of $2 per bet and 4 bets per betting round. That makes it incredibly lame since the only games they play are allowed to play are $1/$2 and $2/$2 (which I believe is original to us). The only places you can play for real money are offshore on casino boats or down south by Miami at the Seminole reservations.
I don't understand the big war on gambling and poker. The days of crime and mob coming with these places is a thing of the past. Hell poker is the norm on ESPN now. The laws need to catch up with the times. - TimmyGUNZ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Of course it is. Why else would they ban it, because they don't want people to get "ripped of?"
- eclectro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The problem I have with online poker 9and why I don't play) is all the cheat bots - which would indeed not make it a game of chance anymore.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 104 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is