You are supporting the judges argument, not refuting it. Those with more skill will win far more often than those who are not skilled. This is because there is far more to the game of poker than just the cards that are dealt. I play quite a bit and can tell you I have one quite often with the inferior hand by knowing how and when to bet and what amount to bet to convince my opponents that I have them beat when in reality I do not.

Why shouldn't it be legal? Oh I forgot---the government says gambling is bad for you. Unless of course the government gets it's slice of the pie. Then it suddenly is ok.

BTW---serving in the military is gambling (with your life) but that's ok because the government is benefitting. I see a pattern developing here.

I think Jersey Girl was joking. I'm pretty sure she was just busting on her friends.

For house get togethers, poker is fine but for professional gambling keep in mind how a Magician controls the cards & imagine him dealing.

Like Kenny Rodger sang "Got to know when to hold 'em............

I'd like to see somebody who says poker is a game of chance to play heads up against a poker pro like Daniel Negreanu, and then say it's still just luck. Any dumbass can get luck on the flop, river, or turn, but it takes tremendous skills to read another person's hand and to see they've got something, or they're full of crap.

altalks, you have obviously never played or seen poker played on a competitive level. Generally in a house get together the deal goes from player to player, at a competitive or professional level the dealer only deals the cards but doesn't play. If you get a chance... check out a pro tournament. As Ranman87 mentions... it definitely requires skills (plural) to consistently win.

I would not object as long as the penalty for cheating is "life without parole" and forfiture of all assets (corporate and private) for all investers.

Idiot, this is exactly the point made by the judge.

On line poker has one fatal flaw it is to easy for the house to cheat like that tribe up in Canada did. A computer program can be easily designed to cheat the players and no one would know. Someone would win the hand , that someone would just be the game owners own private player. Online poker take most of the skill out of the game like holding one's liquor and judging another players tells.

The tribe in Canda didn't cheat...they were the regulators. The cheaters were a former employee and collaborators. They were caught by the players because every hand is tracked by external sites, and any mathematical deviation from statistical norms sticks out over large sample sizes.

Sites police the only real threats of cheating, like colluding and bots. Otherwise they lose money...because again, players police the sites for integrity.

Your conspiracy theory is common, but has been disproven. No site owners are ripping you off. The games are easily proven to be safe, and people like me make a living from them.

Also, online poker is even harder than real poker. Try playing 12 tables at a time profitably, and get back to me on how I have no skills to profit consistently while you don't. Also, there are tells online...namely betting patterns and timing tells.

This is a topic judges are having to waste their time on? No wonder we are so f$%^&$ up! Screw these people, gamble and you're on your own. Don't waste our valuable resources on your piss ant worthless a*^.

Are you blonde by any chance Jersey Girl ?

The biggest problem I see with it is that, like other forms of gambling, people become addicted to it and either (a) think they are better than they are or (b) think they are just unlucky and that if they keep playing, their luck will change. In any case, too many people become completely addicted to ALL forms of gambling (including poker) and it wrecks their lives.

Gambling is fine as long as the losers are the only ones paying the bills. As always you get people doing irresponsible things and they then expect the rest of us to bail them all out.....ohhh my children will go hungry and have to live in the street unless you give me more money.

Bruce... people become addicted to alcohol, should that be illegal? People become addicted to $ex, should that be illegal? People become addicted to foods, should those be illegal? I can even make the case that sometimes people go too far in regards to religion and alienate those around them. EVERYTHING needs to be in Moderation. It's all about the person and what they can handle. People are adults, they need to be able to figure out what they can and cannot handle on their own.

First lets take a look at the definition of gamble :

a : to play a game for money or property b : to bet on an uncertain outcome

2
: to stake something on a contingency : take a chance
Next who is this judge?
Alright he is 88 years old and was nominated to the post back in Lyndon Johnsans days.

"

“I don’t approve of child pornography, obviously,” he said in an interview this week. But, he also said, he does not believe that those who view the images, as opposed to producing or selling them, present a threat to children."

He also hates mandantory sentencing but that view is held by many judges who view it as an imposition on their authority.

All this skill crap is bogus. of course in playing the game and knowing how to minipulate your betting can in fact give you and edge it still is gambling because that does not in any case alter the fact that the outcome is always in doubt. If it were a game of skill only why would anyone play it for money knowing they were gonna lose to the better players and why do these "better" players not win all the tournaments. Time for this relic to step down. He has been had by the big money backing the online gambling industry.

