Is poker gambling?

Is poker gambling?


  • Total voters
    142
  • Poll closed .
Crystal Blue

Crystal Blue

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Total posts
1,190
Chips
0
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.
 
Insaneasylm

Insaneasylm

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Total posts
130
Chips
0
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
 
T

thejuanupsman

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Total posts
409
Chips
0
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.
 
RogueRivered

RogueRivered

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 20, 2008
Total posts
957
Chips
0
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.
 
PokerVic

PokerVic

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Total posts
822
Chips
0
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.

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.
 
PokerPete

PokerPete

RIP Logic And Sanity
Loyaler
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Total posts
17,597
Awards
1
Chips
218
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?

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!
 
vanquish

vanquish

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Total posts
12,000
Chips
0
saying poker is gambling is like saying masturbation is gambling because of the unpredictability of orgasms
 
houcowboy

houcowboy

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Total posts
64
Chips
0
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
 
U

underdog140

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Total posts
1,140
Chips
0
off course it is gambling.Any game that envolves risking something to gain with the chance off losen something is gambling.
 
U

underdog140

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Total posts
1,140
Chips
0
so investing in stocks is gambling?

yes it is stocks can make you money or lose you money.

Definition off gamble(I got this definiton out off a dictionary)........to play at any game of chance for money or other stakes.

Isnt this what we do when we play poker.Poker i s a game off chance and skill.Skill will help you win but there is still a chance you will lose no matter how good you are.
 
RichKo

RichKo

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Total posts
632
Chips
0
yes it is stocks can make you money or lose you money.

Definition off gamble(I got this definiton out off a dictionary)........to play at any game of chance for money or other stakes.

Isnt this what we do when we play poker.Poker i s a game off chance and skill.Skill will help you win but there is still a chance you will lose no matter how good you are.


So you're saying trading stocks online should be illegal?! NO. Poker is a game of skill, not chance. Yes there is some chance involved, but there is a chance the next time I cross the street I'm gonna get hit by a bus. So by your definition, going outside is gambling, cause life and death are some pretty hefty stakes. Stock trading, to someone who knows what the hell they are doing, is not gambling, just cause theres a chance he could lose. But if I were to just start buying stocks it would be a gamble, cause I know absolutely nothing about trading. Poker is a skill that attracts gamblers. A true game of chance is like the slots, when the little cherrys line up, you win, if not you dont. Or roullette, you bet red, it lands black...you lose. So by that logic, the best hand in poker always wins and the worst hand always loses.
 
Ice Wolf

Ice Wolf

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Total posts
1,008
Awards
1
Chips
0
I think that tournaments arent as much gambling as there is skill involved but I would have to say that playing at ring tables is straight up gambling. Kinda undecided on poker as a whole but I did click no (dont really know why).
 
G

glworden

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 29, 2008
Total posts
619
Chips
0
I think that tournaments arent as much gambling as there is skill involved but I would have to say that playing at ring tables is straight up gambling. Kinda undecided on poker as a whole but I did click no (dont really know why).

Funny, I think just the opposite.
 
H

Halibel

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Total posts
53
Chips
0
I think that tournaments arent as much gambling as there is skill involved but I would have to say that playing at ring tables is straight up gambling. Kinda undecided on poker as a whole but I did click no (dont really know why).

Tournaments / Fixed Buy in = max / min loss possible
Cash Game = no fixed loss possible

I've tried to explain this to all my friends when they say I am addicted to poker (I don't do cash games)
 
rwilson

rwilson

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Total posts
126
Chips
0
I think there's a fine line between gambling and investment. Personally I don't think poker is gambling, but for a lot of people it probably is.

It's like many people have said so far.. is buying shares in the stock market gambling? If you buy shares; on any given day, it's nearly impossible to know whether those shares will rise or fall, cause short term most shares prices are highly volatile. Although over the long run, the general trend is that your shares will rise in value. So people call it investment.

Another example, for those who talk about it being a game of chance that people bet on.. think about casinos. Casinos are the largest professional gamblers in the world.. but do people ever refer to casinos as being gamblers themselves? No, cause in the long run the casino will always win. They make wagers and play games in such a way that the odds are usually slightly in their favour. They're still betting on "uncertain outcomes" and on any given day/night a casino can and does lose. You could walk in with 10 million dollars tomorrow, place it on black on the roulette table (assuming the casino will hold your bet!), double up and walk out with $20 million.. and the casino loses $10 million and is left chasing their tail for the next day, week, month, whatever. What I'm saying is, over the short run, luck can make or break a casino just like it can the punters that sit down at their tables... But in the long run they'll always win. Are they referred to as gamblers? no.

