Casino Choice UK News Archive
Poker is game of luck says NC Court
That was the opinion of three North Carolina Appellate Court judges, who yesterday ruled that poker would remain illegal in North Carolina.
The decision was a blow for Howard Fierman, who decided to sue Durham County in 2004 after he was forced to abandon plans to open a poker club when the attorney general told him it would be illegal.
Fierman argued that poker was a game of skill, not chance, and as such was not a gambling game. To back up his case Fierman brought four expert witnesses to the stand, including Roy Cooker, the noted poker professional and CardPlayer magazine contributor. Cooke and the other witnesses all argued convincingly that while luck was a significant factor in poker games, skill would always prevail over the long run.
But though the arguments may have been sound, they did not convince the three Appellate judges. In explaining their decision, Judge Barbara Jackson said: “During oral arguments counsel analogised poker to golf, claiming that although a weekend golfer might, by luck, beat a professional such as Tiger Woods over one hole, over the span of eighteen holes Wood’s superior skill would see him win. The same was true in poker.”
“This analogy, while creative, is false,” continued Judge Jackson. “In golf, just as in bowling or billiards, players are presented with an equal challenge, and each determines his own fortune by his own skill. Although chance inevitably intervenes, it isn’t inherent in the game and doesn’t overcome skill; the player maintains the chance to defeat luck with superior skill. In poker on the other hand, a skilled player might be able to give himself a statistical advantage, however he is always subject to defeat at the turn of a card, something beyond his control. This is the critical difference.
They thus ruled in favour of Durham County.
The decision was a blow for Howard Fierman, who decided to sue Durham County in 2004 after he was forced to abandon plans to open a poker club when the attorney general told him it would be illegal.
Fierman argued that poker was a game of skill, not chance, and as such was not a gambling game. To back up his case Fierman brought four expert witnesses to the stand, including Roy Cooker, the noted poker professional and CardPlayer magazine contributor. Cooke and the other witnesses all argued convincingly that while luck was a significant factor in poker games, skill would always prevail over the long run.
But though the arguments may have been sound, they did not convince the three Appellate judges. In explaining their decision, Judge Barbara Jackson said: “During oral arguments counsel analogised poker to golf, claiming that although a weekend golfer might, by luck, beat a professional such as Tiger Woods over one hole, over the span of eighteen holes Wood’s superior skill would see him win. The same was true in poker.”
“This analogy, while creative, is false,” continued Judge Jackson. “In golf, just as in bowling or billiards, players are presented with an equal challenge, and each determines his own fortune by his own skill. Although chance inevitably intervenes, it isn’t inherent in the game and doesn’t overcome skill; the player maintains the chance to defeat luck with superior skill. In poker on the other hand, a skilled player might be able to give himself a statistical advantage, however he is always subject to defeat at the turn of a card, something beyond his control. This is the critical difference.
They thus ruled in favour of Durham County.
Submitted: 2007/05/03 at 13:12:49
