is poker gambling?

[Abbaddabba 0]

You can sometimes guarantee a return on investment with trades and stocks, which is why it can be classified as risk, if you could ever "guarantee" a win in poker, then at that point, you could also consider it risk.

No, you can't guarantee a return with any stock. Bankruptcy is always a very real possibility. It's called risk because the outcome is uncertain. That is the nature of "risk". When you purchase a bond, the coupon rates are offered on the basis of how probable forecasters think it is that the company will go bankrupt and/or pay off debtholders in the event that they do.What you've described above is comparable to an extremely irresponsible and incompetent investor. Only an idiot would invest everything on the outcome of an individual stock, bond or source of equity.Only a gambler would play for stakes so high that, even if they were a winning player, they'd be faced with very real risk of losing a significant portion of their net wealth.

[cu in 4years Dan 1]

poker as noobs know it which is just betting your cards then yes, but poker as it is played by the elite (lol) is not betting on a certain outcome so you are betting on somthing you already know is there (the oponents cards) and by knowing what they have i their hand you know for alot of the cases what the outcome of your bet is (i.e. fold call raise).poker to me has 2 meanings 1. the gambling poker that people new to the game play which is betting on cards and the outcome of those cards2. skill poker played by people with extensive knowlage of the game which betting does not occur on the cards held by you but by the cards your opponents holdi know ile be flamed so just make it light ok?

[neverfold 0]

Every post I've seen you make is wrong.You're funny

You're a f*cking assh*le. People on this forum are continually trolling to try to get in a flame war rather than having actual discussion. I've tried to add something to most of the threads I've posted in but people like you just make it impossible for anyone that's NOT an immature teenager taking out their anger online to actually discuss something. This'll be my last post so as to avoid morons like you. F*cking douchebag.

[Socko669 0]

Bingo can be beaten. I've found a way.

[Spademan 94]

Every post I've seen you make is wrong.You're funny

You're a f*cking assh*le. People on this forum are continually trolling to try to get in a flame war rather than having actual discussion. I've tried to add something to most of the threads I've posted in but people like you just make it impossible for anyone that's NOT an immature teenager taking out their anger online to actually discuss something. This'll be my last post so as to avoid morons like you. F*cking douchebag.

Re-read this post, realize what you're saying, how you're saying it and how you're storming off in a huff, and then rethink the concept of charging someone else with immaturity.It took three short posts to crush your spirit.That's a record.

[Abbaddabba 0]

Bingo can be beaten. I've found a way.

No joke. I have too.Though for marginal amounts. ;PThere're some days of the week where the prize pool exceeds what they take in, if the weather sucks. I have a friend who works at a place like that. He tells me that the place runs at a loss half the time on the base ticket strips. It's the bonus/special tickets and the concession booths that make the real money.That, coupled with the senility of most people who play means that it probably can be played for a win. But it's for such marginal wins that it's not worth your time.

[SilentSnow 1]

gambling is a strange word because its only possible definition is a matter of degree, since everything in life is a gamble.To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest- nothings certainTo play a game of chance for stakes- most everything does have some stakesTo take a risk in the hope of gaining an advantage or a benefit- redundantTo engage in reckless or hazardous behavior: You are gambling with your health by continuing to smoke- one persons reckless is anothers good bet.the only question is what is your edge, whats the risk, and whats the reward?

[CardWarfare 4]

poker as noobs know it which is just betting your cards then yes, but poker as it is played by the elite (lol) is not betting on a certain outcome so you are betting on somthing you already know is there (the oponents cards) and by knowing what they have i their hand you know for alot of the cases what the outcome of your bet is (i.e. fold call raise).poker to me has 2 meanings  1. the gambling poker that people new to the game play which is betting on cards and the outcome of those cards2. skill poker played by people with extensive knowlage of the game which betting does not occur on the cards held by you but by the cards your opponents holdi know ile be flamed so just make it light ok?

I'll do you a favor here, since I'm not that into flaming.What you said makes sense, but only in the way saying "You can eat a marble, therefore marbles are food," makes sense.Even if a poker player was at the top of his game, making correct reads on every opponent in every single pot he played, it's still gambling. Here's an example:Let's say the greatest poker player to ever live is in a pot against a player whom he has excellent read on. Let's say that he can determine that the player only had bottom pair to the hero's top set. Therefor, when the player bluffs allin at the pot, the hero calls knowing he has the best of it. Then, the sucker hits 2 running cards and makes a straight on the river. Or a more succinct arguement that was already said: AK vs. JJ. Even the greatest players know there are times when they need to take a coinflip. Even if they know it's a coinflip, they cant "skill" the cards to fall in their favor. Also, one must keep in mind that no player is on top of his game every minute of every session. Players make bad reads all the time, or even worse, make good reads but second guess themselves into acting in the wrong manner. So again, yes. Poker is gambling.

[DerekTah 0]

Now you're just talking crazy talk Abba,  You could say roulette is just a spinning wheel game with a ball, and "gambling" is just an element of this fun ball bouncing wheel game.

I suppose it's not entirely fair to say roulette is literally "just" gambling either. Gambling is an element of it. But gambling is the only relevant element of it. Everything else is just a front for the act of putting a wager on an uncertain, uncontrollable outcome. Unless those who play it have a fetish for shiny metal balls, or something. When a game has the potential to be a winning proposition, that's a pretty significant element of the game itself; the physical act itself notwithstanding. It's definitely a lot more fair to say that roulette "is" gambling, even if they're not completely equivalent. It's just that it's close enough.You wouldnt say that investing in a stock portfolio IS gambling, despite the fact that it contains an element of gambling. The difference is that you regard it as "risk" when it's outside of a game context. But you don't go so far as to say that it IS risk. Because that's stupid. It's not JUST risk. It's risk, coupled with an expected return.

