Poker and gambling

[Cactus Jack]

This is my 1100th post, and it's a rant. Figures. (My 1000th probably was a rant, too.)

Last week, the NY Yankees expressed concern that Alex Rodriquez has been seen in illegal poker rooms, playing, whatelse, poker.

Today in the Boston Globe, offensive tackle for the Patriots, Matt Light, has been informed by the NFL that he cannot hold a Celebrity Poker tournament to raise money for his foundation, nor can he play in Bravo's Celebrity Poker show, again donating all the money he would win to his foundation. The NFL has a policy against gambling of any kind, yet, as the Globe writer points out, it's perfectly acceptable for coaches and executives to go to Vegas and roll dice on an off day.

Is it ever going to stop, this predjucide against our game?

I called into the local sports talk station after the ARod story came out. The local host, who talks all week about betting lines for college and pro games, would not listen when I said poker is a game of skill more than a game of gambling. I wanted to say that ARod plays a game for money, the same as I play a game for money. It would appear that since the outcome of the game directly relates to the amount of money I win, this makes it gambling, since ARod makes the same amount of money, win or lose.

It's okay for the owners to gamble millions that a player like ARod will win games, therefore win money, but it's not gambling. It's ok for players, coaches and owners to go to Vegas, where they are gambling, but not ok for them to play poker, at least in a public venue?

Even some poker players say it's a gambling game. For some, it may be. For me, it's not. I do not gamble on any true gambling games. I don't bet sports, I don't buy lottery tickets, and the slot machines totally bore me. If poker were truly a gambling game, where I couldn't have an edge against my opponents, were it a gamble for me to play, I wouldn't play it. I wouldn't play for money I couldn't afford to lose in a game with better players than me. I wouldn't play poker, if I believed poker was more of a gambling game than it is a skill game.

It's very frustrating, but at the same time very profitable, since if the fish knew how much was skill versus luck, they might be less likely to put their money down on their draws. So, I guess, it's really win-win.

Maybe some day.

CJ

[rdale]

The game requires more skill than the uniniated gives credit, but luck plays a larger role than most skilled players wish to say.

I think the luck vs. skill level of the game comes down to your opponents. Some games dictate that it will be more luck oriented. You will be forced into more choices that allow luck to reveal itself, so people will appear to get "lucky" more often. Other games there is hardly ever a showdown, your skill as a player will get to shine.

Poker is gambling, just a form that you can control a little better than others.

[stickdude]

[redhouse]

As far as I'm concerned its only gambling if the EV is negative. The fish are gambling, I'm (usually) not.

[Molina]

Pot limit Omaha and all forms of draw all have more 'gamble' in them than holdem, good players figure to win in the long run but the variance is higher. If some is playing granite at any form of poker maybe they can dispute the gambling element.

The amount of skill is irrelevant, moneys being bet before anyone has the nuts. Pool's a game of skill, if 2 guys each $50 on the outcome, they're gambling, it isn't an unspeakable expletive. It's the same with chess or golf, I remember something Doyle said about when he'd play golf for huge amounts with far better players than he, he could handle the stress of the money on the line better than the golf pros and that sometimes gave him an edge.

Molina

[rdale]

I don't mind that it is gambling, depending on how much is being gambled. I will take every likely near even money play for half stacks in the game that I'm currently funded to play. I hate that 2+2 line but at times it is really the best way to consider the game. Give me a 60/40 and I'm definitely a gambler ready to bet it all, when I have enough money on the table to the opponents stack to reduce the bottom line variance.

It is deciding when "gambling" from even money situations and marginal dogs or favorites that is a skill in its own right. I think most of it has to do with the total size of your roll, how much variance your stomach can take and your current opponents. Then again I'm a semi-LAG by nature.

I give limit hold'em about a 4:1 skill to luck factor you rarely have a decent opponent at worse than that in a hand and NL hold'em depending on your style 4:1-10:1.

[Rhound50]

CJ I do think its dumb that the NFL wont allow someone to play celb poker for charity. I do understand what the NFL is doing, even though poker has gotten to be more mainstream than it used to be, there are still people that look at it as bunch of degerate gamblers. Try being single and telling some woman that you play poker for a living and you will see what I'm talking about.Playing poker is very very mild compared to some of the other things that happen with NFL players, ask the Vikings. The only difference is that celeb poker is on TV and anyone can watch it. The "other" activities that atheletes do, are usually better hidden. The NFL is just trying to keep its image clean.

There is no question poker is gambling, I can walk into the Bellagio and I with a some luck I can sit down with Ivey, Greenstein, Chau, and Doyle and win. There is no amount of luck in the world that would allow me to be Rodger Federer in a tennis match, or knock out Roy Jones Jr.

[rdale]

[Cactus Jack]

[k3nt]

[kingsalami]

[k3nt]

[Cactus Jack]

[rdale]

[kingsalami]

Yeah, they're illegal. So is playing for money at your friend's house. BFD.


the big deal is that he signed a contract that forbids him from doing certain things, like illegal things.