So lets take it a step forward after this ruling which will not stand. I know how to read a racing form and pick horses and you do not. Does that make me skilled and does that make horse racing not a gamble. Expand that to all games of chance....So then you get the tax issue! All of a sudden they cannot collect taxes on wagers because they are all now called skilled ventures. Anyone think that is gonna stand you can buy the bridge I have for sale in the hudges town Brooklyn

Hold 'Em poker is 90% luch and 10% skill. Any hand pre-flop is potentially the winning hand. Once the flop hits, that's when the 10% skill kicks in. The problem with today's players is they have no concept of odds and percentages. They get on these free poker sites, and play with all these free chips. so they are more willing to take risks by chasing low percentage hands that no professional player would do in a high stakes cash game. You have 20-something's that sit around and watch these glorified tournaments on TV, then play 20 games at a time online thinking their now some poker pro. They've changed the way the game used to be played, so the hard-core professionals like Negraneu, Doyle Brunson, Phil Hellmuth, or Phil Laak aren't as proficient to winning as they used to be. I can't recall the number of hands I've seen on the WSOP shows where some kid gets something like a K/8 off-suit in his hold cards, and plays it like pocket Aces. He chases it to the river, catches a King, then claims that he knew he had a powerful hand the entire time. As far as playing online, I defer to the old addage "A fool and his money is soon parted".

If you can get me to fold Aces full of Jacks, then I will say you've got skills.

I understand that a certain amount of skill is needed to successfully bluff but that is really the only skill. The entire concept of the game is luck. Luck of the initial draw. Luck in throwing away the right cards and the draw of the new ones. You may be able to convince someone your POS hand is better than his three aces, but you are as likely NOT to convince them if they know you bluff a lot. That's still chance. I agree with Breadx, if these people were so skillful, they would always win.

I personally agree with Mad magazine which stated back in the 70's that parking meters were, in fact, gambling machines. In the cartoon, a man tells the woman with him that "the city is betting me $20 to my dime that I won't be back in half an hour and that's GAMBLING!"

The only consistent skill in poker is cheating. Everything else is the luck of the draw.

@breadex:

Slight problem with your argument, based upon your definitions and this:

All this skill crap is bogus. of course in playing the game and knowing how to minipulate your betting can in fact give you and edge it still is gambling because that does not in any case alter the fact that the outcome is always in doubt.

Could potentially be used to make the argument that all professional sport players who play games/tournaments for money based on their outcome (golf, tennis, etc..) are gamblers, since they play games for money/property and the outcome (by very definition of the contest) is uncertain - and can, among other things, be affected by random chance ( weather conditions, equipment failure, etc...)

Only other point I would make here is that all games worth playing have "uncertain" outcomes - otherwise the game is not really a game anymore.

Easy on Jersey Girl, I'm sure she has tremendous personalities.

I dont have a problem with poker. I play at foxwoods and really enjoy the game.

I have a problem with the poker sites honesty.

My problem is in the regulation of the game sites.The only way I would support the legalization of it is if there was VERY STRICT regulation of it and the program. There have already been instances of the poker site itself selling the ability for certain people to see everyone elses cards. If this can be eliminated then I see no reason to keep it illegal.

Anyone who uses the excuse of morrality as a reason to keep it illegal needs to mind their own business and stop trying to enforce your beliefs on me.If you don't believe in it then dont play.I happen to feel differenty about many things that i dont try to force down others throats. ie organized religion(givng your money away,just as some do in poker), drinking alchohol(giving your money away just as some do in poker). Keep your personal views in your household,and if you dont like a personal choice another makes then dont associate with them and allow me to do the same.I can't understand why some feel the need to force their morals down others throats,like their "GOD" made them the moral police of the world. WHEN YOU CAN SHOW ME A HEAVENLY BADGE THAT STATES YOU ARE APPOINTED BY GOD TO ENFORCE MORAL STANDARDS (AND CAN PROVE IT)THEN YOU CAN TRY TO TELL ME WHAT IS OK OR NOT OK. UNTIL THEN STFU!!!!! AND MYOB!!!!

EXACTLY JERSEY GIRL! The fact that you admit in your statement that the person you know with no skill always looses proves that it IS a game of skill... nice try! I play poker and my daughter is a poker pro... she works on her game skill for hours everyday. What she works on has nothing to do with luck, but how and when to do what and why... only a small part of it is dependant on what cards you have.

