In breaking news, Senior United States District Judge Jack Weinstein has ruled that poker does not constitute illegal gambling under the Illegal Gambling Business Act (IGBA) in the United States. The case, U.S. vs. Lawrence DiCristina, centered on the latter's operation of allegedly illegal poker games, specifically Hold'em. He moved to dismiss the charges "on the grounds that a poker room does not fall under the definition of an illegal gambling business prescribed by the Federal statute because poker is predominantly a game of skill rather than chance." It appears that is likely the case.Read the full opinion.
In the end, the court agreed, submitting a 120-page ruling that ended with a section that succinctly highlighted, "Poker is not gambling under IGBA." The ruling declared, "Because the poker played on the defendant's premises is not predominantly a game of chance, it is not gambling as defined by the IGBA. That the statute was targeted at limiting the influence of organized crime, and organized crime groups have operated poker games beginning in the years since its passage, does not retroactively change the statute's scope."
The ruling then declares, "Neither the text of the IGBA nor its legislative history demonstrate that Congress designed the statute to cover all state gambling offenses. Nor does the definition of 'gambling' include games, such as poker, which are predominated by skill."
You'll recall that on Black Friday, 11 individuals associated with PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, Absolute Poker, and UB were indicted on a number of counts including operating an illegal gambling business. The misgiving is punishable by five years in prison, fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss, three years of supervised release, and forfeiture of the proceeds of the offense.
Extensive analysis in Weinstein's ruling focused on whether poker was predominantly a game of chance or a game of skill. In favor of the latter logic, the ruling read in part, "The average poker player is not so highly skilled as to take advantage of an advanced player's techniques and knowledge; yet skill, when sufficiently honed, makes the difference between winning and losing in poker."
The judge continued outlining why skill could predominate over chance in our game: "In poker… increased proficiency boosts a player's chance of winning and affects the outcome of individual hands as well as a series of hands. Expert poker players draw on an array of talents, including facility with numbers, knowledge of human psychology, and powers of observation and deception. Players can use these skills to win even if chance has not dealt them the better hand. And as the defendant's evidence demonstrates, these abilities permit the best poker players to prevail over the less skilled players over a series of hands."
PocketFives reached out to the Poker Players Alliance for comment. PPA Executive Director John Pappas responded by saying that a press release is due out in the near future. We'll have highlights of it for you right here on PocketFives.
