Quote from MAESTRO:
Overall, I think it was a productive discussion minus a few farts here and there. This subject interests me very much. Gambling often means "addiction" or other sorts of compulsive behavior. That is why most of the posts were related to the terminology rather than to the subject matter. It is most likely that many of you have similar points of view but simple word connotation prevents you from isolating the subject from its semantics. In the discussions like this it is important first to establish the true meaning of a word that all the participants agreed to. My understanding that "gambling" mostly relates to thoughtless activity like buying a lottery ticket. However, some of you pointed it out (and rightly so) that the broader meaning of the world gambling is associated with"taking chances". In this respect gambling could be perceived as meaningful activity hence the term "professional gambling". The difference' of course, is the same as between backyard hockey and NHL. My suggestion that for the sake of this discussion we should use word "gambling" only in the relationship to coin tossing type of games. For any other activity we should use the term "statistical logic". It should resolve a lot of conflicts here.
Trying to formally define some of these words wasn't so successful the first time in moving the conversation forward, but here was what I was able to dig up:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gambling
gam⋅ble
   ˈgæmbəl / [gam-buhl]
verb, -bled, -bling, noun
âverb (used without object)
1. to play at any game of chance for money or other stakes.
2. to stake or risk money, or anything of value, on the outcome of something involving chance: to gamble on a toss of the dice.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chance
chance
   /tʃæns, tʃɑns/ [chans, chahns]
noun, verb, chanced, chanc⋅ing, adjective
ânoun
1. the absence of any cause of events that can be predicted, understood, or controlled
From my perspective, the part that reads "the absence of ANY cause of events that can be predicted, understood, or controlled" is the important part.
Therefore, if there are at least SOME aspects of it that can be "predicted, understood, or controlled" (i.e. supply & demand economics... an influx of buyers causing the price to go up, or an influx of sellers causing the price to go down) then by definition its not chance and thus not gambling.
Based on how I read and interpret those definitions, its both possible to gamble as well as not gamble in the markets because we know for a fact that lots of people do in fact place trades without first having ANY information that can be used to "predict, understand, or control" the outcome, and there are also people who believe they have such information, but are incorrect and really don't. However, it is also possible to not gamble when trading if you actually have information that can be used to "predict, understand, or control" the outcome of the trade.
So my official position was that it can be both, depending on the information available to the trader and the strategy being implemented, thus, the answer to a question like this is not binary.
But these guys seem to want a multiple choice answer to a question that calls for an essay.
