Worm and Mike unvailable for comment.
Posted on 01/16/2007 4:10:55 PM PST by MotleyGirl70
LONDON, Jan 14 (Reuters Life!) - A court in East London is expected to decide this week whether poker is a game of skill, chance or a combination of both.
A jury has been asked to weigh up the role played by Lady Luck in the world's most popular card game, after police accused a club owner of illegally hosting a poker session and levying winnings and stakes without a license.
Britain's Gambling Act states that a license is needed for hosting a game of chance but not those of skill, like chess.
Derek Kelly, owner of the Gutshot private club in central London, has been accused of breaking the law on two occasions -- December, 2004 and January, 2005. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
In theory the judgment, expected on Tuesday or Wednesday at Snaresbrook Crown Court, could have repercussions for poker clubs across Britain, which claim booming membership. Gutshot says it has around 23,000 members.
Britain's online gaming sector is already in upheaval, after the United States effectively banned online gambling last year in a move that wiped billions of pounds (dollars) off the value of Internet gaming companies.
Britain opposes the U.S. ban, but has said it would not protect British gaming executives from U.S. extradition requests if they took bets from countries where they were illegal.
SHUFFLE INTRODUCES CHANCE
Last week the prosecution's lawyer, Graham Trembath, said the jury would have to decide whether poker was a game of skill, or luck, or both.
The fact that the pack of cards was shuffled before a game introduced a significant element of chance, he added.
If the jurors decide poker is a game of chance alone or a mixture of chance and skill, then the jury should find Kelly guilty, the prosecution said.
On its Web site, the country's Gambling Commission that regulates the sector in Britain, states:
"Whilst there are different levels of skill amongst poker players, the Gaming Act makes clear that even games of skill and chance combined are games of chance."
But Gutshot argues there is a significant element of skill in poker, and that the game is being unfairly singled out under the law. They say golf, even chess, is partly down to chance.
Barry Martin, chief executive of Gutshot who has been at the trial, wants the law to differentiate between casino games like roulette and poker.
"We say there are no games in the world, not one, that are pure skill," he told Reuters. "Chess has some form of chance.
"Poker is on trial here. We are saying poker should be moved into the 21st century and should be allowed to be played outside the hard gaming area of casinos."
He expects the trial to wind up on Tuesday or Wednesday.
Worm and Mike unvailable for comment.
Poker ping :)
You can't consider any activity where someone else is dealing the cards to be either a matter of skill or chance.
Yes.
it's about who has the most money to lose
(My Little Chickadee)
Derek Kelly, owner of the Gutshot private club in central London, has been accused of breaking the law on two occasions -- December, 2004 and January, 2005. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Splitting hairs ALERT!
Greg Raymer--who you know as the 2004 WSOP Main Event Champion--once said (and I paraphrase) "poker in a way is more difficult than a game like chess because there are more decisions to consider. But the main difference between the two is that if you make every move in a game of chess correctly, you're going to win every time. But with poker, you could make the correct play every time and still lose."
True, as is the converse,in the short term.
I've won more money with bad hands than I have with good hands, therefore it's a game of skill.
ML/NJ
If you're the star of the French team, it's a very cerebral one. :)
I love Rounders :)
Same here: great cast, great acting, great movie. It should've made a bigger splash.
Wow, where to begin? First, Government regulation of gambling sucks.
That said, poker is a game of chance where a player can improve his/her chances of winning by knowing odds/probabilities(thereby, making oneself a better player.) Said person can also improve chances of winning by being a good liar (bluffing.)
Since the house takes a percentage of pot, the house cannot lose. In this case, the house should accept the inevitable Gov't intrusion, and buy the license. House wins, Gov't wins.
Players compete for the rest.
The only reason the U.S. Gov't banned on-line gambling is they couldn't get their piece of the winnings.
I agree.
A wise old man told me once as I was hitching a ride on a train bound for nowhere...
"You got to know when to hold 'em,
Know when to fold them,
Know when to walk away
And know when to run
You never count your money
When you're sitting at the table
There'll be time enough for counting
When the dealings done..."
I wish I could've gotten some more pearls of wisdom from the gent, but somewhere in the darkness, he broke even.
If chance is not involved (at all), then there would not be terms as "bad beat" or "out(s)" or others....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.