[BarryLyndon]

It's hard to assign what a person "should" and "should not" do in a game where individualism speckled with degeneracy is one of its key advertising points. Obviously, interfering with fundamental tenants of the game is an empircal violation. Profanity is "bad" because players are expected to conduct themselves as "gentlemen," whatever that means. Mostly everything else is shaded in gray, which is how it should be, because poker is essentially gray.

Much of whether he like celebratory gestures or not is just a matter of what falls alongside social norms, and what does not. If an attractive woman got up and bounced up and down a few times when she won, we'd be putting links up and commenting on how cute she looked (unless she is ugly, of course). And, of course, when a good looking frat boy does a fist pump or high fives his buddies, that's OK, because those celebrations have been unanimously approved as crisp, attractive depictions of glory by the American public.

So when some gaunt faced Swede with a pony tail tells Rain to "act normal," it doesn't mean that Rain's actions are "wrong." It means they are "douchey" because his celebrations are vivid extensions beyond what the poker playing public is used to or comfortable with. However, should any of us really complain about social discomfort in poker?

I'm not trying to advocate what Kahn is doing. In fact, I prefer to keep quiet when I win a big pot live because, in my opinion, a quiet blow is less painful than a loud one. However, poker is a game that encompasses hundreds of different philosophies with regard to communication - that's where the individualism of the game comes in. Some players believe that a loud celebration isn't painful to others (unless someone is being directly insulted), but just good fun and part of an adrenaline soaked game. To this, I say "why not?" If we started filling the pokerrooms with judgmental colleagues who wish to filter out eccentric, brash degenerates, we'd be suffocating the spirit of the game.

Barry