Poker is no different. Many players these days have the skill and knowledge to play in such a way that in the long run they will make money. They consistently bet when the odds are in their favour and they make better decisions than average players. In the long run when luck/chance evens out, they'll have more money than they started with. Are they still gamblers or are they investing their money?

Poker can definitely be played in a manner which shouldn't be considered gambling (IMO). The sheer number of people that play poker for a living proves that. They're not professionally lucky.

It's a game of skill that involves luck.. but what game doesn't involve luck? By nature a lot of gamblers play poker, cause you can still win in poker with basically no knowledge of how to play. But in the long run the more skilled players will win more than the less skilled players, just like in soccer, football, tennis, etc..

So no.. I don't think poker is gambling ;)
 
C

confuzd67

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Total posts
349
Chips
0
YES!!!!!!

I feel that poker is always going to be gambling. Whether you are the best in the world or the worst, you are playing a game of chance for money. If there is any risk, be it calculated or guessed it is still a risk. Even if you become a very accomplished player that is always able to come out on a weekly basis up money there is still some risk involved.
 
Egon Towst

Egon Towst

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Total posts
6,794
Chips
0
There is a degree of confusion in this thread, because different posters have interpreted the question differently. The answer depends upon how you understand the question.

Q. Is Poker a game where money is wagered on an uncertain outcome ?
A. Clearly, yes.

Q. Is Poker a game primarily of skill or of chance ?
A. Over the long term, skill is much the greater factor.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Total posts
8,586
Awards
1
Chips
1
There is a degree of confusion in this thread, because different posters have interpreted the question differently. The answer depends upon how you understand the question.

Q. Is Poker a game where money is wagered on an uncertain outcome ?
A. Clearly, yes.

Q. Is Poker a game primarily of skill or of chance ?
A. Over the long term, skill is much the greater factor.

The title of the thread is "Is poker gambling?"

That means the first point is the pertinent one. Insofar as it's also a game where money is wagered on an uncertain outcome, yes, absolutely poker is gambling.

I don't think anyone here will argue against poker being a game of skill. But that doesn't really have anything to do with whether it's gambling or not. The outcome's still uncertain, even over the long run, and we're still betting on it.
 
I

internetstalker

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
May 15, 2005
Total posts
31
Chips
0
I think gambling is an aspect of Poker

not poker is gambling
 
Mase31683

Mase31683

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Total posts
1,474
Awards
1
Chips
1
Of course it's gambling. There's a random element involved. Just because you can use your brain to make wagers that are +EV, this doesn't negate the fact that it is still gambling. Gambling doesn't mean, "Oh you can't win" it means that you're making a bet and leaving some element up to randomness. Good players are simply making more wagers that are likely to win, while poor players are more often making wagers that lose.
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
Chips
0
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

But in the long run you know exactly what the next card will be. In fact in chess you're hoping the opponent doesn't see a way to exploit your strategy and beat you. If you bet money you're "gambling" that he's not going to notice or is simply going to make an incorrect move. Obviously the same is true in poker but the card to come analogy is bad. I know exactly what the next card will be in the long run.
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
Chips
0
I think that tournaments arent as much gambling as there is skill involved but I would have to say that playing at ring tables is straight up gambling. Kinda undecided on poker as a whole but I did click no (dont really know why).
lol would I regret it if I asked you to please expand on the part where tourneys are not gambling and cash games are?
Tournaments / Fixed Buy in = max / min loss possible
Cash Game = no fixed loss possible

I've tried to explain this to all my friends when they say I am addicted to poker (I don't do cash games)

umm, if I buy into a cash game I can only lose what's in front of me. If you want to talk to me about re-buying, I'll talk to you about entering another tournament.

But on the other hand, note that a stop loss or max you can lose is a concept derived from gambling or a losing proposition. You walk up to the craps table/slot machine and say "I know I'm favored to lose this, it's just entertainment, I'll play until I lose $100".

On the other hand the way someone treats their job or a winning poker player says "I know that all my poker sessions are just one continuous session and that I want to make better decisions than my opponents as many times as possible". Obviously there are points where stop losses are good simply because losing too much could cause tilt and make decisions bad, but in general a winning player who has mastered tilt should never have to set a stop loss unless he no longer has the bankroll to withstand the variance. If you offered me 60/40 $1 flips, I'd continue to take them even if I had lost $100, probably even $1000. Because I know I can afford it and that every single flip I take the odds are in my favor.
 
Related Gambling Guides: AU Gambling - CA Gambling - UK Gambling - NZ Gambling - Online Gambling
Top