Copied from the Triangle Poker Journal
Howard Fierman Responds to Recent NC Court of Appeals Poker Ruling
Full text of Fierman’s appeal available at www.trianglepokerjournal.com
The case went on appeal August 23, 2006. Earlier this week the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that poker is a game of chance and not skill, saying that while skill can enhance a player’s chance of winning, the luck of the draw means poker is ultimately a game of chance.
By Howard Fierman, Special to the Triangle Poker Journal
North Carolina law prohibits individuals from wagering on games of chance. The basis of my lawsuit is that because poker is a game of "SKILL" it is perfectly lawful for individuals to wager at the game and also legal for me to become a proprietor of an establishment where people would play poker for money. The original trial was held in Durham County in May of 2005. In order to have this matter brought before the judge at that time, we promised to make our case concisely and limit the trial to one day. We therefore produced only 4 witnesses who testified from their experience and knowledge of poker. The main witness was Mr. Roy Cooke. Roy is the feature writer for Card Player Magazine. In the limited time available, Roy and the other witnesses testified about the various skills that permit an individual to elevate his/her game to a level where he/she could have a winning expectation. The other side offered only one witness who claimed that he observed a television poker event where Mr. Phil Hellmuth played Mr. Antonio Esfandieri in a "Heads up Match". During that match, there was a particular hand where both players were "All In" and the television graphic showed that Mr. Hellmuth had a 91% chance to win the hand as the last card was about to be dealt. The witness further testified that Mr. Esfandieri was lucky enough to receive his gut card to make a straight and win the pot. The conclusion made by this witness was that "Luck" would prevail over "Skill" every time.
The ultimate decision of the judge was that he wasn't able to determine whether "Skill" or "Chance" "predominated" in the game of poker, so he therefore determined that "Poker is a game of chance".
The attorney who handled the appeal was one of the team of lawyers who represented me at the original trial. It is important to note that although he is a very capable lawyer, he is not knowledgeable about poker and he has very little experience with the appeals process which is extremely complicated and precise.
MY OPINIONS ABOUT THE DECISION:
1. I think that my attorney did a great job. He worked very hard preparing and presenting this appeal. I regret that part of the appeal was dismissed for procedural reasons, but I believe that the main issue was heard by the Appeals Court, and that is really what is important.
2. I believe that the decision from the Court of Appeals was very well written but it only illustrates the lack of intimate knowledge of poker that would be required in order to reach the proper decision that poker is indeed a game of "Skill".
3. Every substantive book and article of instruction about poker emphasizes that "Winning at poker is not an event, it is a process." When we embrace and understand this concept we begin to see that successful poker is about luring one's opponents into making poor or mathematically improper decisions. Everyone, except "Poker Brat" has learned that when we make prudent and proper decisions we receive long term rewards in the form of "positive expectations". We expect to sometimes loose to the 2 outer on the river. We embrace that occasional loss as part of our overall "positive expectation".
4. The Attorney General, the original trial judge, and The Court of Appeals failed to comprehend this issue that is the core concept in the various games of poker.
5. Today's ruling agrees that in the long run the more skilled player will probably amass the greater number of chips. It however states that since a novice player can get lucky on an individual hand or in a short span of time that luck or chance plays a superior role in the game of poker.
I believe that we as poker players need to organize our thoughts and speak loudly and positively in every forum that becomes available to us.
Background:
While luck is a factor, Fierman believes poker is a predominantly a game of skill, just like pool, bowling, or golf, any of which you can legally bet on in North Carolina. Curious about the law? See NC Statutes 14.292 and 14.293 at the NC Gambling Laws page.
Photo of Howard Fierman by George Smart.
Copied from the Triangle Poker Journal
Howard Fierman Responds to Recent NC Court of Appeals Poker Ruling
Full text of Fierman’s appeal available at www.trianglepokerjournal.com
The case went on appeal August 23, 2006. Earlier this week the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that poker is a game of chance and not skill, saying that while skill can enhance a player’s chance of winning, the luck of the draw means poker is ultimately a game of chance.
By Howard Fierman, Special to the Triangle Poker Journal
North Carolina law prohibits individuals from wagering on games of chance. The basis of my lawsuit is that because poker is a game of "SKILL" it is perfectly lawful for individuals to wager at the game and also legal for me to become a proprietor of an establishment where people would play poker for money. The original trial was held in Durham County in May of 2005. In order to have this matter brought before the judge at that time, we promised to make our case concisely and limit the trial to one day. We therefore produced only 4 witnesses who testified from their experience and knowledge of poker. The main witness was Mr. Roy Cooke. Roy is the feature writer for Card Player Magazine. In the limited time available, Roy and the other witnesses testified about the various skills that permit an individual to elevate his/her game to a level where he/she could have a winning expectation. The other side offered only one witness who claimed that he observed a television poker event where Mr. Phil Hellmuth played Mr. Antonio Esfandieri in a "Heads up Match". During that match, there was a particular hand where both players were "All In" and the television graphic showed that Mr. Hellmuth had a 91% chance to win the hand as the last card was about to be dealt. The witness further testified that Mr. Esfandieri was lucky enough to receive his gut card to make a straight and win the pot. The conclusion made by this witness was that "Luck" would prevail over "Skill" every time.
The ultimate decision of the judge was that he wasn't able to determine whether "Skill" or "Chance" "predominated" in the game of poker, so he therefore determined that "Poker is a game of chance".
The attorney who handled the appeal was one of the team of lawyers who represented me at the original trial. It is important to note that although he is a very capable lawyer, he is not knowledgeable about poker and he has very little experience with the appeals process which is extremely complicated and precise.
MY OPINIONS ABOUT THE DECISION:
1. I think that my attorney did a great job. He worked very hard preparing and presenting this appeal. I regret that part of the appeal was dismissed for procedural reasons, but I believe that the main issue was heard by the Appeals Court, and that is really what is important.
2. I believe that the decision from the Court of Appeals was very well written but it only illustrates the lack of intimate knowledge of poker that would be required in order to reach the proper decision that poker is indeed a game of "Skill".
3. Every substantive book and article of instruction about poker emphasizes that "Winning at poker is not an event, it is a process." When we embrace and understand this concept we begin to see that successful poker is about luring one's opponents into making poor or mathematically improper decisions. Everyone, except "Poker Brat" has learned that when we make prudent and proper decisions we receive long term rewards in the form of "positive expectations". We expect to sometimes loose to the 2 outer on the river. We embrace that occasional loss as part of our overall "positive expectation".
4. The Attorney General, the original trial judge, and The Court of Appeals failed to comprehend this issue that is the core concept in the various games of poker.
5. Today's ruling agrees that in the long run the more skilled player will probably amass the greater number of chips. It however states that since a novice player can get lucky on an individual hand or in a short span of time that luck or chance plays a superior role in the game of poker.
I believe that we as poker players need to organize our thoughts and speak loudly and positively in every forum that becomes available to us.
Background:
While luck is a factor, Fierman believes poker is a predominantly a game of skill, just like pool, bowling, or golf, any of which you can legally bet on in North Carolina. Curious about the law? See NC Statutes 14.292 and 14.293 at the NC Gambling Laws page.
Photo of Howard Fierman by George Smart.
Copied from the Triangle Poker Journal
No comments:
Post a Comment