@ThePunisher Your hand-Jh, Jc

The Board Ah Ad As Kd Qd

You have aces full of jacks

If I hold an outstanding ace, king or queen, or J-10 of diamonds, then you lose.

I bet the pot. You really won't fold in that scenario?

@ Foldem...

That scenario works for hold 'em but very few other poker games. Poker is more than hold 'em.

Just sayin'

After reading this article and the first few comments, I'm confused and reluctant to make any comments. I do know that video poker is definitely not skill.

Any "poker" game played vs the house is a losing affair. It's peer to peer, online or live, that is actually real poker. Those games are skill based, and it's mathematically provable.

Kk
Video poker is not simply a game of luck either. You can actually enhance your chances of winning by holding the right cards. However it doesn't even begin to compare to real poker, which most certainly is a game of skill.

There are many people who can make a living playing real poker while nobody can last at pure games of chance.

ProI:

No real poker is played directly against the house. House banked casino-style games that superficially resemble poker are to poker what a golf-themed lotto scratch-off is to golf.

This ruling is regarding peer-to-peer poker.

I'm aware of that, Rich. I think my comment may be hard to decipher given I didn't explain it well. Thanks for pointing that out, for others. And thanks for all your efforts.

For those who don't know, Rich is "The Engineer"...PPA (Poker Player's Alliance) representative extroidinaire. He helps fight for the rights of poker players and the industry we love. Friend him on Facebook and Twitter, and help in the fight!

Yeah, Rich
I too am a member but not as active. Keep up the good work!

Obviously you are not a poker player. Your argument is akin to saying a baseball player is merely lucky because he doesn't get a hit 100% of the time he bats.

Have you ever watched poker on TV? How players take down a hand with rags because they are skilled at bluffing and reading their opponent? How Daniel Negreanu has demonstrated an uncanny ability to call a players's hand without seeing it?

I play in a neighborhood game and some players - those who play more frequently - are better. I doubt they are "luckier" than I am, they are more skilled.

@Jeff N.

If you think poker is about the cards only,or even anything close to that,then you know NOTHING about poker.

Give me the power of the position of the dealer button and I'll play my hands blind all night long.

And win to...

Position,reads,table image,calculating odds and many,many other things count as much or more than the cards.

Poker is in fact,a game of people played with cards,NOT a game of cards played by people.

And ANY game has an element of luck to it BTW. The ball takes funny bounces in baseball and football as well for example. Does the "best" team win 100% of the time in those sports?

I am a poker player and enjoy it for what it's worth.

Winners in poker do so over the long haul. If it was a game of skill then a first time player should never be able to beat a pro. Yet, I have seen it happen many times in Vegas. I've seen yahoos in Vegas not know what they are doing yet have an extremely profitable stay/run at a table. I have seen Pros who could not win if they had a gun to their head.

Knowing what cards to hold and what cards to throw away is not skill in itself..it is all about probability. Once you learn the numbers you know what hands to try and get, play, or fold.

Its like anything in life..the more times you do something the better your probability at succeeding. But there in itself shows it is evolving over a longer play time into a game of probability and not so much skill.

I get it ..I really do...anyone that plays poker thinks they are highly skilled in it. It's human nature.

And I get it that all that post here about how skilled they are make their livings on solely playing poker. They are only here posting while someone is counting all the money that they won.

:)

I have my views and no one is going to change them..just as you have yours and will be just as steadfast.

That is the @!$%#ing stupidest thing I have seen in some time. "Show me a poker player that never loses."

So, in those terms no pro athletes in any sport are pro, because they lose all the time. How many undefeated teams do you know in any sport year after year after year? Or people in single person sports, wrestling, auto racing, golf, bowling, track and field, etc etc. Pros lose, no one is 100% in ANYTHING, ever. Pro card players win more than they lose, that not opinion that is fact.

Your comparison of Bingo is very weak. That is just random number drawing. There is no negotiating, bluffing or anything. Bingo is raw numbers and simple luck.

Show me a pro, in any sport, or anything else that wins 100% of the time.

Be Accountable.......Do what? I wouldn't advise you to try your luck or skill based on this comment.

In basebal if you succeed 30% in hitting you make the hall of fame.

Be Accountable is right. Poker is mathemtically undeniably a skill game. It's been proven for decades. The stigma that says otherwise is just that, a stigma.

