Real News. Real Funny.

Comments

  • Poker isn't really gambling. Better players will beat worse players. There is a definite strategy that isn't based on pure luck like roulette or craps.
  • They are just mad they can't tax it
  • AverageAmericanGuy: Poker isn't really gambling


    Gambling != game of chance.

    If you're making a wager on the outcome of some event, it's gambling.

    If the outcome of the event is random, it's a game of chance.

    Sports betting is not a game of chance. It IS gambling.
  • AverageAmericanGuy: Poker isn't really gambling. Better players will beat worse players. There is a definite strategy that isn't based on pure luck like roulette or craps.


    TFA addresses this.
  • This wasn't a "get together with your friends" poker night, the SC said that's OK...this was a large scale operation that happened to be run out of a home, and clearly wasn't a one-time thing.
  • FTFA: The statute is anti-card, anti-dice and outlaws such long-forgotten games as roly-poly, rouge et noir and draughts.

    Umm..."draughts" is how they say "checkers" on the other side of the pond.
  • clyph: What do you mean by random?

    Odds are somebody is going to get killed driving to work today. Do you consider driving to work today to be gambling, since the death of this person is "random"? Are you not making a wager on an event?

    If you invest in the stock market, is that gambling? Does it change if you go to a "professional"?

    Should people be banned from buying icecream before the try it, because there's uncertainty as to how much flavour (and utility, and value) the customer will get upon purchasing it? Is this not a wager on the outcome of some event?
  • There is a difference between 5 friends playing cards while having a few beers and have two dozen folks playing cards at no doubt 4 to 5 different tables. This looks like a residential street (see link). No doubt neighbors called the cops due to traffic.

    Link 

    Sounds like a small casino
  • Gamblers: Why don't they go after thieves?

    Thieves: Why don't they go after drunk drivers?

    Drunk drivers: Why don't they go after child molesters?
  • Look, it's clear that they're not against gambling in South Caroline, it's just that if you want to gamble in South Carolina, you better be gambling in the State-approved way: Link
  • I've always wondered how poker tournaments can be considered gambling, but chess tournaments aren't. Or Magic: The Gathering tournaments. In all these cases, you're putting up money up front to play a game, and the best players will have a better chance at winning the final prize at the end. The actual chips that you "bet" during the poker game have no value. And in the case of M:tG tournaments, there is even luck involved.

    So I really don't understand how poker tournaments can be treated differently than chess tournaments or M:tG tournaments.
  • If wagering money is all that is required to constitute gambling, how is eTrade not online gambling in South Carolina?
  • I'll say, I was robbed of $40 dollars just last week because of this insidious problem.

    Of course I plan on being robbed again this weekend too.

    /I suck at poker. Horrible poker face and too big of a risk taker.
  • I don't know the specifics in South Carolina, but generally speaking, your Saturday Night game with the boys is safe. Most of the gambling laws are aimed at people who try to run a business by taking a rake or charging a membership fee or over-charge for snacks and beverages.
  • van1ty: clyph: What do you mean by random?

    Odds are somebody is going to get killed driving to work today. Do you consider driving to work today to be gambling, since the death of this person is "random"? Are you not making a wager on an event?

    If you invest in the stock market, is that gambling? Does it change if you go to a "professional"?

    Should people be banned from buying icecream before the try it, because there's uncertainty as to how much flavour (and utility, and value) the customer will get upon purchasing it? Is this not a wager on the outcome of some event?


    Ahh, I see you finally passed enough courses on the 20th or 30th try to qualify as a sophmore.

    And "random" in gambling means that you cannot know the result to any level of certainty (excepting it will occur within the bounds of the possibilities of the game). For instance, roulette is "random". Set-up properly, no one can tell what slot the ball will fall in. You can make some sort of prediction based on probability, but you cannot know nor influence the next result. Likewise, craps is random, since nothing you can do (legally) can influence the next throw. However games of "skill" allow the player(s) to manipulate the results (though, admittedly, indirectly). For instance, in poker, your betting/bluffing/intimidation efforts can change the outcome of the game by making people fold (or not fold when you are confident you can beat their hand). While the next card to be played is as random as can be devised within the confines of a deck of cards, people who are better at the phychological and/or mathematical aspects of the game tend to win more than, say, me.

