500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court • Hacker News Board

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#91

Post by yunesj » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:44 PM UTC

airstrike wrote: post #69

hedora wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The court argues it is a game of skill but follows up with: > it seems evident … that the game also involves a large part of chance, so that it does not take 'only skill or bodily exertion on the part of the parties,' They would have invalidated the bet even if wasn’t “excessive”. Presumably, the law also bans wagers on gambling activities, such as poker.

I love playing cards, but poker is just... not as much fun because there's too much luck involved compared to, say, Rummy-type games (like my biased favorite, the Brazilian Buraco: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buraco )

There’s a lot of luck in a single hand, but over many hands, players’ luck will be similar.

At that point, poker seems to me mostly about the skill of handling uncertainty and communicating with other players.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#92

Post by jon_elbrook » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:49 PM UTC

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

>but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho.

vegans think meat eating is excessive. let's ban meat eating, then?

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#93

Post by jon_elbrook » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

yunesj wrote: post #91

airstrike wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love playing cards, but poker is just... not as much fun because there's too much luck involved compared to, say, Rummy-type games (like my biased favorite, the Brazilian Buraco: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buraco )

There’s a lot of luck in a single hand, but over many hands, players’ luck will be similar. At that point, poker seems to me mostly about the skill of handling uncertainty and communicating with other players.

unfortunately, humans cannot play one million hands simulataneously and must experience each hand individually.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#94

Post by lowdose » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

The rule with friends is to put money on the table immediately and agree on a deposit space/person until the outcome. Otherwise it is a sissy bet & thereby things we don't engage with. The whole betting ritual is a masculinity proxy and proposed solution is levering the fact that people that say A are willingly to agree on B at more at that moment in time than afterwards.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#95

Post by kingofpandora » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

jon_elbrook wrote: post #92

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

>but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. vegans think meat eating is excessive. let's ban meat eating, then?

> >but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho.

> vegans think meat eating is excessive. let's ban meat eating, then?

The only way your analogy would make any sense would be if there were a law on excessive eating.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#96

Post by jon_elbrook » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

liamcardenas wrote: post #89

TuringNYC wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we do not know what would happen if the situation were opposite. They both entered into the agreement, presumably seriously. It seems like just playing the game qualifies both sides as jerks.

If the roles were reversed, I would have a similar criticism of the other guy. Clearly, the loser didn’t want to pay because he contested it in court — and the victor could have forgiven the debt. I wouldn’t even make my friend pay me back for lunch if they forgot their wallet — let alone put them through financial hardship for such a trivial, low-effort event as a game of RPS.

>and the victor could have forgiven the debt.

That would be equivalent to burning $500,000.

>I wouldn’t even make my friend pay me back for lunch if they forgot their wallet — let alone put them through financial hardship for such a trivial, low-effort event as a game of RPS.

What is the minimum amount of effort required to make a bet of $500,000 valid?

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#97

Post by yunesj » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

globular-toast wrote: post #88

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

> I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment though and took out the mortgage on his house! Well he didn't commit to it because he went to court to get out of it.

It appears that the court broke the contract without being asked to do so by the loser.

“But without government, who would break the contracts?!”

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#98

Post by jon_elbrook » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

kingofpandora wrote: post #95

jon_elbrook wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. vegans think meat eating is excessive. let's ban meat eating, then?

> >but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. > vegans think meat eating is excessive. let's ban meat eating, then? The only way your analogy would make any sense would be if there were a law on excessive eating.

there would be if some people had their way

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#99

Post by michaelcampbell » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:57 PM UTC

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

> IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho.

Good thing 'L' is not based on 'o' then.

How many finger (not even hand) gestures does it take to click "buy" on a stock broker's app?

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#100

Post by michaelcampbell » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 4:58 PM UTC

jameslk wrote: post #81

I'm interested in the backstory. How do two people decide to wager such amounts of money over rock paper scissors? Like were they bored or was there some serious reason such a casual game was chosen over a serious amount of money? Clearly the loser couldn't easily afford the amount they were wagering since he had to take out debt for it, which makes it even more confusing why this seemed like a prudent decision.

Because money has marginal value, and they seem to have lots of it.