Never Too Old to Become a Poker Pro
Apr 7th
Professional Poker's Newest Player
You’re never too old to become a professional poker player and Jerry Buss, 77, is proving this by leaving his kids to handle his multi-million dollar franchise to compete in major poker tournaments.
While he admits he’s not sure how profitable it will be, this 77 year old does not see his age as a hindrance. Buss is known to be a competent poker player in the poker community and it seems that with more time and effort he could become an extremely strong poker player.
Buss has already appeared on Poker After Dark and High Stakes Poker and almost got a WSOP in 1991 in a $2,500 buy-in 7-Card-Stud event but ended up finishing 3rd after Rodney Pardey and Don Williams.
Recently, Buss won on the WSOP circuit in a $200 HORSE event in San Diego marking his 5th win in tournaments with similar buy-ins. To date, Buss has accumulated over $160,000 in live tournament winnings. Who knows what the future might bring for this ‘young at heart’ player.
Young poker players who make more than you do…
Apr 6th
Zachary Gruneberg
Age: 19
Lifetime winnings: $562,372
Zachary dropped out of Penn State to play online poker professionally.
“I got this sick ring. I’m thoroughly enjoying it.” (After a win.)
Lifetime winnings: $600,946
“The flight sucked. I actually got sick on the flight. But hopefully I’ll win and make up for it.” (On what it was like to leave his computer and play live.)
Jake Toole
Lifetime winnings: $1,147,359
Jake quit college tennis to play poker while finishing up school at Penn State. He changed his major too.
“I just switched my degree from marketing to psychology this fall and I have two years left. I’m actually looking forward to it,”
Eric Ladny
Lifetime winnings: $1,187,170
“Big Ftops weekend, gonna try to do my best jake toole impression.”
Scott Hall
Lifetime winnings: $1,243,793
“For some reason, I just felt like naming myself after the beer company, St. Pauli Girl. I don’t even like that type of beer, I just thought it would be a cool name. [Laughing] So, I went with it. It was just the first thing that came to mind.” (On his handle.)
“When I went to school, I was an English major, and that’s kind of weird, really. I kind of like reading and writing — it’s probably my best subject — but it’s kind of weird. None of my friends are in any of my classes because they’re all business majors, and I think that’s another reason I quit; it was really unenjoyable.
Poker Declared Game of Luck in Pennsylvania
Apr 6th
It has been declared that poker is a game of luck, not skill, in Pennsylvania. Judge Robert Freedberg announced that while some skill is required to play poker, it is predominantly a game of chance. This implies that all of the poker players who make a good living from playing poker have just been incredibly lucky, incredibly consistently.
This 2-1 ruling reversed a January 2009 ruling that stated poker was more a game of skill than luck. The Poker Players Alliance has stated that it is “disappointed” with the ruling, and that there is a strong chance of an appeal.
This particular debate was sparked by an incident involving a couple who ran a series of small-stakes poker games from their garage. Walter Watkins and Diane Dent were caught out when a state trooper, who had attended a few games undercover, broke a game up and prosecuted the individuals under Pennsylvania illegal gambling laws. The couple refused to plead guilty and took the case to court feeling their case was strong because under Pennsylvania law “for a game to constitute gambling, it must be a game where chance predominates rather than skill.” The couple’s case therefore rested on whether their poker games were classified as games of chance or skill.
The case was initially thrown out by trial judge Thomas James who said it was clear to him after evidence was presented that poker was a game of skill. The state then appealed this and the Superior Court went on to overrule the verdict 2-1 last week.
Judge Freedberg’s decision was made after studying the following cases: a 1904 New York case, a 1911 Missouri case, 1919 Nevada case, a 1927 Oregon case, a 1928 Utah case, a 1935 Kansas case, a 1971 Washington case, a 1995 New York case, and a 2007 North Carolina case.
Judge Robert Colville, the one voter who disagreed, argued that while poker may not be predominantly a game of skill he did not think it had been proved to be a game of chance either: “The Commonwealth failed to present any evidence which, if accepted as true, would prove that the games played at the Appellants’ Texas Hold’em Poker tournaments were games where chance predominated over skill. In other words, the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden of proof at the hearing.”
The case will now be taken to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court where a more favourable outcome for the couple, and poker, is wanted.