    One way to look at it is thus: You can thoroughly describe the probabilities of the ball landing in any slot in roulette. And you can then look at who bets on what, and say who is most likely to win. But those percentages hold exactly the same whether the bettor is James Bond or Lottie Smith (though considering the old girl isn't obsessively betting the same number over and over while drinking a shiatty girl's martini, I would actually expect her to win more often). You can also thoroughly describe the probability of any particular card coming up next in poker. You can describe the probability of any particular hand held by a player winning the round. But that doesn't determine the winner of the hand as mechanistically as roulette does - because I can bluff my opponent with the better hand into folding, or raise him higher than he wants to go - well, not open-faced, poor-ass me, but you get the point
  • The South Carolina Supreme Court reinstated guilty verdicts against five Charleston-area poker players who challenged a state gambling law that is more than two centuries old.

    /What really is pitifully apparent in all this is that the state doesn't have a moralistic problem with gambling, they just want a cut of the money. This was obviously a game between friends, they weren't shuttling strangers in and out like Circus Circus. Just another sad example of one more of our rights getting trampled on.
  • jack21221: I've always wondered how poker tournaments can be considered gambling, but chess tournaments aren't. Or Magic: The Gathering tournaments. In all these cases, you're putting up money up front to play a game, and the best players will have a better chance at winning the final prize at the end. The actual chips that you "bet" during the poker game have no value. And in the case of M:tG tournaments, there is even luck involved.

    So I really don't understand how poker tournaments can be treated differently than chess tournaments or M:tG tournaments.


    Do you use money to influence the path the game takes in chess* or MtG?

    * though the variant the Doctor was playing with the electrical charges might count as gambling
  • phalamir: Do you use money to influence the path the game takes in chess* or MtG?


    Um, you don't use money to influence the path the games takes in a poker tournament. The chips have no monetary value. The prizes are determined by place, just like in chess and m:tg tournaments.
  • oh_please: This wasn't a "get together with your friends" poker night, the SC said that's OK...this was a large scale operation that happened to be run out of a home, and clearly wasn't a one-time thing.


    Lets see how many people

    ♪Can't read the♪
    ♪Can't read the♪
    ♪No they can't read the farkin' article♪
  • LDM90: Gamblers: Why don't they go after thieves?

    Thieves: Why don't they go after drunk drivers?

    Drunk drivers: Why don't they go after child molesters?


    i.imgur.comView Full Size
  • phalamir: Ahh, I see you finally passed enough courses on the 20th or 30th try to qualify as a sophmore.


    You sound like a smug prick, and it is plain you were in such a hurry to finally get some use from your previously wasted education that you paid far too much to obtain that you totally missed his point.

    Read it again without the desperate drive to prove you didn't wast your education.
  • JohnCarter: There is a difference between 5 friends playing cards while having a few beers and have two dozen folks playing cards at no doubt 4 to 5 different tables. This looks like a residential street (see link). No doubt neighbors called the cops due to traffic.


    Ding. It may also have annoyed the local legitimate businessmen's organization, who would prefer to keep certain types of card games in certain places.
  • FTA: "The Supreme Court also found that it is not illegal for people to play a casual game of poker in a private residence, but it is illegal to play in a "house of gaming." The antiquated statute doesn't clearly describe the difference between a private residence and a "house of gaming." ... "Mark Powell, communications director for Attorney General Alan Wilson, who prosecuted the case, said the high court found that because the definition of a private residence in the statute is so vague, cases about gambling in private residences will be decided on a case-by-case basis."

    I wish the article mentioned what made them decide the residence qualified as a house of gaming. Did they advertise and allow in uninvited strangers? Did they charge entry or take a commision?

    FTA: "They are cowards," Chimento said of the justices. "They don't have the guts to bring the law into the 21st century." But, he said, he's happy that people who are not looking to make a profit can play poker in their own homes."

    Does that mean that the home owners were making a profit in this situation? If so then I don't see a problem here. I'm ok with legal gambling but not with unlicensed and unsupervised casinos.
  • Load 25 of 38 newer comments

This thread is closed to new comments.