IS POKER A GAME OF CHANCE?

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 153, 26 December 1936, Page 19

IS POKER A GAME OF CHANCE?

Mr. Justice Macna'ghten, in theKing's Bench Division, recently was asked to decide the question: Are bridge and poker games of skill or of chance? says the "Daily Telegraph."

An action to recover money lent to pay card debts was brought by Mr. Sydney Alexander Woolf, proprietor of the Dorchester Bridge Club, against Mr. Max Richard Grey Freeman, of West Hampstead. He claimed £52 19s 2d, the balance of money lent and the cost of food supplied.

Alternatively, he claimed £33 10s as the amount of a dishonoured cheque and £19 9s 2d as the balance of money lent and the cost of food supplied. The Gaming Act was pleaded in defence.

Mr. Charles Doughty, K.C., for Mr. Woolf. said that bridge was played at the club, and' sometimes poker in the evenings. »

It sometimes happened that players gave chits to cover their debts. It. was Mr. Woolf'spractice,' if he knew the man who' nad. lost, to "pay, at,his request, those who had won. . i

The money, ih this case was largely sums paid bx Mr. Woolf to cover losses : incurred;, by Mr, Freeman. it included a small.sum for refreshments supplied in the club. . , Referring to the Gaming Act plea, Mr. Doughty said:

"Almost any game which is not one of pure;iskill may be held to be a gambling1-game,.- but it has also been laid dow.n that games in which there is a'predominant element of skill are not gambling games. ,

"Bridge, I. suggest, is.predominantly a game .of. skill, and poker is, entirely a game of skill, because"a weak hand can b'.'eat quite a good hand, and the demeanour- and- confidence of the player are' of paramount importance.''

Mr.Woolf, giving evidence, said that; after he lent Mr. Freeman the money, Mr; Freeman gave him a cheque drawn by ■ another person, which was dishonoured. He afterwards wrote expressing his ' regret, and stating that he- intended to .pay in full. ~ -

.Cross-examined by Mr. T. Springer, for Mr. Freeman, Mr. Woolf agreed that on March 14 Mr. Freeman gave him a cheque, drawn by another per-

son. for £33 10s. In exchange he gave £30 in counters and-£3 10s in cash. Mr. Springer: So that you knew he was going to play cards with the counters? . "Not necessarily," replied Mr. Woolf. "I have seen jewellery purchased, and private debts settled by- means of chips. Mr. Freeman used to pay his food bill and. give the waiter tips in chips." • , • ;. Mr. Springer submitted that Mr. Woolf had paid, oa behalf of Mr. Freeman, sums won-by other players at an unlawful game, and the money was therefore irrecoverable. Mr. Doughty argued ■. that bridge clubs could not be gaming houses, or they would have - been stopped. Mr. Justice Macnaghten: Is it your view that all the gaming houses in London have been stopped? • Mr. Doughty: I think, if they had been as habitually carried on as bridge clubs are, they- would have been. ■. ■';' ..■-, v " :'■■;• ■"■ ■••■ .' ..Mr, Justice.. .Macnaghten,. giving judgment, 'said that" he" could 'See no reply to' the 'claim ''l or £3 10s which was lent in cash, arid not for the purpose'of gaming;: It seemed to be .1 separate transaction from, that relating to the £30. which was given; in chips to Mr. Freeman. ':: '.■•■. '■■'. .'• "That bridge is a game of skill'no one would dispute," continued the Judge. "W.hether poker is''to be regarded as a game ; of skill I should have thought was questionable. ' ■■; \'\ "I always understood that . 'bluffwas the quality useful in poker."... : If the proprietor of a club chose to sell.his chips on credit for a.security which was not met, he could not rely upon a court of law to enforce payment for those, chips. /Therefore the claim for £30 worth 'of. chips failed., The balance of £18 19s was paid by Mr. Woolf to members i.to w,hqm;: Mr,, Freeman had ..incurred .;garriing^. losses. "I think," concluded"':? Mr, 'Justice Macnaghten, "that he is debarred from recovering in. a court of law the moneys so paid. He' can rely only upon the sense of honour which is said to exist among the, people who engage in gaming of that description." Judgment was entered for Mr. Woolf for £4 0s 2d, and no order as to costs was made..