Hugo's Blogspotting: 15 August

Quiz Show

Even though poker is basically mainstream these days and it seems like everybody and their dog plays, believe it or not there are still some folks out there who have no idea that a flush beats a straight, and that a person can actually make a good living out of being a professional gambler or poker player.

I call these people civilians, or, if I’m feeling unkind, squares. They just think it’s all gambling and there’s some sort of voodoo mumbo-jumbo to winning at gambling. Granted, being a professional roulette or craps player would definitely require a special sort of magic (yeah, ok, if you can find a biased wheel you can beat roulette).

A long time ago, before the internet and Chris Moneymaker and Party Poker and the WPT and ESPN, poker really was a super-obscure pursuit. Without doubt it was very much a murky sub-culture populated by hustlers and chancers – very much off the radar of your average joe’s typical interests.

Not so now and Terrence Chan has written an amusing blog listing his top twelve annoying questions that non-poker players ask him. Tellingly, the first one he lists is (although not at the number one spot):

"Have you ever been on TV?"

That shows you how far poker has come. Usually I get asked the “Can you really win?” variety; I’ve certainly never been asked if I have been on TV. I wonder how linked poker and TV is in the mind of the great unwashed? It makes you realise how it’s just another game show/reality show to your average casual viewer. Don’t these rubes realise that some of us sweat blood over this frickin’ game?!?!

Chan’s number one most hated question is:

"Will you teach me?"

Yes I can see how that’s irritating. These regular folk don’t realise that you basically have to spend all of your time eating, sleeping, breathing, thinking, playing poker to become vaguely good at it. And now they expect somebody else to just learn ’em just like that.

Actually I have to say that the only person who has ever asked me to teach them is my girlfriend. You know how they always say that you shouldn’t get driving lessons from somebody close to you? I suspect poker is the same.

A relationship is already a fragile battle of wills between man and woman, imagine adding poker to the mix. And then what if your girlfriend gets better at the game than you? Oh my God, I don’t know if I could handle that. Jeez, that’s a real possibility these days what with the internet and all that.

Nobody's Business But Mine

All this gets me to thinking about how poker fits into the real world. One often hears players asking, “How does being a poker player contribute to society?” I’ve often thought, “Not very much”, but it’s a form of entertainment I guess and if the pros aren’t there to start the game then the suckers won’t have a game. Or something like that.

Anyway, the point is that I personally have never thought there any need to justify being a poker player. If that is what somebody wants to do then so be it. We all end up as worm food and the worms don’t care if you were a vicar or a gambler.

stevesbets has been applying to business schools and in his blog he writes that he has been open on his application forms about being a poker player since he left college. Unsurprisingly, a few of these business schools took a pass on him, one being Wharton.

When you get rejected from Wharton they offer you the chance to discuss the reasons why with somebody in the admissions department. Naturally stevesbets could not resist this and when he asked Wharton if they would have been more impressed with him if he had had a legitimate job instead of playing poker their response was:

“Well a job may help, but frankly we are very open minded and we take people that do all sorts of interesting and obscure things. It’s just that you’ve shown no leadership, teamwork or accountability”

To which stevesbets replied:

“At this point I couldn’t resist but say one thing about my application since it directly contradicted what she was saying, I pointed out a very strong recommendation from someone who staked me who I won alot for (meaning someone who TRUSTED me with a large sum of money, had FAITH in my poker ability, who I was ACCOUNTABLE too and who had success with me).”

I guess that’s one way of interpreting the word “accountability”. I mean, yeah, stevesbets has shown that he’s a trustworthy individual who has weighed in with his backers, but is that really what a top business school like Wharton is looking for? stevesbets goes on:

“The thing that really bugged me about her commentary was her way of paraphrasing that they wanted me to have a “legitimate” business job and my lack of one was the reason for my rejection. I believe she chose not to say it that way because she didn’t want Wharton to come off as close minded. How could she say I haven’t shown leadership when I’ve supported myself all on my own for over 5 years now?”

Whilst I sympathise with stevesbets for what seems like disingenuousness on the part of Wharton’s admissions department I have to say that just because he has been able to support himself for five years does not mean he has leadership qualities.

In fact, most of the top players I can think of have no leadership qualities whatsoever. Would you really want to take orders from some complete sicko who, when he’s not playing poker, spends most of his time at the dice table? Besides, what the hell does knowing how to extract the maximum value out of the nuts against some fish online have to do with leadership?

Society's Child

stevesbets’ blog has prompted his good friend Luke Kim to blog about poker’s role in society too (look for the Aug 14th entry).

“I am simply saying that I think lawyers, consultants, bankers, have a biased leg up on poker players and other non-traditional jobs in the arena of public perception. It is fine; I certainly did not enter my profession to please the world. I do disagree with those who say lawyers and doctors are here to save the world. I agree with doctors who admit they are simply businessmen in the field of medicine. I am no more a mercendary (sic) than a schoolteacher. I receive market wage and market prestige based on my contribution to society. Doctors do not work for free. People mention Medicin san frontieres as an honorable charity. Fuck, I am going to start poker players san frontieres charities. I do not discriminate. I will take your money however.”

Well said. Kim talks about the arena of public perception which I reckon most professional poker players have to deal with at some point or other. I guess the idea of making a living out of a game seems frivolous to an ordinary citizen. And they’re probably right.

But then again, one could argue that business and the law is one huge angle shoot. It seems like every businessman is trying to fuck each other over and that lawyers spend their whole time looking for loopholes and ways to bend the rules in their favour. Sounds a lot like poker doesn’t it?

Hugo 'Chimney Sweep' Martin