Most people would say that the difference between a game of luck and a
game of skill is the degree to which luck and skill contribute to the
outcome, proportionally. If more than half of it is luck, it’s a game
of luck.
Gil Kalai seems to be saying that it’s really a matter of risk exposure.
If the chance of losing multiplied by the dollars lost is high even for
skilled players, it’s gambling.
ETA: I guess I was seeing faces in the clouds.
Considering the number of things he didn’t mention that he’s since endorsed as
exactly what he meant, I’ve joined your consensus.
well, brian, what you wrote is not exactly what I was saying
the problem with your statement
Most people would say that the difference between a game of luck and a game of skill is the degree to which luck and skill contribute to the outcome:
is that I am not aware of any definite way to quantify the degree to which luck and
skill contribute to the outcomes
People often assume that the most skillful the player need to be
the higher the contribution of skill to the outcome is
but this does not seem to be true
Consensus so far (to which I add my voice) is that none of us can even detect an argument there, let alone agree or disagree with it. Solved!
I think I do detect an argument.
Most people would say that the difference between a game of luck and a game of skill is the degree to which luck and skill contribute to the outcome, proportionally. If more than half of it is luck, it’s a game of luck.
Gil Kalai seems to be saying that it’s really a matter of risk exposure. If the chance of losing multiplied by the dollars lost is high even for skilled players, it’s gambling.
ETA: I guess I was seeing faces in the clouds.
Considering the number of things he didn’t mention that he’s since endorsed as exactly what he meant, I’ve joined your consensus.
well, brian, what you wrote is not exactly what I was saying
the problem with your statement Most people would say that the difference between a game of luck and a game of skill is the degree to which luck and skill contribute to the outcome: is that I am not aware of any definite way to quantify the degree to which luck and skill contribute to the outcomes
People often assume that the most skillful the player need to be the higher the contribution of skill to the outcome is but this does not seem to be true