Is poker gambling?

Lots of discussion in other threads, but I haven't found a poll. So here's a poll. What do you think? Is poker gambling?

oops I clicked yes when I meant to click no

I did the same thing. I PM's mod and she changed my vote. But already we have 40% voter error. Is this going to be one of those hanging chad situations?

If there are enough votes, and other people are more careful than you and me, the effects should be minimal.

The real vote at this point, had unstoppable not screwed up is 4 to 1, not gambling rather than the 3 to 2 shown. Even though my name is under the YES list, Tammy already chagned my vote no no.

Of course poker is gambling. Money is being exchanged on a bet that you have the best hand !!!

This has already been definitively answered.

Professor Ben Van der Genugten, who is an eminent mathematician, published a learned paper in which he calculated that the differential in skill level between a beginner and in expert in Poker is very large, similar to Chess.

Poker therefore differs radically from games of pure chance, where the differential is small and the outcome of the game is determined wholly or mainly by luck.

Unlike almost any other form of "gambling", poker you can swing the "odds" in your favor with skill. No amount of "skill" will give you an "edge" over the other players in a lottery or playing slots (at least none that I know of).... but with skill, knowledge, and good reads you can often win in poker even without having the "best hand".... it's not always what you have, it's what the others think you have

If you play one session it's gambling. If you play hundreds of thousands of hands over a long period of time, it's not gambling.

When poker was like gambling means that everybody has the same chance in actions. However Phill has 11 bracelets which means he had more chance han others???

I don't think so. It's an statistical game and as already stated a lot of perople have proven that however the governments are not so sure about that (at least in the Netherlands) but they are using credibility by stressing that it is gambling. I guess it's just a matter of time and it's clear and accepted that it is not gambling

yes poker is gambling what else would you think it is when you bet on something anything that would make it a gamble

you're betting on an uncertain outcome. by the definition of gambling, it's gambling. but that's really just semantics, so who cares?

You were right 1st time.

That's the thing, long-term the outcome isn't uncertain.

yes it is. we don't have infinite lifespans. jamie gold will finish his lifetime of poker several millions of dollars above his expectation. was that a certain outcome?

HMmmm.. then I would say poker is gambling based on the 'uncertain outcome' criteria. But then, considering current world financial situations, wouldn't stocks and futures be gambling. ?? ...

Jamie Gold played one big tournament. That's gambling. If you mega-table online poker or if you grind 40+ hours/week live you will get pretty damn close to your expectation.

but jamie played tournaments before that, since then, and will probably continue to. you just happen to be focusing on the one. no matter how many he plays, he will pretty inevitably be millions of dollars over his expectation

does that mean you think someone who plays live poker exclusively is gambling but someone who grinds online isn't? because before the advent of online poker, the professional players would be hard-pressed to play a million hands in their entire lifetime

if you play tournaments you will never reach the long run

so tournament players are gambling while ring players aren't?

Is poker gambling?

No when Im playin it aint. He he he...

maybe? Define gambling. Obviously there will always be a small amount of variance. For every 300 billion trillion gazillion etc. casinos built one will fail because all the slot machines hit jackpots and stuff. But I wouldn't claim that casinos gamble on slot machines.

yes it is in my opinion, it in the longrun is taking calculated risks, same as horse racing, you know that a horse is doing really well and beaten all the others, your money is safer there, and its still called gambling. It is a game of skill, but is still gambling aswell, thats why its so fun.

The way I see most people play these days it's gambling for the majority of the player. In freerolls and low stakes tournments, skill seems to be out the window when almost, not everyone, goes "all-in" with any 2 cards or calls an raised pot or even calling with any 2 cards. When a person is playing/calling when he or she knows that they're already behind, then it's gambling and the only "skill" is see are the players that are playing the correct odds or trying to figure out how to last longer than the "bingo" players. Although "bingo" is legal in most states...go figure?

Poker is skill and luck.
If you are experienced, you let skill speak for you.
If you are bad / new, you'll rely on luck most of the time.

Its like driving, experience gets you your license.

FYP, at least in my State. We barely have any parallel parking places yet it's the only thing that's hard on the test.

Average Joe 1 ( AJ1 ) and his identical twin brother Average Joe 2 ( AJ2 ) were good little boys when growing up.
They always listened to their parents who taught them well about right from wrong and always obeying the laws of the land etc.

When the AJ brothers turned 21 they were both offered very good jobs with the same company.
But there was one big difference, AJ1 would work in his home state in America, and AJ2 would work in Europe.

