Skill vs. Gambling

Poker ruled a skill Game by Federal Judge

As the title indicates- Skill vs. gambling.  Poker is a sport, and no real poker player would argue that point. Most of the world has recognized that it takes skill to make it to the end game. So what is the luck element? The river card is the luck card in my opinion. You know that one card that bails the gambler out for poorly played hands trying to hit that miracle card that makes their hand. That two outer for the win. Skilled poker player rarely gamble to the river. They will take calculated odds of hitting and push the envelope so the gambler pays for trying.

PPA Applauds Federal Court Ruling that Poker is a Game of Skill and Not Illegal Gambling

Washington, DC (August 21, 2012)

–The Poker Players Alliance(PPA), the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide, today lauded a federal court’s ruling that poker is a game of skill and is not illegal gambling under the Illegal Gambling Businesses Act (IGBA).The decision of Judge Jack Weinstein of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of  New York is the first federal court decision on whether poker is a game of skill rather than gambling. The court resoundingly ruled it a game of skill. The ruling stated that, “Neither the text of the IGBA nor its legislative history demonstrate that Congress designed the statute to cover all state gambling offenses. Nor does the definition of ‘gambling’ include games, such as poker, which are predominated by skill.” “As we worked for years defending players against vague gambling laws, we have patiently waited for the right opportunity to raise the issue in federal court. Today’s federal court ruling is a major victory for the game of poker and the millions of Americans who enjoy playing it,” said John Pappas, executive director of the PPA. “Judge Weinstein’s thoughtful decision recognizes what we have consistently argued for years: poker is not a crime, it is a game of skill. As the judge’s opinion aptly notes, poker is an American pastime that is deeply embedded in the history and fabric of our nation and his decision sets aside the notion that the vague laws render the game criminal.” PPA played a central role in the case. In coordination with the defendant’s lawyer, PPA provided the arguments and briefs and extensive expert testimony. Lawyers representing the PPA wrote the principal briefs and presented the principal oral arguments. Judge Weinstein’s opinion relied heavily upon the information the PPA provided the court. “Judge Weinstein gave the government an opportunity to prove that poker was a game of predominant chance, but even federal prosecutors could not provide an expert of any kind that could conclude that chance predominates over skill in poker. We could not be more pleased with the outcome of today’s decision,” continued Pappas. In addition, Judge Weinstein relied substantially on the absence of clear guidance in federal law on the question whether poker is illegal gambling. The decision therefore reinforces that now is the time for Congress to enact a fair and reasonable regulatory model that protects players and generates tax revenues. The PPA continues to work towards that end. For a copy of the U.S. vs. DiCristina case ruling and PPA’s initial amicus brief, please click  here.