I know, I've been playing poker as a pro for 4 years now.

Jeff - You do not play poker. Stop lying. You've played poker.

There is no logic in your argument. You must win 100% of the time, an amateur cannot beat a pro,etc. Why do these parameters determine whether it is a game of skill? Just dumb.

Additionally, some of the things you talk about are skills. (Knowing card profitability is a skill) Let alone things you probably know nothing about - ICM, Fold/Shove ranges, Balancing ranges, fold equity, texture, fold to 3bet, Vpip, etc. Since you know the game lacks skill, explain these concepts and how understanding them has nothing to do with skill. Yeah, that's what I thought. Why don't you stick to commenting about things you understand and you won't come across as a troll.

Skill-

Proficiency, facility, or dexterity that is acquired or developed through training or experience

mohomad ali must be just lucky he won the title 5 times but he had to lose 4 times before h could retire as a champ pretty lucky uh

Jeff leveled himself while triple range merging...

Jeff N., you are in fact clueless to what makes a pro in anything. Pros don't always win, and neither do amateurs. If what you are saying was applicable to anything relevent, then a pro boxer would never have to defend the title belt, Tiger Woods would never have to be called a loser, and you would never have to worry about the difference of luck vs. skill. Can you get lucky in just about any skilled event? The odds say yes, from a statistical point-of-view, at least once, but not much past that. Can your luck hold out over skill (long term-odds)? For example, I don't shoot hoops, but I do have a chance, without any previously learned tecnique to be able to land the ball in the net, given an endless number of tries. And it is possible, that if I shoot only three times in one session, I could possibly score more points than even a seasoned NBA pro (granted, he is tired, not focused that day, didn't wear contacts, etc. any number of variables in play that could, by chance, work in my favor). Are you still entertained by your own misperceptions? If you are, then obviously you have no understanding of the difference between skill and luck, since your ability to differentiate the two is lacking.

ProIndividual-3906907: You can't compare poker to a football team or any team for that matter . It is a single person battle. Compare it to tennis why don't you? Try putting in a category like ...lets say Federer. Is he skilled to be the best at what he does? Yes and he has many wins because he is skilled, very skilled for that matter, to be the best in his specialty. Compare poker to NASCAR, Jimmy Johnson was a very skilled driver so was Jeff Gordon and Earnhardt. They all have shown their skill. Shall I go on?....Ping Pong, Gymnastics, look at the Olympics....they all have a skill for each they are performing. You say players in football, remember also they depend on other team members to win the game. Poker is a one person team. They is no one to help them they are responsible for every move they make.

Sorry ProIndividual-3906907 I meant that to be directed to Be Accountable-1433376

As a moderate poker player I can tell you for sure that luck/chance plays an important role - but it is far outweighed by the player's patience and skill.

In the long run, even the luckiest of players will succumb to a skilled and patient player. The element of chance involved in poker only really serves to make it more fair, by ensuring that it's virtually impossible to have a 'perfect' streak. In peer to peer gaming, this element is essential because it can then be exploited by skilled players.

Yes, it's a game of probabilities - but it's knowing how to work those probabilities to one's favor (skill) that makes it skill-based.

Jeff, let's take a look at your example. If you correctly guessed the outcome of a flipped coin 70 times out of a 100 flips, that would make you incredibly lucky, since there is a .003% chance of doing so. If you somehow were lucky enough to do so, and then you repeated this task, it would be a statistical anomaly...in other words, this would be impossible to repeat on a regular basis without some sort of skill, trick, or ...clairvoyance.

If anyone wants to check, a coin flipped a 100 times has a binomial distribution with a standard deviation of 5 or (.5*sqrt(100)), which gives it a Z transform of (70-50)/5. P(Z>=4.0) = .003%

Hey, I love watching Negreanu play, the way he thinks out an opponent's hand, and does it out loud.

It's spooky, and it's skill.

But I'm still 50/50 regarding online poker sites. Seen some really strange hands before, where you feel like someone at this table needs to get shot.

So I'll save my money for when I can actually see my opponents.

bobmck-751368

I am convince there is no skills or very minimal skills involved in online poker. I have never seen so many donkeys commit to the "All In" move before the flop as much as I have online.

In hold 'em poker, I'd have to say its nearly all skill. Being able to bluff, reading a bluff, and so many more skills needed. I believe Daniel Craig as James Bond in Casino Royale said it more accurately than anyone else. You're not playing your cards, you're playing the person's cards across from you. Sure people get lucky, it happens all the time in any skill-based event.

