The recent restrictions on campus poker tournaments -- most notably last week's cancellation of Phi Kappa Sigma's charity event -- represent not a new policy, but rather a growing awareness of gambling on campus on the part of University officials.
The cancellation of the fraternity tournament gave rise to multiple concerns, including questions over the nature and scope of the enforcement. It still remains unclear how enforcement will be carried out, but original worries over possible negative effects on traditional fundraisers were misplaced.
Although the actual statute against gambling is complex, Brenda Fraser, associate general counsel for the University, said that the essential components of a gambling event are monetary stakes, the element of chance and a reward greater than the entry fee. She explained that poker falls under this definition but that traditional fundraising events do not.
Events such as athletic games and Quizzo competitions are not considered gambling because they are games of skill, Fraser said, adding that card games, like poker, do qualify as gambling because they are more based on chance.
But many in the Penn poker community are not so sure that the distinction between chance and skill is applicable.
"Poker, over the long run, is not so much a game of chance but a game of skill," said Engineering sophomore and Penn Poker Club member Danny Panzer, adding that even though any given hand can be lucky, when the whole duration of a game is considered, poker is definitely skill-based.
College junior Ari Paul, also a member of Penn Poker, agreed.
"I would say it's gambling -- the outcome is uncertain -- but I would compare it to sports, where there is skill involved. In other words I think it's an unfair distinction," he said.
Raffles, despite being games of chance, are legal because they are covered by a different statute, according to Fraser.
Still, questions of implementation exist. It is uncertain how the University will enforce this policy. The Office of Student Life originally deferred comment to Fraser, who was not able to answer implementation questions.
"My view is that we tell people what the law is and we hope that they abide by it," Fraser said. She said that the Office of the General Counsel will talk to individuals, groups or administrators about the viability of specific events.
She added that certain poker events might be legal if appropriately modified. For example, if an event offers food instead of prizes like gift certificates, then it would be considered recreational instead of reward-driven.
Realistically, however, since many participants in charity fundraisers are motivated by the desire to win, the absence of monetary prizes might prove lethal to this form of fundraising.
Chloe Frankel, a volunteer for National Student Partnership -- a student group that does community work in West Philadelphia -- was in the process of organizing a charity poker tournament when she heard of Penn's new policy.
"We can't have a poker tournament without involving some sort of prizes," said Frankel, a College junior. "We are not looking to promote gambling on campus. In our view, it's not a gambling event because ... the purpose is to raise money for our program."
