Pennsylvania Judge Rules Poker Game of Skill

Last week a Columbia County judge dismissed gambling charges against the operators of a garage poker room finding that Texas Hold’em was a "game of skill."
.
Prosecutors in the case had charged the poker room operators with unlawfully soliciting and allowing "persons to collect and assemble for the purpose of gambling." But Judge Thomas A. James examined four issues in determining whether "gambling" had taken place: whether each player had enough data to make an informed choice; whether each player had the skill or opportunity to exercise skill in the game; whether skill sufficiently governs the outcome; and that the standard of skill is known to all players.

James wrote is his opinion “Simply, if chance predominates, Texas Hold’em is gambling. If skill predominates, it is not gambling.” James examined the extensive body of poker books which describe various winning strategies to play the game. James quoted several books on the matter including Mike Caro’s “Secrets of Winning Poker.” And he referenced various academic studies including a study by Swedish researchers that found that "Hold'em is a very sophisticated game requiring mastery of many different skills." After evaluating all the factors involved, the judge agreed with the poker experts that "in the long run, good players willw in money and bad players will lose money."

While it seems obvious that skill, not luck, predominates in poker, it is still significant for a judge to come to that decision after considering all the evidence. This is especially true in light of another recent contrary ruling, in Kentucky, where a lower court judge claimed that poker was a game of luck because whoever has the best hand wins (showing a complete ignorance of how few hands go to showdown and how much more is involved than hand rankings).

The more that poker is properly considered a game a skill, the better chance to have it accepted. Let's hope more jurisdictions follow Judge James' lead.

Obama -- Apologist in Chief

This is from Obama's interview with Al-Arabiya:

"And I think that what you will see over the next several years is that I'm not going to agree with everything that some Muslim leader may say, or what's on a television station in the Arab world -- but I think that what you'll see is somebody who is listening, who is respectful, and who is trying to promote the interests not just of the United States, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity. I want to make sure that I'm speaking to them, as well."

Am I naive to think that it is the job of the President of the United States to promote JUST the interests of the country?

Or is he naive to think that he can be loved by the Mustlim world if he says that America has made mistakes and is always "dictating" what it wants in the Middle East? Should his first interview on an Arab station have been so full of contrition? Is insulting the US the only way to achieve his goals in the Middle East? If so, just what are those goals?

Madoff Still Out on Bail?

US prosecutors head back to court to once again try to get Bernie Madoff sent to jail pending trial. To this point, he has been on home arrest at his multimillion dollar Manhattan apartment. Proving once again the fairness of the criminal justice system.

Despite already violating the court order freezing his assets by sending luxury watches and jewelry to friends and family and having 100 signed checks worth $173 million in his desk ready to be sent, Madoff has been treated like a king -- and not an accused thief -- by federal magistrate Ronald Ellis.

Another judge has the chance to do the right thing and put Madoff where he belongs, where anyone accused of stealing a fraction of the alleged $50,000,000 would be. We'll find out any minute...but it doesn't look promising.