[Soncy]

First, let me say that I enjoyed reading the article and appreciate the idea of promoting poker as a game of skill, and furthermore, as having other positive attributes. However, I found many of the points to be pretty overstated if not borderline sophistry. Even though I enjoy poker and agree in theory with many of the points, I fear the one-sided-ness of the article may be a bit of a stumbling block for actually getting a point across to poker detractors. I’m going to poke a stick at a few things with which I had issues and also comment on ideas with which I wholeheartedly agree. Mostly what I continue to see is that each point should have a ‘could be’ instead of ‘is’. It’s all so dependent on the individual.

"POKER IS A GREAT TEACHER.
Poker teaches by rewarding desirable actions such as thinking logically and understanding other people and by punishing undesirable ones such as ignoring the odds and acting impulsively.2 "

I’m kind of annoyed that possibly the most important part of this passage as it applies to poker is a footnote which the reader may or may not bother to look up, given that to do so requires scrolling a mile down the page. “2 These rewards and punishments may not be instantaneous. It may take a while for things to average out.” …A fairly vital tidbit as far as poker being an educator is concerned. How many times have you made a correct decision as far as odds are concerned, and then been punished by the turn of the next card? The lessons that poker has to teach about being rewarded for making correct decisions occur over time. I truly believe that some individuals tend to be more in tune with what is happening right now, while others have a better ability to take a broader view and consider events past and future. The pupil is of paramount importance in determining whether poker is a good teacher or not. ‘Right now’ people are fun people—there is nothing wrong with them—all I’m saying is they will have a much harder job of learning poker lessons.

"Learning Depends Upon Feedback.
Rewards and punishments are valuable feedback. The faster and clearer the feedback is, the more rapidly you will learn."

Ha. You are playing no limit hold’em and go all in with your set of nines getting called by the guy with the gut shot straight draw who hits it on the river. You reload, limp in position against Mr. Gutshot and two other opponents, and catch an open ended straight flush draw with two overs to the board. Being a little gun shy you call Mr. Gutshot’s minimum bets to the river, getting great odds because the other two call along as well. You miss your monster draw and lose to Mr. Gutshot’s under pair to the board. Sometimes the punishment and rewards are neither fast nor clear. I reiterate the fact that the lessons of poker are found in an ongoing set of trials. Paying too much attention to instantaneous feedback in poker can be a very bad thing.

"Lessons Learned In One Situation Often Generalize To Other Situations.
If poker's lessons applied only to how to play games, we would not have written this article. But its lessons apply to virtually every aspect of life. For example, if you are impatient or illogical or can't analyze risks and rewards, you will lose at poker, and you will make many mistakes in business and personal relationships. If poker teaches you how to control your emotions, you will be much more effective almost everywhere."

Amen on this point. This principle is why teams do drills in practice. Work on a particular skill, and then apply it in a game situation. Unfortunately, drills do not always carry over with a one to one ratio, but still practice is practice.

"Young People Generally Learn More Quickly Than Older Ones."

I found this section to really be reaching. Not that good points weren’t made about young people constantly choosing to make risky and sometimes poor life decisions. Sure they do. They are the ultimate “right now” people. So naturally, I would tend to question their ability to easily learn the long term lessons that poker can offer. I don’t doubt that young people can play good poker. The game rewards aggression and fearlessness. But… “If it taught nothing else, poker would prevent some young people from making terrible mistakes.” Come on. I’m supposed to believe the patience to wait for some pocket queens, translates into the patience to wait for the right girl. I’m skeptical.

"POKER IMPROVES YOUR STUDY HABITS. "

Again some very good points were made, but this position is a reach. “Poker doesn't just develop study habits and other important qualities; it also increases the value people place on them.” Sure, poker can give someone a motive to study, but I contend that it is the more studious person ALREADY who actually does study to become better at poker. I’m not sure the people that are too short sighted to see that their football career will be ending after high school will be the best students of probability and the long term lessons poker has to offer.

"Winning increases their status and confidence and makes them much more likely to get dates and influence their peers." I can get behind increased confidence helping a person get dates and so forth. But the idea that winning at poker will increase ones status implies that society accepts poker wholeheartedly when one of the purposes of the article is dependent upon the premise that a portion of society, in fact, does not accept poker at all.

"Young people resist studying math, psychology, logic, risk-reward analysis, probability theory, and many other subjects they will need as adults because these subjects seem unrelated to their lives. … Poker quickly teaches them the value of these subjects."

