Gambling or Not?

Interview with Annie Duke

Annie Duke in the interview distinguished between poker and gambling. The interviewer kept hinting at the point that poker was gambling despite Annie's claims that poker is not a form of gambling.

She claims she absolutly does not gamble.

Though I agree, poker is not gambling, I want to here some other peoples thoughts on this matter as both sides have some strong arguments. There is luck involved in poker, and there is skill involved.

Is poker gambling or not?

I have never thought about it until now really and I think I can understand the view that it's not gambling........however...

Am I to understand that if it's not gambling it is therefore a sport, hence there being professionals within the game.....But how did these professionals get there.....???

Before the invention of the internet, we played poker in Casino's or some very shady premises(these were my birth ground) and the idea of the game is to sit down with the amount of "money" required in order to play with the ultimate goal of winning more money from your fellow opponents.

No other sport I can think of requires a cash buy-in before you can play, all other sports that I can think of require a certain level of merit from the individual in order for them to be able to compete in there respected events. However anyone with 5-10k to spare can enter any world recognised poker tourney.......yes there are favourites in these tourneys but technically if there are 500 entrants at the start you are a 500-1 shot along with everyone else to win.

These are odd's,poker is built around odds AK vs. AQ, AA vs. KK, pre-flop odds, post flop odds etc....heavy betters, calling stations these are also forms of betting.

One of the main difference's I feel between Poker gambling and other Gambling is you are "betting" on yourself in regards of poker where as other gambling your betting on something you have no or very little control over, horse racing, football, slots etc.....

Only really in Cards is the betting all on yourself, how you play, the cards you hit and even then your still reliant that the community cards go in your favour( this is where the luck or form as I like to call it comes in) and even if you don’t hit your cards you may still bet like you have.....All the time gambling working out your odds, checking out what other people may have and betting or not betting accordingly.

So in summary (and this is only my opinion) Anything you can lose your house, car, life on or of course what we all hope that we can win enough to change our life has to be a form of gambling, however the only difference we are gambling on ourselves as poker players every time we pay and sit opposed to betting on somebody or something else.

Perhaps it's the perfect hybrid of the two but before there were professionals there were just poker player's who were largely regarded as "Hardcore Gamblers". There is a high level of skill involved to become a pro tho and this is the only element of sport that I think is in poker.

When we play scissor, paper, stone or marbles we are gambling all be them in a milder form and I played these when I was six...!!!lol

Thanks


Sonny

p.s So yes it is then....!!!! lol

The irony is that many legislators and judiciaries consider, or at least interpret gambling laws to include, poker as gambling. But then you have a professional poker player who denies being a gambler.

The reason I tend to agree with annie here, is because poker has odds, but what poker players try to do is skew the odds into thier favor to come out winners. If your odds are winning are a set ratio, then i consider it gambling. But in poker, if you are a good player, you can feed off the weak players and skew your odds (theoretically) to get a larger profit for less risk. In essence the idea is that you can win money without being a lucky player.

We try to put the odds in our favor to come out winners. That is why we fold bad cards preflop, and hold high ranking cards when we get them. I think of poker as a game of skill because I want to believe that my dicisions have enough influence on the odds to make me an overall winner. I want to believe that i can use my skill to make profit. Can I? it can't be logically proven nor disproven, but I think this is why there is a lot of confusion over this subject.

I feel its more opinion than confusion.....!!!!

I hear what your saying and your right your level of skill can influence the game, but yet still it is a "game" that you have sat down with the intention to win money and I feel that this may be the final element that will keep it within the gambling world as opposed to the sport world..!!!

We do have pro's now and it is now a well recognised game (50million Americans alone play poker online or otherwise every day) mad stat, and I do feel that this has been made possible because it is a game that any one can play (but few can master....lol) and win at and yes the more experienced and skilled you become by rights you should win more but you will still get beat buy the aggressive gambler with very little skill who has only just started playing....!!!!

As you say that's poker and that’s why we all love it....!!!!!!

Thanks

Sonny

I can see the points being made above saying its not gambling ,but if that logic holds true a proffessiononal handicapper on horse racing could make the same argument.Stating he is not gambling because he can handicap and decipher the racing forms better than others giving him an advantage.
If we put the 10 best poker players in the world on the table at the same time,not all of them can be better than the other so in essence only 1 of them wouldnt be gambling by the defition because the losers on the table proved to be infereior.If you say they were all even players he/she just got better cards,that proves it is a game of chance just by the seat you draw or the cards you get.
When I bet my hand.Im taking a chance that no one else has better cards or will in the end.If youre betting heavy pre flop or after the flop with more cards yet to come you are taking chance you wont get outdrawn ,which makes it a game of chance.

__________________

Poker is gambling.

No matter how skilled or experienced you are, you cannot predict what cards will fall. You place a wager based on the probability of certain cards falling or not falling. You can, with experience and skill and knowledge, place bets in such a manner so that over the long run you will win more money then you will lose. But any single hand you are gambling. In any given hand, you are placing a wager that your hand is better then the other hands. Poker has the added feature that your hand doesn't actually have to be better, your opponents just have to think it is, but you are still placing a wager on an outcome that cannot be predicted with certainty.

When I look up "gambling" in the dictionary, I find the following definition:

gambling - to bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest

This is exactly what takes place in each poker hand. The outcome is uncertain until the last card has been dealt and all of the cards have been turned over. Anyone who thinks differently is deluding themselves.

