3 ms·
There's a pretty fundamental difference between house-banked games where no player has a long term positive expecation and peer to peer skill games where better
by Sambdala 12y ago
There's a pretty fundamental difference between house-banked games where no player has a long term positive expecation and peer to peer skill games where better players will be able to gain an advantage by outplaying their opponents.
Roulette is a particularly bad example as there is no decision (well, there's one decision on American Roulette tables that is worse than every other) that changes your expectation on the amount wagered.
- dnautics 12y agoThat's exactly the top commenter's point. The law doesn't hinge on the distinction between a house-banked game (like blackjack) and a house-hosted, peer-to-peer game (like poker). The distinction between skill/no-skill is less meaningful than the fact that you point out. Nontheless, the law (and thus the article) is about the former distinction.