To the person who used Bingo and such as examples: you're comparing apples to oranges. Bingo, as with other "against the house" games, is a game of luck. The more cards you buy, the higher your chances are, as you're betting against the house, not against another induvidual. In poker (specifically hold 'em) the house has no stake in any particular bet, so no matter who wins or loses, they still win from either entry fees, drink/food sales, etc...

thepunisher:

Those are the idiots who are just trying to get lucky and have no skills. Hitting or matching an all-in does not make one a good poker player. These experiences with "donkeys" should have convinced you that the players have no skill, not that the game doesn't require skill. Allbeit, online poker has a diminished emphasis on bluffing, and an increased emphasis on odds calculation and betting strategy.

@JustGetAlong

As someone who plays both live and online I'll go you one better---I think reading ability as far as betting patterns and the like are even more important online than they are live,simply because live poker presents one with physical tells that we're deprived of online (though,and here's a hint if you ever choose to play online for $,there are SOME tells online---for example,any South American player with an image from Scarface as their avatar is 99% likely to be an enormous fish...).

That's why many players online run software like PokerTracker or HoldEmManager,which have HUD's built in to the software (you can see things like how many times a player voluntarily puts money in the pot for instance---VPIP %, and many other things...). Sites constantly check out various software programs to see what they'll allow and what they will not.

@kennyw-2983735

Interesting, your one better stated the same thing as I did, just with a lot more words :). Thanks for the information on the online circuit.

Brilliant sleuthing there James, spot on!

As I recollect, the three judges lost their hats, watches and shoes before they ruled that "seven-up" was a game of skill.

I started from a $50 deposit...and worked my way into a career as well. It is mathematically provable to be a game a skill...the only reason there is a debate is because most people associate it with casinos.

President Andrew Jackson played poker professionally as a 20-something youth for a few years. It's an American tradition.

I don't want taxed more than other people though. I already pay the same income tax as everyone else. The depostors already pay income tax before depositing. Taxing us more is a sucker's play. It gives the govt incentive to run a protection racket...they illegal something, then relegalize it only if you agree to pay more in taxes than any other citizen or business. How would that be fair?

You don't need to tax things to legalize them. If marijuana for example were legal, then growers would pay income taxes, as well as distributors, as well as buyers (both income and sales, plus "sin" tax), and as well as other fees associated with liscencing, regulation, etc.

We should just call for legalization of poker, not more taxes on it. I'm taxed enough, and taxing the companies that provide online poekr just taxes me more...because they'll make up the difference by raising the table tax - the rake.

Pro
It's said that Nixon was a great player. Some say he used poker winnings to pay for his first political campaign. My father was a semi-pro until us kids were born (60+ years ago). He bought my folks first household of furniture with his winnings.

That's awesome dsb! I looked up Nixon...you're right!

well i never got my money from POKER STARS

Why, they paid everyone else? All you have to do is email them even now, and I'm sure something can be worked out. I waited a while to cash out the tiny amount of funds I had on there before the online poker shutdown....they paid me.

I don't think you tried to get that money...or you'd have it. No one else got refused through them.

1000% WRONG.

And since the deck is reshuffled after EVERY hand how in the Hell would counting cards do you any good?

Please don't comment with any sense of authority on a topic when you have no clue what you're talking about. If you meant being able to calculate one's outs (and know the difference between "true" outs and counterfeited ones...) and the inherent odds,both by hand and pot equity,then that IS part of the skill.

Equating blackjack to poker is false.

Paul
You are talking about blackjack. Not poker. If you must comment, please know your subject.

Oh, btw, a good card counter can also make a living at blackjack. The trick is to keep the casino from thinking you're counting. I have been going to Vegas 3-4 times a year for 30 years. 2 out of 3 times I pay for my trip and then some. I just don't get greedy. I play for fun and relaxation. If you know what you're doing you can play BJ or poker and not lose, or not lose too much. I used to go as stress relief from work. Now that I'm retired I just have fun.

Equating blackjack to poker is false.

Even though they are different games they do have skill similarities. Based on cards held, there are odds of drawing certain other cards. In addition, you are playing against the dealer and the cards displayed further define odds of busting, drawing under the dealer, or the dealer busting. A lot like Holdum. There are some making a living playing both but never heard of anyone making a living on the lottery.

