I've 'grabbed' information from various postings on this site (hopefully you all don't mind) and others and put together a draft of a letter that I want to present to my state senator. My goal is to legalize charitable poker tournaments in Nebraska. I didn't push for cash poker games or other types of casino games as I wanted to first make a good case for charity poker tournaments in that players can't lose a lot of money real fast.
Anyway, this letter is pretty long and I decided to add some additional information at the end to help support the body of the letter. Let me know what you think. I haven't proofread it yet as it's late and I just wanted to get the letter out for review. My next goal is to try and line up some charities in NE that would support me and say they would love to see something like this available. I wonder if it would be useful to ask charities in states like MI or IL that have used poker tournaments for fundraising to see if they'd explain why they like them.
Note: I have some links embedded in my letter which I didn't put into this posting.
Here goes:
My name is Brian Pick. I live in Omaha just outside of Gretna. I’m an avid poker player and often play poker at the Council Bluffs casinos since poker isn’t legal in Nebraska. The reason I’m contacting you is that I am requesting the State of Nebraska to consider a law that legalizes poker tournaments if the event is played as a fundraiser for 501(c)(3) tax exempt organizations or for a similar type charitable event that has been approved by the state to sponsor a poker fundraiser (e.g. – fundraiser for a person battling cancer). This type of law would benefit many people, businesses and philanthropies.
As our economy struggles, so do charitable organizations. Many organizations have seen a substantial decrease in donations over the last two years, rising costs, increased demand for their services and the loss of government funding. These charities are forced to reduce the services they provide and the people they can serve if they’re not able to make up the difference in other fundraising activities. Many struggling families are being asked to support more fundraising programs for their church, schools, clubs, team sports and other activities. This includes hosting car washes, selling magazines or cookie dough, collecting recyclable cans and simply donating more money personally to the charity. In addition to added financial expectations, these activities require a large amount of time and effort in order to make the fundraiser successful. Donations are often considered a discretionary expense in the family budget and with questionable job security and the rising cost of their basic necessities; these donations are often eliminated or at a minimum reduced.
What is the solution? I’d like to propose that poker tournaments are made legal in Nebraska but only if a certain percentage of the proceeds or net proceeds go to a charitable organization. With the correct structure in place, poker can be a good source of revenue for charities which would require a minimal amount of volunteer time and would not put pressure on its members to have to purchase something the charity is selling. In addition, charity poker tournaments would have the added benefit of generating revenue for the state, creates new jobs and supports local businesses.
I’m not suggesting that we allow casinos in Nebraska or to allow games of chance such as black jack, craps or pai gow. What I’d like to see is for the state to simply allow charitable poker tournaments. These tournaments could be held at card rooms or if a permit is approved, it could be held at other locations too (e.g. golf course, bowling alley, VFW hall, etc). These poker rooms would have to apply for a license in order to host a poker tournament.
Poker tournaments can often raise anywhere from $500 to $1000 per day depending on the structure of the tournament. Several states including Michigan, South Carolina, Illinois, and New Hampshire have already legalized charitable poker tournaments or ‘millionaire parties’ and many more including California, South Dakota, Virginia and Texas have introduced bills to legalize and regulate charity poker games. The charities requesting permits to host these tournaments have been increasing too and must often wait several weeks to get their application approved. For the 12-month period between Oct. 1, 2006, and Sept. 30, 2007, Michigan issued 2,800 millionaire party licenses, said Mike Petersen, deputy commissioner of charitable gaming. That number rose to nearly 4,000 in the next 12 months (source – mlive.com). Michigan charges $50 per day for these licenses so in addition to the charities generating much needed revenue; the state too has added a new source of income. If on average, the number of days the tournament is licensed is two days, that means that Michigan brought in at least $4,000,000 in revenue from the permits alone. A more detailed analysis of the state’s profitability of millionaire parties can be viewed on the Michigan.gov’s website. Michigan and other state charitable gambling laws are available here: http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Charitable-Gaming/.
