Quote from nitro:
You need to stop writing and start thinking. The reason this is the case is because chess is a game of perfect information, and therefore great skill dominates and luck plays much less of a role. On the contrary poker is a game of imperfect knowledge and luck plays a much greater role.
Now, think for a moment. Say I sat down and challenged even a player rated a couple of hundred rating points higher than me. What would be the use of a wager? The chess rating system is extremely accurate, and my expectancy to win would be well known. So unless I got money odds to equalize it more or less, it would be foolish to enter into this wager. Wagers are most interesting when the game actually has some skill, but luck has a very if not most of dominating role. Otherwise who in their right mind bets when they know they are going to lose? Inspite of all this, chess is played for money to gamble, just not enormous sums of money for this very reason.
Bridge is the game that sits almost perfectly between chess and poker, although it is far closer to chess than poker, and it is played for money, although again nowhere near the same prize funds.