Hold Em isn't played vs the dealer. Also, there is one deck in play, not many decks like most BJ today. Also, you're right...the lottery is a sucker's game, while Hold Em and all other forms of peer to peer poker, and BlackJack, are games skilled players can profit at longterm. BJ has a tiny edge for even the most skilled pro though...I'd suggest that because you play vs the house it's very hard to make a living at it today. Poker on the other hand is played against other players, and therefore the house (casino) doesn't care who wins or loses...they get their rake regardless.

Paul is a dumbass

hahahahahhahahaaaaaaaaaaaa................................had to laugh. That was funny paul. If I had 15 and you had 16, I'd stay everytime, and probaby win 90% of the time.

And if you have better poker skills you'll see more skin long term. :)

Pro, you don't need better poker skills, that's for later. All you need is more beer.

I made a living playing online. The rare cases where the programs were manipulated it was done from the inside, and at one particular company (which owned two sites). Full Tilt and Pokerstars have never had their integrity questioned by any real pro. Why? Because we extensively track every hand. There are whole sites dedictaed to it. We can tell if there are any deviations from the norm. That's how the cheaters from that bad company got caught...the players put the data together and proved it.

BTW, the websites have far lower rakes than Brick and Mortar casinos.

To say that online poker isn ot a game of skill denies the facts. Thousands of Americans made a living from poker for years, and many of us have left the country to continue making a living from it. The same players win time and time again given the proper sample size, and the same percentage of winners and break-even players always exists for any amount of players in the games.

If you were correct I wouldn't have the job I do. You are completely incorrect.

@HarmlessOldman

ProIndividual is 100% correct. Some of the smaller outfits had issues with there programs being manipulated Tilt) never had such problems.

They DID and will always continue to have problems with players trying to manipulate the programs and even more prevalently trying to win by the use of bots or collusion through co-operative play schemes and the like. And I'm sure that ProIndividual will concur with me that EVERY time I was even in a game at either of those sites where this happened I had my money refunded. On more than a few occasions this happened in games where I was unaware that cheating was even going on but someone else on the table raised such suspicions to support and when it was confirmed I received an e-mail letting me know what had happened and that X amount of money had therefore been returned to my account.

If you truly understood what Stars rakes in a day (and it was MORE when US players were competing there and will be again,sooner than later hopefully...) then you would realize how ridiculous your claims of cheating the players at that site are. As for Full Tilt their problem was in the actual accountancy of their funds and how irresponsible they were---think a Ponzi type scheme with the player's money. The people involved have been banned from any involvement with the company forever (this includes a couple big time professional players) and Stars has agreed to pay back the money to every Full Tilt player worldwide. This will cost Stars over half a BILLION dollars to do---that's how big an industry online poker is---that Stars will take over a half BILLION dollar hit to make the players of a former rival whole,just for the opportunity to run that rivals site as their own moving forward.

Personally I always liked Stars software better,and their selection of games and the sheer depth of how many players they had 24/7 as well,but some of my poker friends were huge fans of Full Tilt and are jacked to think of Tilt's program being run by the clear industry leader in integrity and customer service and satisfaction---that being PokerStars.

And ProIndividual is also completely correct in his statement that if the software itself were "rigged" in some way that the players would have tripped to it a long time ago (players can use tracking software such as PokerTracker and HoldEmManager,to name 2,while playing for one thing...)and that site would see it's players drop to zero in no time. Integrity of the game is sacrosanct in the online poker community. NO ONE will play on a site that they feel doesn't run an honest game. Yes I'm aware of all the conspiracy theorists out there (go to Youtube and type in "PokerStars is rigged" and you'll get the phone book...) but I guarantee you that everyone of those players has one thing in common---they're losing players. Losing players always look for reasons/excuses beyond their own bad play and that's a huge reason why they lose.

And players like myself and ProIndividual love them for it...

i know for a fact there cheaters on ub ulitmate bet, i seen it with my own eyes,playing in toury and reported it they said no way theres cheating on here, and i talked to the other player they said they told them the same thing.

I do concur, and those sites also actively seek out bots and colluders, because it hurts the integrity of the game and can cause not only victims to lose money, but for them to lose money too.

There are steps people can take, that are not difficult or time consuming, to prevent themselves from being easy targets for such things. Because of the vigilance of players tracking other players, and the sites themselves seeking out potential cheaters, the chance of running acorss these incidents are very low. I have only run into colluders once, and was refunded. And I figured it out based on their obvious play patterns very quickly (within about 30 minutes of play). The more you know about how people try and cheat the easier it is to indenitfy it and stop it. Most of what they do is fairly obvious.