Casinos know that with games of chance, you can, over the long run, have a guaranteed gain. This can also be achieved with poker by applying skill, experience and knowledge. But even a casino with game rules tilting the game in their favor are gambling on any particular toss of the dice, deal of the cards, pull of the slot, etc. They can lose that roll, that hand, that pull, but in the long run, they'll make money.

Most poker players, not so many on this forum, are like the mobs that flock to Vegas. Some get lucky in the short term, but most are going to lose every penny they deposit. These are the people that frustrate those of us who spend countless hours studying and learning this game to run into players who do not follow any type of logical play. When they get lucky it drives us nuts. But eventually they'll give their money away. They are the true gamblers, they don't understand the game or the odds or the why to play one hand and toss another. But don't deceive yourself, every hand of poker you play, you are gambling.

Annie Duke is one of my favorite players so I hate disagreeing with her. But in fact she did refer to her bankroll as her "gambling money". She knows poker is gambling and was simply attempting to legitimize the game. There is a lot of misunderstanding in the general public about what gambling is. And while poker is gaining popularity, many people still see gambling as a vice. And many people know one of those ignorant donks that have sat at our table and managed to take some of our chips with ridiculously stupid play. Yet they have lost tons of money playing poker with those same stupid plays and their friends are aware of this which feeds the stereotype that all gamblers are low life, losers who are one step above being criminals.

__________________
Nobody is always a winner, and anybody who says he is, is either a liar or doesn't play poker. -- Amarillo Slim

You say how could I make that call? How could you make that bet? We're playing poker, not solitaire. -- Doyle Brunson

It's both.

You cannot deny that a "better" poker player is going to win a poker game (i.e. in the long run) over a "worse" poker player.....due to his/her skill.

However, a "worse" poker player can beat a "better" poker player in any individual hand....and even a tourney..........due to luck (i.e. getting an incredible run of cards).

The simple fact of the matter is, no matter how good you are, there still is the element of chance to the game (i.e. the randomization of the cards).

Point #1: No matter how good you are, the cards can get you....if not, then none of us would be screaming about how some guy called with a crappy hand and then sucked out on us.

Point #2: Why haven't Phil Helmuth, Howard Lederer, Phil Ivey, Doyle Brunson, TJ Cloutier, Daniel Negraneau, etc, etc, etc. won the WSOP Main Event in the last "X" years?

Point #3: If you had the choice of being the "best" poker player in the world every hand you played OR the luckiest poker player in the world every hand you played.............which would you choose?

(Hint: its a no-brainer!!!)

Let's also go back to the original premise which I stated in paragraph one, which is:
You cannot deny that a "better" poker player is going to win a poker game (i.e. in the long run) over a "worse" poker player.....due to his/her skill.

Let's make a comparison: The "better" poker player, due to his/her skill, in essence, "manipulates" the odds so he/she can win poker in the long run. Sounds exactly like what a casino does....they manipulate the games of chance to produce odds in their favor and they win in the long run.

Bottom line: Poker is a form of gambling...you can just have more control over it due to your skill level. As such, its both.

Opinions are free,
TZB

Here are some official definitions of Gambling:

1) Playing games of chance or betting in the hope of winning money.

2) Wagering of money or other items of value on an uncertain event, dependent either wholly or in part on chance. Gambling appeals to the human desire for gain and the thrill of uncertainty or risk.

I have though about this question as well. I think in the pure form of the definition Poker is gambling as it is stated above. I think people who are students of the game and understand that proper play can vastly improve your outcome in the long run want to differentiate this activity from the less skillful forms of gambling, and do not want to be compared to people who take unnecessary and uncalculated risk with their money. To be honest I think it is somewhat of an EGO thing. I agree with extra and his handicapper theory. It would be the same for sports betting of all kinds.

You might say there are smart gamblers and dumb gamblers. The casino and their table games make them smart gamblers while the people who play the games are dumb gambles destined to lose over time. I certainly agree that skilled play can improve the long term out come, but by definition number 2 above you would have to declare that there is NO chance involved in the activity whatsoever and that’s just not the case.

I sometimes wonder if the way we discuss this issue actually hurts our case to represent a skillful, competitive game to the public. The average person inherently knows that the outcome of the cards is unknown thereby making the game based, at least in some part on chance. So when we try to convince them it is not we lose credibility. I think what we are really saying is the game does have an element of luck but skill by far outweighs the influence of luck. Just like in golf if the weather is great in the morning and bad in the evening your tee time draw creates an element of luck but we all assume that skill will overcome the luck and that over the 4 day tourney this will balance out. In a baseball game you score the winning run on an error, your skill did not really win the game but the luck of the other players mistake was the single biggest factor.

Well as usual I have complicated the issue but I would summarize that the real question that should be asked is “Does poker involve more or less risk than (you fill in the blank)?”. Now this is a question that might actually be answerable.

I don't believe poker players can be ranked. Who is the best football player of all time? They all play different positions. You can argue who is the most athletic, or can throw the farthest. Poker players don't have positions, but they have styles. They are weak against some players but strong against others. One might be strong against a player that a third player is weak against.

I see your logic, but in my opinion, it is slightly flawed. Your assumption is linear. There are no best poker players. Just players who do well against a variety of styles making them profit. No one player can be strong against every style. And even if you get put at a table with 9 other people of the style that you do poorly against, you still have a shot at overcoming it, though you may be disadvantaged, your skill would be to blame.

If we think of it like a triangle: "A" beats "B", "B" beats "C", "C" beats "A". No one is the best.

Also remember that in poker, you don't need to win it all, just be able to top most of the players to allow for winnings instead of taking losses.