Just posted a little while ago. Part of the article I find disturbing in that if the Feds really think they can sell Sports books are games of skill but poker is gambling arguement then somebodys been stealing from the DEAs seized stash of mary jane.. The article itself dated late tonight west coast time does have my wondering what the DOJ is even doing releasing their side of BF.. Either they are seriously afraid their case is leaking air or they intend to completely destroy poker in the US not just online but the threat of going after big names from the live work pontentially. I cant tell it this is a 4 bet light from the DOJ or what not but just seems odd suddenly after 7 months they feel they need to break their silence. anyway heres the read for those who are interested in it

http://pokerati.com/2011/11/10/doj-r...-response-lol/

separations of power, police and justice are working together but are independent
Feds never have the last word anyway

So Sports betting requires much more (substantial) skill than poker? Man do I feel dumb for thinking it was the other way round. Preach, DoJ!

Confused by the Willie Nelson/Kenny Rogers citation.

It's not saying sports betting is a game of skill per se, or more of a game of skill than poker.

It's saying if poker is a game of skill, then so is sports betting.

And to be fair, there are plenty of people who prove that point. Ask Tony Bloom or Matthew Benham if sports betting is skill based or not.

It's just there are a lot less of them than pro poker players as winning at sports betting is really really hard and takes a lot of work.

They don't say that, they dismiss the skill argument entirely by saying skill and gambling are not mutually exclusive.

I think sport betting is a game of skill and winning player rely on their capacity to deduct/uncover hidden information so yeah it's true.

I do think that edges in professional sport betting are so ridiculously low that it's still massively a game of chance, just like trying to win the main event.

I thought what they were saying is that sports betting is a game of substantial skill but still illegal; and therefore poker should be treated the same.

One counter to this is simply: buying puts and calls on the open market can be based on pure luck or skill depending on how you play it. Buying puts and call on the open market is not illegal. Its not illegal because no statute makes it expressly illegal, just like no statute expressly makes poker illegal.

WTF.... Heads or Tails? Tails....Tails it is. DAMN I GOT SKILLS

Sports betting undeniably requires substantial skill to be able to be a consistent winner.

Poker (though some still deny it) also requires substantial skill to be a consistent winner.

But sports bettors are betting on a game, not playing a game - the participants in the game (football, baseball, whatever) are the "players" not the bettors.

Poker players ARE the players in the game.

The DOJ sort of missed that point, don't you think?

Skallagrim

Pretty sure the luck v. skill thing has been discussed a million times in the legislation forum.
I am guessing that the IGBA is the illegal gambling businesses act? I am also guessing this was in place before the UIGEA. If I am correct in those assumptions then the statement appears to point out that poker had been defined as an illegal gambling business on several occasions prior to the UIGEA.

Wonder if they will go after affiliates etc? Would be a hell of a lot of people to indict if they did, but I am guessing this is just some sort of bargaining tool. Definitely find it strange how the US DoJ has appeared to act so far since BF. They seem to use the law as a means to extract fines. Or people appear to be able to pay their way out of prosecutions.
You would also feel that as playing on FT was totally legal in the rest of the world, was owned by US citizens, and as they shut it down, as a matter of good will they would deal with those RoW players first, but at least the rumour seem to suggest, they are only interested in doing the opposite..

Edit - Absolutely not looking to be inflammatory/bash the US or anything, just stating my opinion. Cheers

Pretty sure they are saying the game isn't illegal, but running the game is? In a dogfight the dogs don't get prosecuted, but of course the people running the fight do.

Depends on how you define the game. There are 2 games really. The football game and the sportsbetting game. The sportsbetting game is between the bettor and the casino. The poker game is between the players and the players -- that is the better distinction imho. To support this perspective, you can argue that its one of the reasons why fantasy football is legal -- the game is between individuals, not between players and casinos. Horse racing cannot be justified on these grounds, so maybe its different because horses can bet!

To the extent the issue of whether a game is a skill game is important, imho, the sole determination should be whether its possible to win the game over "the long run" without cheating. This would make sportsbetting, poker and fantasy football legal (assuming rakes/vigs are reasonable) and blackjack (assuming we don't take card counting into effect) and craps illegal.

According to the DOJ document linked, gambling is defined as follows in NY:

I don't see how we can realistically argue that doesn't apply to poker. On the other hand, they should probably be shutting down the stock exchange based on that definition. The take home message, IMO, is that gambling is like pornography: You know it when you see it. Luck vs skill arguments aren't going to change centuries of cultural belief that poker looks like gambling. Hence, the DOJ citing Kenny Rogers (and mistaking him for Willie Nelson?) in a legal document.