I was a huge fan of Full Tilt's software BTW, and played almost exclusively there (although i played freerolls and eventually micro stakes at Pokerstars just to toy with the idea of building a bnkroll from nothing, just to document I could do it...and it was going well before the govt shutdown of online poker in the USA) until Black Friday. I am totally excited about a company like Pokerstars taking over FTP, as their customer service and such is great. They also have integrity and more than handle their business on the financial end. I also like how quickly they respond when a belligerant player is at a table and you request them to come over and settle the person down or kick them out. That is like a real casino experience...very classy. It's also good for the game long term. I'll be pleased to play on FTP software again, but may also keep dabbling on Pokerstars now given they have made a lot of upgrades since Black Friday and I've come to like the player concentration there. They just didn't have the SNGs I liked pre-Black Friday, with any kind of volume I required (I was grinding 90 man KOs 12 at a time for $13, $26, and $52 BIs - and would have played higher if they had them...I also grinded their 45 man $75ish SNGs, and their $200ish MTTSNGs when they had them, and of course, I played cash too).

Great comment, KennyW.

And Laboror...UB and AP were the same company....they were the companies me and Kenny were talking about. And 60 Minutes did a show on that scandal...where in fact players caught them by proving it. To say no one believes you is impossible. We all believe evidence. But we also know they only cheated certain people...and if you weren't one of them, you might just be a losing player making excuses. If that's not the case, please go to any poker forum and suggest AP or UB were cheaters (actually a former employee and collaborators were)...they'll say "you're late, no duh."

If a poker company has the Lederer/Duke name on it's board....RUN!!!!!!

heres what happen on U B i was playing in freeroll when we got down to 2 table i started watching the other table to see who might i be playing at the final table when i noticed 1 guy only had 420 chips, well i said to myself hes gone next, so i made it to the final table and there he was, UB did not take his ante or big and small blinds, i seen i wasnt going to win my 3 toury this time, and yes he won the tourny. sitting out with 420 chips. after that i play poker stars freerolls and won money there, and i didnt cash out for the thought of play real money in the furture. now i play only play money on P S, i hope they will put my real money back on my account when they out up to USA players again, and thanks kenny for the warning but ur to late,and .com info on PS. i only played freerolls and some cash game but i never made a deposit to open an account but won money in tournys, will it still be there or do i have to email them to cash out.

Many pro poker players used to be traders. They left Wall Street to make MORE money in poker. In a recession this is possible. I agree, however, that in a good economy trading is where the big boys gamble with skill.

Respectfully, even in a bad economy a decently informed investor will usually come out ahead in the longer run. Better odd than you'll ever see in Vegas.

Go read the 120 page decision full of indisputable facts that poker is mathematically a skill game. Stop making BS assumptions and ad hominems.

I too question this. Sounds like big business is not only trying to buy the White House but judges from the top down. Money runs this country....that Constitution is becoming worthless.

Where in the Constitution does it say (Amendments or Article 1 Section 8, the Enumerated Powers) that the federal government has any power to ban or sanction poker, gambling, or anything else?

Let me guess...you want to reinterpret the "commerce clause" (which was intended CLEARLY to stop tariffs between the States ONLY, and prosecute harm and fraud ONLY when trade was interstate), or the "general welfare clause" (which is the Preamble, not the Enumerated Powers or Amendments, and ignoring Preambles to legal documents do not give powers, but outline the general content that will follow in the document it proceeds).

Also, how is it big business? Big business got online poker outlawed to stop competition! Who do you think lobbied for that law? The casinos! Is it irrelevant to you that thousands of Americans lost their jobs when that law was enforced, lost their life savings in some cases for over 15 months now (and don't have any hope of being repaif by the DOJ until at the earliest Christmas via remission), and had to leave the country to keep working? How's that for "general welfare"?

If online requires no skill at all then why are most pros online pros? How did I file my income taxes a professional poker player almost exclusively playing and profiting online the last 4 years? How did all those tracking sites track every single player that played online and show that the same guys keep winning over and over again?

You don't know what you're talking about when you say online poker is not about skill. There are reads online, as well as psychology. But the psychological aspect of the live game is overblown. It's more math than psych. It's about positive expectation, probability theory, and game theory mathematics. It's provable that all forms of peer to peer poker, live or online, is skill based.

