In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : Would you say horse racing is gambling or skill? We have professional horse layers/tipsters, who make money using 'skill' to wager on horse race outcomes, and less skillful layers who lose over the year, would we say that jp macmanus who makes a fortune in horse race betting is skillful or lucky? So if you think poker is skillful, its no more skillful than horse betting, which i think is gambling - i rest my case! Posted by loonytoons
wow
if you think horse racing is fair and that 'skill' wins through you're very foolish. skill is information not some teachable/learnable knowledge.
horse/dog racing is rigged!!! like actually proper RNG rigged not 'I lost a hand it's rigged'.
Tbh I think horseracing and poker are both all about luck, unlike roulette. I've found a system.... Posted by yb
horse racing is easy
know either jockeys/or owners.
find out if the horse is trying/its been prepared to win this race bet if so do not otherwise lol,
so ridic how it's given any respect when everyone knows it's dodgy.
the mini horses are even worse, oh look the massive favourite is about to win quick hit the button that breaks the rabbit so the race is voided. oh look how regularly that happens lol (also tbf I have a brilliant strat for mini horses, watch for the one that does the biggest poo on the walk round the track at the start - never fails!)
In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : horse racing is easy know either jockeys/or owners. find out if the horse is trying/its been prepared to win this race bet if so do not otherwise lol, so ridic how it's given any respect when everyone knows it's dodgy. the mini horses are even worse, oh look the massive favourite is about to win quick hit the button that breaks the rabbit so the race is voided. oh look how regularly that happens lol (also tbf I have a brilliant strat for mini horses, watch for the one that does the biggest poo on the walk round the track at the start - never fails!) Posted by beaneh
Thats why i only bet on the virtual horses, much more skill involved
You may call me stupid but a degree in maths says I'm not. You may consider me wrong but provoking a discussion is part of the fun and calling me stupid says more about you than me.
My point is simple. If you cant lose anything you're not gambling. Simple . You may not agree but that is how I see it .
Because the established opinion is against you doesn't mean you are wrong. People once believed the world was flat. Many churches will tell you Adam and Eve were real. Over and over the established authority is proved wrong.
The arguement that you are gambling from your original stake ( actually a buy-in ) falls because once you have cashed you cannot lose. You have that money back.
The point from there is that when you cant lose, your strategy is freed up and you are totally committed to the strategy of your opponents and not on the odds related to an event. The game has changed. The important thing is to think it through . Its the difference between probability and odds.
I know I am on a limb but it is not the first time and last time in the end I was proved right.
Tiercel, Like you say if your in a toruny and cashed and are carrying on to get more winnings, you have to pay in the tourny which imo is still gambling anyone who doesnt see poker as gambling is pretty stupid, but thats just my opinion. Posted by tiggerovnh
On that basis tiercel the lottery is also not gambling, because once the first 4 balls come out correctly for you you know that you cannot lose. Honestly your argument saying that cash poker is gambling but tournament poker is not makes no sense I'm afraid.
In Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK : horse racing is easy know either jockeys/or owners. find out if the horse is trying/its been prepared to win this race bet if so do not otherwise lol, so ridic how it's given any respect when everyone knows it's dodgy. the mini horses are even worse, oh look the massive favourite is about to win quick hit the button that breaks the rabbit so the race is voided. oh look how regularly that happens lol (also tbf I have a brilliant strat for mini horses, watch for the one that does the biggest poo on the walk round the track at the start - never fails!) Posted by beaneh
LOL
whenever you get this dodgy info send me a quick PM, I want some easy monies!!!! lol
With all respect to the grand master you don't answer my fundamental . Inherent in the term " Gambling" is the risk of loss . If you have cashed in a tournament and have at least got your money back , there is no risk of loss therefore no gambling except in the the general sense of taking a chance. If you are knocked out of a tournament after cashing you have not lost anything. This debate is not about luck v skill ( that depends on the players and I absolutely bow to your understanding of it ) its about the nature of the tournament and the way you approach the game especially when you reach the money - When you place a " bet " are you gambling on his hand versus yours or are you challenging him to a fight ? Me , I don't think there is necessarily a right answer either way. I know that when I get knocked out of a tourney I have lost the game - not the money - that was gone as soon as the tournament started. so I am not gambling I am playing to beat the other players.
In Response to poker gambling : Sorry Mr Tier, but that argument is seriously flawed. I have given evidence in two Court Cases on the "luck v gambling" issue, & in neither of them was the debate restricted to cash games. The degree of luck in poker is open to debate, most reckon it to be between 60% & 80%, but whatever, we all know it includes a substantial luck quotient. Personally, I'm not at all fussed whether it's deemed gambling or not, it matters not to me, but it's not possible to argue that luck does not play a part in poker. It does. So it must be deemed as gambling. If you get all your money in pre-flop with two red aces, & your oppo calls with two black aces, & the board comes five spades - was that unskilful play, or (bad) luck? And there's never been a Tourney winner who has not got all his money in with A-K v Q-Q, or vice-versa. Again, relying on luck to hit or hold. We also hit sets or bust overpairs, having got our money in bad. Is that skill, or luck? Posted by Tikay10
Comments
I've found a system....
DOES ANYONE WANT THE CORRECT SCORE FOR THE NEXT ENGLAND GROUP GAME?
My point is simple. If you cant lose anything you're not gambling. Simple . You may not agree but that is how I see it .
Because the established opinion is against you doesn't mean you are wrong. People once believed the world was flat. Many churches will tell you Adam and Eve were real. Over and over the established authority is proved wrong.
The arguement that you are gambling from your original stake ( actually a buy-in ) falls because once you have cashed you cannot lose. You have that money back.
The point from there is that when you cant lose, your strategy is freed up and you are totally committed to the strategy of your opponents and not on the odds related to an event. The game has changed. The important thing is to think it through . Its the difference between probability and odds.
I know I am on a limb but it is not the first time and last time in the end I was proved right.
n Response to Re: poker and gambling - meant for ask TK:
I think its 85% luck and 15% skill
That 15% skill seems little but infact when your playing it matters a whole lot.
whenever you get this dodgy info send me a quick PM, I want some easy monies!!!! lol
Me , I don't think there is necessarily a right answer either way. I know that when I get knocked out of a tourney I have lost the game - not the money - that was gone as soon as the tournament started. so I am not gambling I am playing to beat the other players.
n Response to Re: poker gambling: