Although many in the poker community are cheering the latest ruling in a federal courtroom regarding the issue of “skill versus luck” in the game, there are those that haven’t exactly embraced the decision. The day after the verdict in that federal case was issued, a top media outlet came out firmly on the other side of the discussion.
As reported here on Poker News Daily on Tuesday, Federal Judge Jack Weinstein of the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York issued a ruling that, while argued with varying degrees of success previously in lower courts, have now reached the federal level. In his 120 page decision on United States of America vs. Lawrence Dicristina, Judge Weinstein reversed the conviction of Dicristina on two counts of illegal gambling. What was most important in this case was Dicristina’s conviction on one of the two counts – that of running a “gambling business” where the game offered is dictated be a predominance of chance rather than skill – that Judge Weinstein overturned.
In explaining his decision, Judge Weinstein firmly stated for the record that “the government must demonstrate that it is more probable than not that poker is predominated by chance rather than skill. It (the government) has failed to do so.” In essence, Judge Weinstein’s decision was that poker is a game of skill rather than luck; Judge Weinstein explained this earlier in his decision in stating, “The average poker player is not so highly skilled as to take advantage of an advanced player’s techniques and knowledge; skill, when sufficiently honed, makes the difference between winning and losing in poker.”
As many in the poker community celebrated the decision by Judge Weinstein, there was the natural outcry from other segments of society regarding the decision.
The Christian Science Monitor was one of those outlets decrying the decision by Judge Weinstein, using their “Editorial Board” to release a series of articles regarding the online poker/internet gaming question. Under the title of “Misdeal On Internet Poker Gambling,” the Monitor goes on to express its viewpoints on the online poker question.
“(Judge Weinstein’s) decision needs to be appealed to higher courts as it could easily be overturned,” the Monitor states in the article. “It argues against poker as a game of chance, but then finds that states can still outlaw it as a form of gambling…It approves of sports betting – which often relies on skilled knowledge of players or teams – even though that is outlawed under federal law.”
The Monitor continues, “(Weinstein’s) ruling is also weak in presuming that a game must always be predominantly chance in nature to be called gambling. Even the most successful poker players often lose – and not for a lack of skill. Placing a bet will always be just that – a bet.” The Monitor then inaccurately states that the 2006 enactment of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA) “outlawed” internet gambling (it didn’t; it merely made it illegal for banks to knowingly finance online gaming outlets) before concluding that the UIGEA and the law that Dicristina was tried under, the Illegal Gambling Businesses Act of 1970, be strengthened rather than overturned by “buckling under to the million member strong Poker Players Alliance.”
Since the Monitor’s opinion was released yesterday, 45 comments have appeared on the its website, with every one of them expressing outrage over their position. Led by Rich Muny, the Vice President of Player Relations for the PPA (who opened the comments made on the Monitor’s website), people have expressed their displeasure with the stance by the Monitor’s editorial staff. Poster ‘Dubbelyoo Bee’ perhaps said it best in writing, “Why is it OK to buy and sell stocks and options online, but not play poker?”
Although there has been a mountain of comments regarding the stance, not one voice from the Monitor’s “Editorial Board” has chimed in with a response.
The decision by Judge Weinstein definitely opens the doors on several avenues for the poker community, but changing the mindset of some in the mainstream media remains difficult.
Again, anti-government idiots want the government to interfere. So sick. Weak minded people who believe the only reality is in fantasy messing w responsible peoples lives.
I guess I just don’t get it, I played poker online with people from communist nations, and with people from poor little third world country’s, this is the greatest nation in the world and our government takes away our right to play.
I think it was Thomes Jefferson that said the government should not play a part in our every day lifes. Jefferson said that people should be left to manage their own affairs.
I really don’t think it is all about taxes, or weather it is a game of chance or not. All it is really about is CONTROL! We have politians running arount having affairs sendind nude photos, they have proved they cant run their own lifes, why should they have CONTROL over ours?
Is this for real? What does being christian have to do with playing poker in the privacy of your own home? The Christain science monitor needs to butt out of other people’s business and stick to their own narrow minded cult. The TRUTH.