Go read his 120 page decision with the proof you require, or a few poker books that provide that proof extensively. There have been thesis papers in college written on this subject.

...all which can be disproven. I'm not saying there aren't mathematical formulas that do not work or do not apply. However, no one would lose if they did. Think about that.

Just think. A person is at home, they do not even have to remember formula, books are open, and they are playing a game against the computer. Some first timers might do good, too. Is it the book? or is it something else? Perhaps playing against others. Certainly, they do not have access to these miracle books. There was a short print that year, and 80% burned up in a fire, and the rest were lost at sea...you have one of the only ones and it was never published for Kindle, or whatever.

Either way, some will do good, but the rest will lose. Hey, if you won once or twice, more power to you. However, others probably had access to the exact same information and they lost. If there was merit, no one would ever lose, especially on a computer.

Basically, I may not be right on all the issues but I have validated my point. It is gambling. Therefore, I do not advise it.

What you're saying makes absolutely no sense. If everyone wins it's the same as everyone losing...that would mean it's not a skill game. For it to be a skill game many should lose, some should win, and here's the important part...the winners should be the same people over and over.

Do you know how many people flunk out of law school? Medical school? Fail to make it to the NBA, MLB, NHL, and NFL? Do you realize how many people try every single career that uses skilled labor and fail at that skill?

By your definition, every single thing we do in life that requires skill is gambling.

Skill means that not everyone wins. It's a skill precisely because it takes knowledge and aptitude to win. The fact you don't understand Variance (known outside of mathematics as "luck") and Standard Deviation, probability theory, game theory, and Kelly Criterion does not mean others don't.

Furthermore, I'll clue you into a little equation that will aid your life everyday:

good "luck" (favorable Variance) = preparation + being aggressive + opportunity

Ed
Video poker and poker are not the same thing. Online poker is played between players. The only computer involvement is the deal and money tracking.

We are just about the only country in the world that doesn't allow it. It's legal and regulated quite well elsewhere.

What dsb said Ed...online poker is played between individual players. The site (Pokerstars,Full Tilt,Carbon...whomever) is the host and rakes their fee from all the players. They have no stake in who wins and who loses,they just take their cut off the top and move on. And we're talking a lot of money here for the biggest sites.

Uhhh... 3rdparty, online poker is played with 52 cards as is most poker unless you play using Jokers. ;)

For understanding mathematical facts? i think you're the doofus.

markiejoe is right.

the judge either doesnt know poker, or doesnt know casinos, or doesnt know math.

nobody beats the rake.

/shrug

Nobody? You mean like me, who has been pro for 4 years now?

Thousands of people in the USA alone "beat the rake". Stop blaming your inability to do it on "luck".

And you clearly don't know the math...because it's provable to be a game, with the proper skill relative to your opponents, you can beat. The top 15% of players break-even or profit in poker. And you don't play against the casino...the rake pays the dealers, etc. You play vs other players. The 85% that lose pay the rake and the 15% that break-even or profit.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Hey Flashy I'm sorry if this bothers you but many of us consistently beat the rake, year after year. However that was not the critical finding. The important point made by the judge was that even though a minority of players make a profit, skill is the predominant factor in determining relative performance. IF you had read the opinion on which you are commenting, you would know that.

nobody

beats

the rake.

You can't just dream up stuff and curtail my liberty on that basis with a "trust me." Poker is an honorable game that we are proud to play. I don't need you to use government to compel me to behave in a manner you believe is best for me.

John
Online poker is not actually illegal. It's the money transfer that's deemed illegal. It was made part of the Port Security Act. One of those weird add-ons that make no sense. But we needed the Port Security Act and some dumba$$ added it on.

John, did you not read the entire article?

Its definition of gambling lists several forms -- including slot machines, lotteries, and bookmaking -- that his lawyers argued were games of chance.

Games of chance differ from games that require skill. And what is this "TRUST ME" about? Who is going to trust anyone that makes such an absurd comment like that? Nice bluff though... LOL

John, poker is not gambling. It is in FACT a game of skill. Anyone who says this game is a game of chance, which is what gambling is, obviously doesn't know much about poker in the first place and shouldn't be commenting.

John. I don't trust you. I trust myself to make the right decision on whether to play. I even trust you to make the decision for yourself. If you don't want to play, don't play.