By the time the twins were 25 years old, and even though they were in different continents, they both found poker. ( its funny how identical twins seem to do things the same regardless of distance etc )
This happened in 2004, and during one of their many regular telephone calls to each other, they had a good laugh about being so alike, and then started swapping notes about what they had learned about poker so far.

It turned out that they were at a very similar stage to each other in what they had learned so far ( this was no surprise to the twins ) and that they had been winning roughly the same amounts and were playing at the same kind of buy in levels.

Some months later, AJ1 was involved in a car accident which resulted in him being dependant on a wheelchair for mobility.
Around the same time, online gambling became a no no in his home state and left him with somewhat of a predicament.

The thing was, the AJ twins were raised by their parents to always do the right thing, that being the case, there was no way that AJ1 could bring himself to play online poker anymore.
That was ok though, even taking into account his mobility issues, there was a very reputable casino some miles away that he could just about manage to travel to whenever the urge took him, so thats what he did.

Meanwhile over in Europe, AJ2 had become somewhat fed up with the online poker grind and found himself much more drawn to the live game at his local casino. ( its funny how it goes isn't it )
So while circumstances had now changed, the twins still seemed to be following the same path in their poker lives.

For months after this the twins still spoke often to each other about poker, only now they were swapping strategies about the live game instead of the online one.
They were amazed at how alike their game play was in all departments and the reads they had now learned playing against live players.

There was one huge difference though, AJ1 was a losing poker player while AJ2 was consistently winning.
They were both doing the same things when it came to striving to become better players, the focus, the dedication, the will to improve, the hunger to keep learning, etc etc.

This went on for the next 20 years with AJ1 at best breaking even, while AJ2 continued to be a substantial winning poker player.
The thing was, while the twins were equal in their knowledge of poker and approached the game in the same way, AJ1 always found himself up against more sophisticated and more skillful players than himself, while AJ2 didn't.

Because of their upbringing and AJ1's car accident, he was left with less options as to where he could play poker.
AJ2 on the other hand, found the soft games to ply his trade because he had no mobility restrictions to contend with.

Their parents never did like gambling, in fact they made a point of airing their views about their dislike to all things to do with gambling.
AJ2 goes back home to America from Europe to visit his parents whenever he gets vacation time from his job, and his parents love those visits from their wonderful son.

They don't see AJ1 anymore, they disowned him, because he is a GAMBLER.

i just wasted 5 min of my life reading that. so what you are trying to say, it is only gambleing if you lose. lol

I don't understand the people who think it isn't gambling because there is skill involved. That's not material to the question. Someone above mentioned chess as an exampled of a skill game. But if you wager on the outcome of a chess game it is still gambling. It doesn't matter if the game is all skill or all luck or somewhere in between if you wager on the outcome it is by definition gambling.

I'm not sure. Based on the definition of gambling, just about anything undertaken for money that has an uncertain outcome could be called gambling. That would include investments, owning a business, paying entry fees into any kind of competition, etc. Of course most people don't think of those activities as gambling. I think it's simply a matter of the fact that the game is based on a simple deck of cards that people call poker gambling. Real players know that it is so much deeper than that and requires skill in order to win over the long term, but I guess the winning issue is irrelevant to the question.

Same in Canada. And I've never once had to parallel park since getting my license. I think the gov must be getting kickbacks from road cone manufacturers.

Given the simplicity of the question, I had to go with 'yes', it is gambling. It's a wager, no different that betting on sports, or any kind of prop bet. I'd even say that betting on a prop bet that you know to be a 100% sure thing is still gambling, in that you're wagering your money against someone else's. There may be little or no risk involved, but I'd still consider that gambling. Others wouldn't, which is probably why the field is split 50/50.

I do agree that it's mostly just semantics; just like the game vs sports discussion.

Poll sucks. No cake.

lol...me either... for if it were all luck... I'd actually win sometimes!

Ever see and ETrade commercial? Ever get a "hot stock tip" email? They keep sending them, so a whole bunch of donks out there must be buying these bs stocks with no due-diligence, skill, or even the first hint of a clue whatsoever... and then they lose all their money.. so clearly investing without thought or skill is gambling! Quick, call your local congressweasel! We need to ban email and ETrade today!

saying poker is gambling is like saying masturbation is gambling because of the unpredictability of orgasms

That chess analogy was asinine!

Both players moves depend on only one thing; their own decision. When you play chess, you're not sitting there hoping that your queen makes a certain move. You move it where you want.

My point is that the chess moves are not based on a random outcome, like what the next card is going to be in poker.

houcowboy