Some people will argue that poker will bring unwanted people to the area. Poker players aren’t your old-fashioned stereotypical type of gambler where shady looking people are throwing around thousands of dollars. Poker players range from businessmen to wives to those that are retired. It’s a game that requires skill to do well and is not purely a game of chance. You’re playing against other poker players and not trying to beat the ‘house’. The cards you are dealt and what are flipped over on the board do obviously have an impact on how you do but less than half of all hands make it to where the players must show their two hole cards. A person can still win a hand because they have the skill to read other players, understand the situation and know how they bet can increase their chances of winning – not just by having the best cards. In poker, you can turn bad luck into good — you can be dealt the worst hand but convince the player with the best hand to fold.
In a recent ruling by South Carolina judge Larry Duffy, he finds that poker is a game of skill and he stated, “This Court, based on the… stated facts, finds that Texas Hold’em is a game of skill. The evidence and studies are overwhelming that this is so.” Judge Duffy alluded to a recent ruling in Pennsylvania in which Judge Thomas A. James utilized a number of sources, including Mike Caro’s “Secrets of Winning Poker,” to make the same determination.
If the state is concerned with people losing too much money playing poker, the best way to do that is to restrict the law to only allow poker tournaments and no cash games. By doing this, the amount of money potentially lost by a player will be nominal and will be limited to the amount of the tournament entry and re-buys (poker tournaments often allow players to buy back in during a certain time if they lose their chips early). Tournaments can cost a player as little as $10 depending on what the entry fee is. In addition, because of its structure, poker isn’t the type of game that those addicted to gambling will play because it doesn’t allow them to bet a large amount of money randomly like they would with black jack, roulette, craps or keno. With those games, it would be very easy for a person to lose a large amount of money in a short amount of time. In poker, you need to be prepared to play an extended period of time, especially in tournaments.
Currently the State of Nebraska uses three elements to determine if an activity is to be considered illegal gambling (28-1101 – 4 & 6): 1) Consideration 2) Chance 3) Reward. Charitable poker tournaments would fall into these areas because you would have to pay an entry fee for the tournament, there will be some chance since the cards do influence the results almost half the time and there would be a reward to those players that do well in the tournament. It seems strange though that the state’s strongest argument against poker is that poker is purely a game of chance. As noted above, that is debatable with several states ruling that poker is more a game of skill than a game of chance. There are several games of chance already legal in Nebraska including keno, lotto, bingo, scratch off cards and pickle cards. How a person plays those games will in no way influence their outcome, unlike poker, which make them completely a game of chance. In addition, a person can lose a large amount of money playing any one of those games of chance since there are no limits imposed.
In summary, I feel legalized poker tournaments for fundraising offers many benefits to the people in the state of Nebraska. Charities will be able to more easily meet their financial goals so they can continue to provide their services. Charity tournaments will provide much needed tax revenue for the city, county and state. Setting up card rooms will allow empty store fronts to be filled and will draw in people into those areas which will benefit restaurants and gas stations. Poker players will be able to play poker locally. Lastly, it will allow new jobs to be created for those that will manage these tournaments or open up poker rooms.
Thank you for considering this request. If you’d like to discuss this further, let me know.
Sincerely,
Brian Pick
17113 Merion Drive
Omaha, NE 68136
402-650-0310
Additional Information:
Items that would need to be laid out in the law include:
• Application procedure and fees for the charity
• Application to manage the poker tournament and/or host the tournament
• Should the players have to pay a fee for every tournament they play in (e.g. $1 or $5 which goes to the city, county and/or state similar to a tax)
• What type of reporting needs to be provided to the state
• What is the limit on the number of poker tournaments a charity can host in a year
• Is there a limit on how much a poker tournament can cost to play in
• What is the required percentage that must go to the charity
Items to consider in regards to whether poker is a game of chance or skill.
