David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

Bravo!

-Zeno

PS - I wish Mr. Sklansky would post again.

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bravo!

-Zeno

PS - I wish Mr. Sklansky would post again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. Why doesn't he ever post here?

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

emailed that to my GF, a former math teacher--she loved it. Rah rah The Don.

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

Sir,

Assuming your article is true, and I have no doubt it is, what is the answer? How do you convice parents a math/science education is worth more than what is currently offered? The sad news is most parents would rather have their children march in the band, or play on a winning football team than be a math scholar. I work at a cable company and the most common across the board response about cable is,"My kids gotta have cartoons." I have co-workers who cannot wait until their sons are playing football for the state college team. I found out that in the local school district the third graders are timed over and over on the same arithmetic problems so they make a good showing on the state proficiency test.
So my question to you is how do you get people to change their thinking about what is important?

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
How do you convice parents a math/science education is worth more than what is currently offered?

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is not to advise people or parents to go into math/science jobs, it's to use math, science, and logic to go about making +EV decisions in life.

[ QUOTE ]
So my question to you is how do you get people to change their thinking about what is important?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are not asking me but I'll give my answer-

Teach them mathmatics and logic and they'll understand. Wanting to be a pro football player if probable enough is logical, NFL players make a lot of money, and being a good athlete can provide for a scholorship to a good school.

Math isn't all about using the quadradic formula, it's about making +EV decisions in life, whether it be relationships, occupation, or at the poker table

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

even if you grant the numbers Sklansky makes up, that isn't proof (or even a decent arguement) that mathematics is useful.

All you have done is shown correlation, not causation.

For example, maybe people who have no social skills do math and do poker well. Doesn't make math useful for poker. Nor does it show that doing math (ceteris paribus), would make you a better poker player.

So maybe non-mathmaticians arent the only ones falling for fallacies.

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

All you have done is shown correlation, not causation."

A technically true statement of no importance in this particular case.

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

I thought the article was great. just another way that Mr. Sklansky sees this big picture, as well as every brush stroke it took to make the painting. Having a high iq especially in math (specifically pattern recog, a very unusual strong point) this article gives me that much more certainty that if i continue to take the game as serious as i do, i have a shot at getting past 5/10 and still winning.

on another note, I read hold for advanced, theory of p, and small stakes he daily and have picked up on a few things that arent spelled out for the world (that was nice of mr sklansky and mason to give even the most subtle expression of xtra expert advice). But i know of course that im probably still scratching the surface of the hidden concepts in their work(being strong at math but simply an above average reader). I guess my question is should i continue to keep rereading, comparing and contrasting situational tactics in the different books. Or is there something on this forum or magazine or perhaps another book that will maybe tie my word for word knowledge of sklanskys,and mason's professional thoughts.

Any and all replys would help

respectfully,
phosix- a kid on the rise, with a dream.

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

ps. i belive much of the concepts that im not getting from the text directly relate to math. more specifically probabilities. any thoughts?

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sir,

Assuming your article is true, and I have no doubt it is, what is the answer? How do you convice parents a math/science education is worth more than what is currently offered? The sad news is most parents would rather have their children march in the band, or play on a winning football team than be a math scholar. I work at a cable company and the most common across the board response about cable is,"My kids gotta have cartoons." I have co-workers who cannot wait until their sons are playing football for the state college team. I found out that in the local school district the third graders are timed over and over on the same arithmetic problems so they make a good showing on the state proficiency test.
So my question to you is how do you get people to change their thinking about what is important?

[/ QUOTE ]

As the father of a young man that played QB for the largest high school in the country I couldn't agree with you more. I've been preaching forever that a college education is not unlike sports. If your grades are good enough, if you're good enough, you can get drafted by the business world straight out of college and make more than a lot of pro athletes. But what kid wants to listen to an old man? There is nothing more useless than un-asked-for advice.

Re: David Sklansky\'s Article: Math, Logic, and Poker
 

I think things outside the realm of math and science are important as well (arts, etc., are a part of the human experience), but perhaps less of a priority to people.

I think you need to instill a sense of importance for learning to think about things using reasoning. The problem is that a lot of people are not motivated to learn subjects that are generally more difficult.

The only time people seem encouraged to actually persue study in these subjects is when the financial payoff is decent for a job, at least in terms of popular belief. I saw this during the dot-com boom when everyone and their mom wanted to go into computers. HR staff would say that they "worked in IT" almost with the zeal of a lead programmer. Good times.

Since then the wannabes have moved to other areas and college enrollment has declined for computer science because of the dot-com bust plus overreaction to concerns of outsourcing. There are many good opportunities out there for the years to come for people that enter this field.

Anyway, enough rambling.