GPSTS conference 11/10/07 at Harvard Law School: My Thesis

[budblown]

[ QUOTE ]
lol np.

You bring up a good point though. In poker, it is easier to define a "consistent throughout" goal, which is to win $. (Don't be confused with the "objective" of a poker player, which is to make correct decisions).

In the scenario that was proposed in this thread (not by my btw) is one that certainly has it's faults. You are certainly right that the goals of each player in the "bar" game are NOT consistent throughout. This is because of a fundamental difference in a player's POV in the bar game, which I'll call perception. The 1-10 scale of one of these theoretical "girls" maybe not be PERCEIVED the same way as another players'.

That being said, I'd like to get some feedback on this contrast (since you've got me thinking now)......

Note: For the sake of this argument, use the most "popular" idea of the terms "ugly" and "attractive" as you know them...

Ugly guys perception of an 8 : Attractive guy's perception of an 8

Micro stakes poker player's perception of $1k : High stakes poker player's perception of $1k

Discuss (I cant only hope this gets half as much attention as ridiculous threads like "What are the top pros worth?")

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't say that's necessarily true because there are high stakes players who would value $1k more than micro stakes players. What if the micro stakes player is a billionaire but gets the rush from playing cards, not the money involved, so he plays micro stakes. Same with a high-stakes player who is broke but continually plays high limit games with backing.