Poker stands apart from other gambling games for a couple reasons. First, you can choose when to play before you put your money down. This fundamentally sets the game apart from other gambling games. Unless you are one of the two blinds on the table, you can fold any hand you don’t like without putting a cent on the table. You can’t do that with blackjack or craps, which means just deciding when to play takes a certain skill.
Second, you are not directly playing the casino, you are playing other people. Because of this, the odds are not statistically stacked in favor of the casino. Rather they change constantly, implying a certain skill of play in understanding the math involved and knowing whether the odds are in your favor or not. Since you’re playing against other people, there’s a skill in understanding how they play and what cards they are likely to have.
Some will use the argument that anyone can win a poker tournament if the cards happen to fall their way at the right time. This is true but over a period of time, the players that are skilled at playing poker will finish much higher due to their skill and not because of luck. In large tournaments, it would be very unlikely that a poker player could win or place high in multiple tournaments simply by having luck on their side. This can be demonstrated by reviewing the most recent 2009 World Series of Poker results.
Through the conclusion of Event #50, the 2009 WSOP has attracted 46,283 entries. Even with such a large number of entries, there were several players than won or placed high in more than one tournament. Multiple Gold Bracelet Winners at the 2009 WSOP include Jeffrey Lisandro (3 1st place finishes), Phil Ivey (2 1st place finishes) and Greg Mueller (2 1st place finishes). The following players all finished in the top three in more than one event:
* Ville Wahlbeck – 1st, 2nd, 3rd
* James Van Alstyne – 1st, 2nd, 6th
* Pete "The Greek" Vilandos – 1st, 2nd
* Angel Guillen -- 1st, 2nd
* Vitaly Lunkin -- 1st, 2nd
* Brandon Cantu – 1st, 2nd
* Marc Naalden – 1st, 2nd
* Ville Wahlbeck -- 1st, 2nd, 3rd
* Steve Sung -- 1st, 3rd
* Scott Clements – 2nd, 3rd
* Eric Baldwin – 1st, 3rd
Even more items to consider proving poker isn’t a game of chance (source: Poker Players Alliance)
1. More than 1/2 of the US states define "gambling" as participating in a game where "the outcome is predominantly determined by chance." Logically then, if it can be shown that poker outcomes are not result of chance more than 1/2 the time, we will have shown poker is not 'gambling' and therefore LEGAL in those states.
2. First, define the terms:
"chance" is the random distribution of the cards.
"outcome" is who wins and how much.
Now consider a fair representative number of poker hands at any table, and remember, showing chance means the outcome is determined by the cards.
So, first, every hand that does not go to showdown was clearly the result of player actions, not the cards (there is no rule that says you HAVE to fold 2-7 or call/raise with A-A). In most forms of poker this is the way most hands are resolved (all but one person folds before all the cards are revealed).
Second, when hands do go to showdown, that is a choice of the players and that should count for something.
Third, who is at the showdown is determined by player decisions (to call, fold or raise), not the cards. Quite often the person who would have had the best hand has folded long before all the cards are shown. That also counts for something.
Fourth, even at the showdown the more skilled player will be in the advantage (he who has the best pre-river hand is there usually because his skills -math AND psychology- tell him he has that hand). So are the cards determining who goes into a showdown with the hand most likely to win, or is it the skill (or lack thereof) of the players?
So put all that together, and the only time you can really say that chance DETERMINES the outcome in poker is when there is a showdown and the less skilled player gets lucky and hits his or her improbable card. We all know that happens in poker, we also all know that happens far, far less than half the time.
Once the distinction is made between "acts of skill" and actual application of personal ability to an "act of skill," the proof that poker is a game of mostly skill becomes clear and obvious: MOST POKER HANDS (AND THE AMOUNT OF THE POT) ARE DETERMINED BY HUMAN ACTS OF SKILL NOT THE RANDOM DISTRIBUTION OF THE CARDS. In fact online databases show that somewhere between 2 out of 3 and 4 out 5 of all poker hands end because all players have folded to the winner. In those hands the random distribution of the cards is never consulted. People doing acts of skill (betting, raising, calling, folding) are determining the outcome.