Gutshot lose Court case Skills fight... Derek Kelly found Guilty!

[tantrum]

Unless of course poker will change its status into sport.

otherwise any game that is not sport is gaming...

[Royal Flush]

In many states in the USA poker is illegal and players go to the illegal joints where they risk their money and safety. 

Thankyou for making my point.......

[ifm]

Nobody has touched upon the skill v luck argument yet, had Derek won would that not have opened the way for tax to be levvied on winnings? as it would not be gambling any longer?

T minus 50mins............

If we play golf and have a bet on it there's no tax to pay, if we play chess and have a wager, no tax. Even if we do some brain surgery and have a flutter on who's patient will come out best there still ain't nothing to pay to Gordon the Moron.

What has skill in poker got to do with tax?

You are confusing gambling with skill, picking a winner is not what winning at poker is is it?
My point was that a few years back if you went into a bookies and placed a bet then you either paid tax on your stake or on your winnings, this was abolished BECAUSE THEY ABOLISHED GAMBLING TAX.
If poker is said to not be gambling anymore then it will no longer come under that umbrella.

I think the thing is that the government look at all this income some folks make without getting their cut and eventually they are going to make a move on it.
Afterall labour have taxed everything else.

[77dave]

Not too sure what difference the argueing over the law conserning luck and skill

my question is what affect has the court ruling had on the gutshot

is the club still operating as  usual

are they still raking pots in the cash games

what is going to happen to Mr Kelly

is any chance of the club being raided and shut down   

how are other private clubs affected

[byronkincaid]

Nobody has touched upon the skill v luck argument yet, had Derek won would that not have opened the way for tax to be levvied on winnings? as it would not be gambling any longer?

T minus 50mins............

If we play golf and have a bet on it there's no tax to pay, if we play chess and have a wager, no tax. Even if we do some brain surgery and have a flutter on who's patient will come out best there still ain't nothing to pay to Gordon the Moron.

What has skill in poker got to do with tax?

You are confusing gambling with skill, picking a winner is not what winning at poker is is it?
My point was that a few years back if you went into a bookies and placed a bet then you either paid tax on your stake or on your winnings, this was abolished BECAUSE THEY ABOLISHED GAMBLING TAX.
If poker is said to not be gambling anymore then it will no longer come under that umbrella.

I think the thing is that the government look at all this income some folks make without getting their cut and eventually they are going to make a move on it.
Afterall labour have taxed everything else.

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=17936.msg366723#msg366723

[FlyingPig]

I personally think the gutshots defence have gone about this in the wrong way. No dis-respect to them, as I am sure they have analysed the case and thought that was the best route to go down.

The horse taking part in the race is using its strengh, knowledge and the skills of the rider and is a sport. The person putting money on the horse winning is gambling. You are taking a chance on the many different varaibles the horse and rider may come across in their challenge.

When taking part in poker you are using your knowledge, mathematical probabilty, skill and wit (unreadable stupidity in my case) against other competitors, this taking out a large margin of luck. The gambling for me is, again, trying to place a bet on the outcome of an event.

In all sports/competitions there is always an element of luck. But in the long run the most skillfull adept competitor will win more than lose, and I know this is the case with poker.

[tantrum]

I personally think the gutshots defence have gone about this in the wrong way. No dis-respect to them, as I am sure they have analysed the case and thought that was the best route to go down.

The horse taking part in the race is using its strengh, knowledge and the skills of the rider and is a sport. The person putting money on the horse winning is gambling. You are taking a chance on the many different varaibles the horse and rider may come across in their challenge.

When taking part in poker you are using your knowledge, mathematical probabilty, skill and wit (unreadable stupidity in my case) against other competitors, this taking out a large margin of luck. The gambling for me is, again, trying to place a bet on the outcome of an event.

In all sports/competitions there is always an element of luck. But in the long run the most skillfull adept competitor will win more than lose, and I know this is the case with poker.

Agreed, their defence was not the best way to tackle the case in terms of interpretation of the Act.  This of course won't matter for other clubs, as the nnew Act comes to force soon, and poker definitely will be included in the Act - as all the games which are not a sport.

[bolt pp]

But in the long run the most skillfull adept competitor will win more than lose, and I know this is the case with poker.

In any given game of poker the process of shuffling and dealing is an action dictated completely by chance, seemingly everything thereafter was of peripheral interest to the jury.

If it only has to be proved that there is a significant amount of chance involved, in any aspect of the game, then i really dont see how the gutshot could have argued their case more effectively.

[FlyingPig]

Next step then: How can we get Poker to be taken as a sport?

sport  (spôrt, sprt)
n.
1.
a. Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively.
b. A particular form of this activity.
2. An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively.
3. An active pastime; recreation.
 

[tantrum]

In any given game of poker the process of shuffling and dealing is an action dictated completely by chance, seemingly everything thereafter was of peripheral interest to the jury.

If it only has to be proved that there is a significant amount of chance involved, in any aspect of the game, then i really dont see how the gutshot could have argued their case more effectively.

Yes and no- as you read the definition of the chance game in the Act, although the shuffling and dealing takes place - none of the players is more or less 'priviledged' to be dealt winning hand so they are not at the start of the game - players who will overall be preferred by dealt hands.


Next step then: How can we get Poker to be taken as a sport?

sport  (spôrt, sprt)
n.
1.
a. Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively.
b. A particular form of this activity.
2. An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively.
3. An active pastime; recreation.

Bridge and chess are sports- but they are not physical activities as the layman understands it. 

Tournament poker could be applied to some of the points nr 1/2, cash games might be argued to be qualifying under the definition nr. 3.  Whether one can charge for those activites and accept the betting is another story of course.  The money and the betting poses a problem in poker to qualify as sport.  Participants of the poker tournament each pay in order to play the game, which does not happen in other sports. 

What one should demand is regualtion of the cardrooms - licences that are not casino licenses but cardroom ones.  This would be much more logical and I am sure many would agree that by doing this the consumer would be protected from possible  cheats and rip offs.  Casino's have pretty big influence over the Gaming commision though so fat chances for that.
, 

[doubleup]

The Gambling Commission certainly isn't going to let this drop

http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/Client/news/pressrelease_detail.asp?id=26

[boldie]

The Gambling Commission certainly isn't going to let this drop

http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/Client/news/pressrelease_detail.asp?id=26

to be honest, that's fine by me..as long as they get a system in place for poker clubs. the main thing for me will be to see how DTD will fare..if they get a license there is hope..if not...I'm going back to work.

[thetank]

I tend to agree with Wardonkey, anything you can do on the internet is not a sport.

If Poker wanted to be recognized as a sport, it would first need a governing body......it kinda does, join the http://www.wpapoker.org/ and encourage them to petition the IOC if you're interested in seeing poker become a sport.

The IOC let in Bridge and Chess, so you've every chance.

The British Government (which gives special funding to things it deems as sports) doesn't always go along with the IOC. for instance, it recognizes neither Bridge nor Chess. Don't let that stop you though, you never know your luck.

[BrumBilly]

The IOC are nuts if they classify Bridge and Chess as sports. Must be a very looose definition.
As far as paying to participate in sports go, isn't there an entry fee for pretty much all sporting competitions?