Researchers have analyzed a huge database of hand histories in the hopes of determining conclusively whether skill dominates luck in poker, or vice-versa.

In their study, three university professors subjected a database of 465 million poker hands to a variety of statistical calculations. They began by investigating how consistent player performance was over two, six-month samples. They found that users performing in the top 10% of accounts in the first six months were more than twice as likely as others to continue doing well in the next six months.

Additionally, the elite 1% of winning players was 12 times more likely to again rise to the top over the next half-year period. Similarly, players at the low end of the spectrum could be expected to fare poorly over the next six months and were unlikely to turn their losing streak around.

Amateur poker players, along with pros taking a shot at higher limits, often want to know how much of a sample size is needed to get a clear picture of their win rate. In the past, the prevailing wisdom was that players should have at least 10,000 hands under their belt in order for the luck factor to be diluted.

In the new research, however, the authors found that skilled players can expect to do better than their relatively unskilled opponents after only 1,471 hands.

The results of studies like this one can have far-reaching implications. Branding a game as skill-based can play a big part in determining where it can be spread, if at all. For example, the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) made poker essentially illegal in the US. But at the same time, the bill created a carve-out for daily fantasy sports, something which lawmakers determined was a game of skill.

While the new research will validate poker proponents, the results could be bittersweet for UK grinders. Traditionally, British poker pros have enjoyed tax-free winnings, but the conclusions made in the report could lead the government to tax poker like any other profession.

“The good news is they’ll have the satisfaction of knowing the game they love is recognised as requiring real skill,” read the report. “The bad news is that one day they might have to start handing some of their winnings to the taxman if the policymaking community takes notice of findings like ours.”

In another case, a US citizen accused of operating a back room poker game in New York was seemingly let off the hook when he convinced a judge that poker was a game of skill and therefore should not be considered illegal. A Court of Appeals later ruled, however, that whether or not poker was a game of skill was immaterial. The sole fact that it was classified as a gambling game by the state meant that the defendant’s actions were illegal.

John Pappas of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) summed up the feeling amongst the poker community at the time. “Today’s decision by the Second Circuit Court, while unfortunate, only adds to the growing call for federal clarity on the definition of gambling. The Second Circuit clearly did not dispute the district court’s finding that poker is a game of skill. This is a key point distinguishing poker from the types of gambling games that Congress and state legislatures have often tried to prohibit,” he said.

Want the latest poker headlines and interviews? Follow PocketFives on Twitterand Like PocketFives on Facebook.