[skinnymuch]

Is there anything that isn't? Sure poker has more luck than other things, but to just boil it down to simply saying 'luck and skill' seems wrong.

[ThomPete]

Chess

[tptacek]

Hey, message board geek? (And, I'm calling you that because it takes one to know one.)

We know there are things that have little to no luck involved in them, and things that have a lot of luck in them. Yes: there is more "skill" (let's not have the message board geek argument about what that word means) in chess.

Exactly what is the point you're trying to make?

[ThomPete]

That your conclusion is wrong. The correct conclusion would be that Poker is a game of both luck and skill.

I fail to see why that is by any metrics message board geeky but fair enough if that is what it is then by all means...

[tptacek]

I'm sorry. I've mishandled this. What I should have said to begin with is, "Yes, ThomPete, you are right, and I was wrong. Poker is a game of both skill and luck. Thank you for clarifying that for all of us; it would have been terrible indeed to let stand the incorrect notion that luck was not a factor in poker."

[ThomPete]

I see your point