I will say it, investing in a stock portfolio IS gambling. Its a different type of gambling in the sense that its buisness and not a game. But any stock can at anytime go down. In fact this is sort of truer gambling becuase a lot of people do it without knowing what they are doing. Some expert often is doing the stock part of the buisness, the person investing is really just fronting the money to the stockbroker who then gambles your money on the stocks he/she thinks will do well.Just because the game has the potential to be a winning proposition doesn't mean its not gambling, just a gambling game where the player has a edge. In poker the player has the edge because the win/loss ratio will overall be based on how wisely a player plays his hands, you can't really say that with many other gambling games (in paticular roulette, that is simply did the ball land in the place I bet on).

[brian67 0]

The only game that's played in a casino that can be played WITHOUT gambling is blackjack if it is beaten like the MIT team did.

That's pretty hilarious. Were you joking?

[ksean9999 0]

it's funny that some people are so passionate about this topic... like saying, "if you don't think poker is gambling u should kill yourself."take it easy. to say poker is gambling is an incomplete statement in my opinion.gambling is part of it but in that regard there is also gambling in golf and business and pretty much every other aspect of life. i know this sounds obvious but i have a point.for example. if you are playing phil ivey in a heads up match (any game), make NO mistake about it.... you are gambling.he is not. or at least not as much. i mean no more than purchasing real estate in las vegas. it COULD decline in value but it's extremely likely to be a winning investment over the long term.example # 2. Are casinos gambling?yes and no. there is luck involved but over the long term they have clear and proven mathematical advantage - that's why they don' t go out of business.they have an edge - just like phil ivey against your sorry azz.in other words...poker is...for phil ivey - GAMBLING, skill, focus and experience.for YOU - gambling, gambling, luck... oh yeah and MORE gambling.for those of you disagree with what i think is fairly obvious...no problem.but look at the pictures of ivey's house, or greenstein's house and compare them with the inside of your mom's basement.(DISCLAIMER: excluding those of you who are rich, brilliant poker players living in mansions)

[CardWarfare 4]

The only game that's played in a casino that can be played WITHOUT gambling is blackjack if it is beaten like the MIT team did.

That's pretty hilarious. Were you joking?

Sadly, I doubt it

[Abbaddabba 0]

For a competent portfolio manager, risk can be hedged to near negligable degrees. The same is true of someone who knows how to handle their money in any situation that exhibits risk; poker included.For both poker and stocks, an idiot can find a way to make decisions that will face them with unnecessarily high degrees of risk. The difference is that no matter how stupid someone is, they will not be able to pick a stock with a negative expected return if they choose from companies listed on internationally recognized indices. On the other hand, it's quite easy (and common) for an individual to be a losing player. Hell, the majority of people reading this post probably are.

[uahphysics 0]

yes, poker is gambling. case closed

[pckt10s 0]

yes, poker is gambling.      case closed

come on, Howard Lederer is better than that.Thats him on the left cut out, right?

[LewFather 0]

I believe poker is gambling and the only skill involved is putting yourself in position to be lucky, Not completely dominated. :wink:

[spikymarv99 0]

Here is how I view poker with respects to those who are skilled:The odds of calling a coin flip are 50-50. If some were to lay to 2:1 odds, would you take it? Of course you would. You might lose a thousand flips in a row due to variance, but in the long term, you will break whoever is making you the proposition. The same applies to poker. If you are better than the other players then your edge equates to someone laying you 2:1. You might go through the negative side of variance every once in awhile, but in the long term you will win.Can you really call that gambling? Or is it more correct to think of it as an investment? For those who consider it gambling, why would you continue to do it?

[mosley 0]

let's not forget the stock market crash, when all of the wise non-gambling investors lost everything they had. oh, yeah and the collapse of the dot com industry when all of the wise.......

[teneight 1]

yes it is. very easy question....next?

[spikymarv99 0]

The only game that's played in a casino that can be played WITHOUT gambling is blackjack if it is beaten like the MIT team did.

The MIT team ended up losing money due to a bad run towards the end of their stretch. Even they lose.

[ksean9999 0]

yes it is. very easy question....next?

i don't know who's avatar cracks me up more... you or the jimrome guy.

[Turbo Dog 1]

... "Poker is 99% luck in the short term, 100% skill in the long term."Anyway, his numbers aren't exact, but he's right in the spirit of his statement.

Skill beats luck in the long run, but its amazing how long the short run can last.

For those who consider it gambling, why would you continue to do it?

Personally, I love to gamble. I think the better question is:For those who have an aversion to gambling, why would you play poker?

[greatwhite 0]

I'll go with DN on this one. "For me poker isn't gambling, It's the players that are around me that are gambling." Or something like that.

[ricker 0]

You are the weakest link, good bye.

Aha ha ha. Oh, gosh that's funny. That's really funny. Do you write your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. You are the weakest link goodbye. You know, I've never heard anyone make that joke before. Mmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone reference, reference that outside the program before. Because that's what she says on the show right? Isn't it? You are the weakest link goodbye. And yet, you have taken that and used it out of context, to insult me in this everyday situation. God what a clever, smart guy you must be, to come up with a joke like that all by yourself. Mmm, that's so fresh too. Any titanic jokes you want to throw at me while we're hitting these at the height of their popularity? Hmm? Cause... I'm here. God you're SO funny.

[kennyg1966 0]

wadda ya think bone head !you starting this thread might have been a gamble!