Two PokerStars Announcements: IOM Chess Tournament and 2014 Poker Tournament

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Why?

Because it has a great deal of potential to be addictive, but more importantly involves people with little money risking their money. It isn't moral, in my opinion, to give gambling a pleasant image or to have people or companies encouraging people to gamble.

 

From reading the responses on this thread, I am surprised at how people think it is okay to advertise and promote gambling.

Surely people can recognise that encouraging gambling is not a good thing? It's no better than finance companies encouraging working class folk to buy financial packages that carry risks.

Is the dislike of any criticism simply because people recognise that many events can't get off the ground without funding? If so, maybe that opens another issue of whether alternative sources of funding can be arranged, maybe through the State.

 

But if people can't work out that sponsorship is fundamentally about creating a good image, especially when a bad one would otherwise exist, then I don't really rate the intelligence of other posters very highly. It isn't hard to work out.

 

For clarification, it is also okay for finance institutions to post events they are sponsorship on MF? If Barclays or NATWEST were hosting an event, can they post on this Events forum?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Poker is a game of skill

 

Funsponge!

And largely chance.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Cocaine isn't actually addictive...

Physically addictive, no, you're right. However, it is becomes very addictive with alcohol and the two are commonly combined.

But it is definitely psychologically addictive.

[Thomas Jefferson]

How do you annoy the constellation Virgo?

 

PokerStars

[alibaba]

I think that it should be allowed. The events forum could be busier, and if it takes the organisers or sponsors to make it happen so be it.

[When Skies Are Grey]

[j2bad]

Whether you like it or not Pokerstars make their money from the gambling side of poker not the free games or the game itself, the free games are in essence marketing or pre-sales so are just a way of introducing new users to gambling which Pokerstars and other companies make money from, so all this argument about whether it is a skill game is irrelevant.

[Josem]

Whether you like it or not Pokerstars make their money from the gambling side of poker not the free games or the game itself, the free games are in essence marketing or pre-sales so are just a way of introducing new users to gambling which Pokerstars and other companies make money from, so all this argument about whether it is a skill game is irrelevant.

 

No, this is largely inaccurate - very few players (in the order of 1 or 2% of players) change from playing the play-money games to playing real money games.

[When Skies Are Grey]

Yeah Bingo really is only a gateway past time....

 

Down with that sort of thing.

[j2bad]

 

Whether you like it or not Pokerstars make their money from the gambling side of poker not the free games or the game itself, the free games are in essence marketing or pre-sales so are just a way of introducing new users to gambling which Pokerstars and other companies make money from, so all this argument about whether it is a skill game is irrelevant.

 

No, this is largely inaccurate - very few players (in the order of 1 or 2% of players) change from playing the play-money games to playing real money games.

 

Whilst the 2% conversion rate sounds low, I bet 100% of your real money customers started with the play money version and I'm sure you try and market and incentivise 'play money' players to move over to the real thing.

[Josem]

Whilst the 2% conversion rate sounds low, I bet 100% of your real money customers started with the play money version and I'm sure you try and market and incentivise 'play money' players to move over to the real thing.

 

I'd happily take your bet. Your beliefs about play money poker activity are simply not accurate. It's not a situation unique to PokerStars - it's pretty common throughout the industry.

 

Some people want to play poker for real money. Some people do not. While there is a very small proportion of either who may cross over, there isn't much significant movement between the two.

 

Here are no less than three articles written by poker industry experts who discuss this issue in some depth (primarily in the context of Zynga):

https://pro.pokerfuse.com/news/article/get-real-a-look-at-zynga-pokers-numbers-26-10

http://www.infiniteedgegaming.com/business-development/playing-around-with-zynga-poker-numbers/

http://www.billrini.com/2012/07/27/zynga-real-money-poker-hype-reality/

 

Most games played on the internet are played with no money at stake. This applies to all sorts of games - from Battlefield 4, through to Candy Crush, through to World of Warcraft, through to poker. People play all these different games because they actually enjoy the contest.

[Slim]

I'm with Vulgarian 100%. Gambling is going to be the next big issue for society to deal with. And yes, it's addictive as hell. Have you not seen the adverts on the TV enticing women to play bingo upon their laptops during the day? All sparkly and exciting and in pink with offers of free money to get you started? It will end in tears I tell you.

 

I know it's the way of the world and I know everyone has a right to do their own and I know it makes the Island loads of dosh in revenue but I really wish it didn't do any of those things.

Shopping is advertised and also psychologically addictive. Other psychological addictions; exercise, sex, work, relationships, eating, throwing up...

 

People have died playing world of warcraft. There are extremes. You can't declare a whole organisation morally wrong because some people are addicted to that activity and it's damaging. It's kneejerk crap, the company has a responsibility to minimise damaging behavour for sure, but why should they be branded as a dirty gambling site because of this prejudice, bollocks and misinformation? Poker isn't routelette, it's much closer to games than gambling. Buying equities is gambling, should we ban investments adverts?

 

(http://www.indiana.edu/~engs/rbook/readabd.htm)

 

The free play poker isn't simply a funnel into paying customers either, lots of companies with free play don't even have a pay equivalent like xbox live and zynga. You can buy more chips but you can't cash out. They make from advertising, punters buying merch, or buying avatars or extra chips etc.

[HeliX]

 

Why?

Because it has a great deal of potential to be addictive, but more importantly involves people with little money risking their money. It isn't moral, in my opinion, to give gambling a pleasant image or to have people or companies encouraging people to gamble.

 

From reading the responses on this thread, I am surprised at how people think it is okay to advertise and promote gambling.

Surely people can recognise that encouraging gambling is not a good thing? It's no better than finance companies encouraging working class folk to buy financial packages that carry risks.

Is the dislike of any criticism simply because people recognise that many events can't get off the ground without funding? If so, maybe that opens another issue of whether alternative sources of funding can be arranged, maybe through the State.

 

But if people can't work out that sponsorship is fundamentally about creating a good image, especially when a bad one would otherwise exist, then I don't really rate the intelligence of other posters very highly. It isn't hard to work out.

 

For clarification, it is also okay for finance institutions to post events they are sponsorship on MF? If Barclays or NATWEST were hosting an event, can they post on this Events forum?

Am I misremembering, or do you also support decriminalization of drugs?

 

I don't see why giving gambling a pleasant image is a bad thing. Gambling is entertaining, same as a lot of other things that cost money. If I go to the Casino with £30 on a night out, I treat the experience in a similar manner to if I had paid £30 to see a show.

 

 

 

Poker is a game of skill

 

Funsponge!

And largely chance.

Can we just address this right now, a good poker player will always win against a bad poker player over any significant number of hands. It is very definitely a game of skill.

[ans]

There's only one way to settle a skill vs luck argument...

 

MF invitational online tournament. For play money of course. You guys who say it's all luck don't mind playing against those of us who don't, right?

[j2bad]

Of course poker is a game of skill, like Chess, or even horseracing, the best will usually win but sometimes they don't thats why you can bet on it, facilitating gambling of real money games makes it gambling as you are just backing yourself rather than a horse.