What evidence do you have that skill predominates in 30 hands of Skillbet poker? How do you know that the better player is winning the majority of matches after 30 hands played? It seems to me like you definitely would not know this.

Hi R*R,

SkillBet helper here. Thank for the heads up on the error on our list of excluded jurisdictions - guess that's what betas are for! Canadians can play SkillBet.

Luckyladyblue, you guys mention CA being excluded because of licensing issues, is there plans to apply for that license in the near future?

(1) 30 hands is the minimum for a single match. You cannot play a match for more than 50% of your deposit for the 1st 3 games - ensuring over 90 hands. Moreover, you can't withdraw more than 25% of your deposit until you've played 9 contests or 270 hands.

(2) Best way to tell is to play someone that has no skill in SkillBet - and you'll crush them very very quickly - and you'll say - oh wow... I get it. Compare that to playing against someone with no skill at coin flipping (i.e., 0% skill). OR compare that to playing someone with no skill in regular poker for a single hand.

But I'm not lawyer who specializes in this area... However, we've gotten input from 5 lawyers (6 if you include the lawyer from the post that this thread is from) who are specialists in this area. They all agree SkillBet passes the skill requirements in the 28 states where we are offering SkillBet. While we have not asked for any a opinion that conventional poker does not pass these tests - the analysis suggests that the single hand issue of conventional poker makes it problematic.

Thank you for your interest in the subject and contribution! It is fascinating (IMO).

"...and the clown posts the small blind."

I thought Paypal was categorically against any and all transactions related to online gaming? Guess I was wrong... interesting.

I'm not so sure on this...

How are the bots measured? As a software dev myself, it all depends on how the bots are programmed. Do they continuously run their hands against ranges? Do they know all the specific +ev moves? Do they constantly consider pot odds? Are they all aggressive/loose, tight? Can they bluff? The list can go on...

This might be a situation in which 3rd party auditing of the ai/bot logic is involved to be sure they play "fair" and can make the same senses/moves that a human can make. Software programming is pretty static, and they can only do so much to make it "learn" against your play.

Not likely in the near future due to the expense (it's really, really expensive ).

NY should definitely be excluded, the chance test there is not Dominant Factor it's material element (regardless of skill involved), even duplicate bridge was ruled a game of chance simply because the cards are shuffled.

California could probably be added though, the controlled game statute was clearly intended for B&M rooms requiring a license.

a. The computer players are actually modeled after 500 real human real money players.

b. So the experience is just like it used to be playing online poker – at $200 buyin…

c. You’ll find the computer opponents will raise, continuation bet, buff, value bet, steal blinds, defend their blinds, 3 bet, etc. with the same frequency and distribution that you’ll find online.

d. Some are better than the vast majority of online poker players, but some are rocks, callings stations, nits, and maniacs…

e. At the beginning of a session, they don’t know you and you don’t know them. It’s your job to figure them out and exploit their weaknesses, while the AI is also figuring you out!

i don't have anything against it, but the premise of this is ridiculous. there is still a lot of short term luck in this game and an inferior of two players could still easily win a lot of matches.

Could you give some more details on how this works?

Why is Tim Tebow, Kobe Bryant, and a man in just a speedo at my table?!

Usain didn't protect his hand!

Is it only nlhe? Any PLO8?