Originally posted by RahimKDoesn't the player who is "dealt" White have an advantage, and isn't it equally distributed over time?
In Chess is solely depends on the players skill.
In Poker it depends on your skill and THE CARDS YOU ARE DEALT( CHANCE, LUCK) . Thus poker is gambling and chess isn't.
How is this different from one poker player being dealt Aces?
Originally posted by RahimKi don't think chess or poker is gambling, while there is an element of luck in both, (slightly more in poker) you win because of skill and get rewarded financially if it’s an entry fee tournament because of this.
You pay the entry fee to play in a tournament and win some money. Do you think this is gambling?
Do you consider chess different from poker in terms of gambling?
Let me add a thought to this thread...
YOu are only gambling if you expect to get you money back. IN my case, I enter tournaments because they're tons of fun. I don't expect to see that money again.
Extrapolating on this idea... an amatuer who enters a poker tournmant for fun, not expecting to see his entry fee again, is not gambling. The person who enters to try and make buku bucks is.
Originally posted by RahimKRecently, my dads work place had a company picnick at our house, which included a bbq, trampoline, and a cash tournament in poker. My parents weren't sure if I should be playing because some would consider it gambling. As they thought about it they came to the realization that this was a single entry (you lose and you can't buy your way back in, your done) and the entry fee was $10. They decided to view the picnic as a fair, and the poker match as a carnival game-you pay to play ONCE and only ONCE, you might get a prize but your paying for the entertainment. They declared that it wasnt gambling because of the set-up of the tournament. I know their reasoning is a little shacky and it begs alot of questions, but I was thankful for their decision and was happy to take the $150 prize for first place 6 hours later.
You pay the entry fee to play in a tournament and win some money. Do you think this is gambling?
Do you consider chess different from poker in terms of gambling?
My family also has the same view on cash tournaments=were paying money to play, not to win money. You might win money, but the point is that you have to pay to play in any tournament, and this one just might return your deposit😵
In the US ......
The words "gamble" and "gambling" are generally used to discuss an activity that may run afoul of applicable criminal laws. The word "gaming" is usually reserved for those instances where the activity has been specifically legalized by applicable laws or where the activity is exempted from the criminal laws. Thus, playing a casino-style game at a for-profit website online in the United States is referred to as gambling, since no state has yet finalized any law specifically authorizing a for-profit website operator to offer any casino games. The two words are not mutually exclusive. That is, a gaming activity could turn out to be gambling where applicable laws regulating that particular gaming are violated. Similarly, a gambling activity may turn out to be gaming if it is exempted from a given criminal statute. For example, playing a card game for money in a purely social setting where no one earns anything from the game other than as a mere player would be gaming if such social games were excluded from the reach of the criminal laws in the state where the game takes place.
i would say no. chess isn't gambling. it is a game of skill. there is no "chance" in chess. a randomly shuffled deck of cards has no skill in it. unless you can "stack" the deck while shuffling. chess is a game of skill.
the fee you pay goes in part to the people running the event and the prize. in racing, you pay an entry fee to a race.
i wouldn't worry about the gambling part. if someone is saying it is, then they don't understand chess is a game of skill.
ohhh. you mean ratings too? well, any ratings system has much politics involved in it. how ratings change is totally up to the ratings system. i am not familiar with any of the ratings system. ( i am not good enough to care about ratings. ) if there is a standard mathematical model for ratings change based upon game output, then i cannot see how that can be construed as gambling.
NASCAR has a rating system based upon how you finish in a race. i can't, nor will i, answer for any of the ratings systems or the people that run them. i haven't read all 5 pages, and won't, but your question on the rating systems seems leading and makes me believe you were wronged at a tournament in some way.
Originally posted by SoliTearWhat are the political components of the Elo rating system in particular? The only components I see are probabilistic ones.
well, any ratings system has much politics involved in it.
For your reference in pointing out the political components, here are the formulas for calucating ratings in the Elo system:
Players are rated using the following formula:
New Rating = Old Rating + K * (Score - Win Expectancy)
K is a constant (32 for 0-2099, 24 for 2100-2399, 16 for 2400 and above)
Score is 1 for a win, 0.5 for a draw and 0 for a loss.
The Win Expectancy is calculated using the following formula :
Win Expectancy = 1 / (10^((OpponentRating-YourRating)/400)+1)
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThat is gambling.
Are you saying that if you are wagering on events with equilikely outcomes ("equal chance", "equal shot" ) that you are not gambling?
Suppose we flip a coin, and if it lands heads, I pay you a dollar, and if it lands tails, you pay me a dollar. We both have an equal chance, an equal shot to win. Aren't we gambling?
In Chess you are in control over the outcome. It you suck deal with it.
Flipping a coin, you have no control over that.
Poker, you have no control over what cards you are dealt.
As for chess, who cares about black or white, who cares if you suck and the other guy doesn't. You have control.
In Chess if you lose who do you blame? Yourself.
In poker if you lose who do you blame? Yourself, the DEALER!!!
Get it?
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI told you already. What we consider gambling is up to us basically.
That's what I've been trying to extract from him all along, since he first made a claim in another thread that his religion prohibited gambling and thus he could not play poker but he could play chess. He has still refused to say what constitutes gambling with respect to this religious edict.
Times change, beliefs change.
Intellect plays a huge part in our religion. Not everything is written out in religion. You have to use your brain on certain issues.
I consider poker gambling because of the reason I mention and chess is not gambling. This is my opinion.