I think I’ve covered the idea that poker lessons and quick learning do not belong in the same sentence. My sister, is a competent poker player (based mainly on her patience, I think), but when I try to talk about probability and odds with her, I end up wanting to pull my hair out. In response to me mentioning the percentages they post next to the cards on televised poker, she has said, “But they often change completely in the other guys favor on the next card.” One time I was griping about running poorly and joking about defying the laws of mathematics. She said something to the effect of maybe my percentages were off because other people weren’t folding when they should. {Throwing hands up.} Yes, there is value in all of the subjects mentioned. Whether or not that fact can be quickly learned is another issue entirely.

"POKER TEACHES YOU TO FOCUS ON THE LONG TERM."

Well, it should, but here’s the thing. If LIFE can’t do it, do we really expect POKER to do it?

"Impatience is not the only cause for short-sightedness. Learning research proves that immediate rewards have much greater impact on people than delayed ones. For example, most American adults are overweight because the immediate pleasure of overeating is more powerful than its disastrous long-term effects such as heart attacks."

So you are telling me that the same people that overeat and risk heart attacks are going to be disciplined enough to play good hands in good spots at the poker table? That’s in between smoke breaks, right? I’m being facetious, but surely we are placing too much on poker’s shoulders saying it can help cure society’s ills by making players focus on long term results.

"Poker players quickly learn that a bad play can have good results and vice versa, but that making decisions with positive, long-term expectation (EV) is the key to success."

No. No they don’t. Well, maybe ‘poker players’ do. But people who play poker…not necessarily. My dad has been playing a lot longer than I have, and he knows people that have been playing poker badly for many years. Surely long enough to have learned from not being able to win making certain plays over and over. Poker COULD teach you to focus on the long term. Like most of these really good points…it depends on the person.

"POKER TEACHES YOU HOW TO HANDLE LOSSES. Poker teaches you how to cope with losses because they occur so frequently. "

Poker certainly does give you ample opportunity to have to cope with losses. Hands not holding up, draws with odds not getting there, having a really great second best hand at the river…it can all be very frustrating. Often you do the right thing and get punished by losing the hand. Sometimes you do exactly the right thing, lose the hand, and then, the winner berates you for your play. Frequently, you might have a session or tourney where you have to sit and watch one or two players being rewarded for very poor play, while you and others are constantly being punished for making correct plays. This aspect of poker is indeed so much like life. Often the conniving, dishonest, or ruthless prosper. There have been numerous times in my Bible study when I’ve read about such prosperity being temporary and ultimately leading to ruin, and my mind has been drawn to the obvious parallel in poker.

"POKER TEACHES YOU TO DEPERSONALIZE CONFLICT."

That is a big bite to chew. Granted, I am aware that I have vengeance issues, but I’m also pretty sure that I’m not alone. The desire for vengeance is so human nature. I can almost imagine God watching us floundering around in our selfishness and unforgiveness until he couldn’t stand it anymore and had to come show us how it’s done.

“Poker teaches you to depersonalize conflicts because it is based on impersonal conflict. The objective is to win each other's money, and everyone's money is the same.” I’m am going to try to hold onto that thought the next time some obnoxious player sucks out on me and then berates me for my play, but it will be hard. Usually it doesn’t even have to happen to me personally. If someone is misbehaving at the table, I want to watch him limp away broke. And if it’s by my hand, all the sweeter. Like I said, issues. I’ve been playing poker for a few years now and do not feel I’ve been taught to depersonalize conflict. Just to hunker down in the grass.

"The Chinese have a wonderful saying, "If you set out for revenge, dig two graves: one for him, and one for you." Poker teaches that principle to every open-minded player."

Finally, a much needed qualifier.

"POKER TEACHES YOU HOW TO APPLY PROBABILITY THEORY."

It can, but I’m telling you, some people just have a terribly difficult time grasping it. Even once you have it down pretty well, you have to go back to analyzing situations, especially in tournament poker. Your chip position, your opponents’ chips, placement and payout…there’s a lot to consider. I don’t mean to sell my fellow man short, but I think some of it is just beyond some people. To act like it’s a cut and dried thing that anyone can learn is surely inaccurate and misleading.

I once jokingly stated that “Poker is evil like Jarts are evil.” But all kidding aside, I actually stand by my statement. For those of you not familiar with Jarts, it’s a game of lawn darts where you try to toss large—rather stubby tipped, if I’m remembering correctly—darts into a plastic ring. I played it many times as a kid with nary an injury. However, following at least one fatality, the sale of Jarts was banned in the U.S. That’s right, you can purchase firearms…but the deadly Jart is a no-no. Anyway, the point is that surely hundreds of thousands have played Jarts without tragic incident, but yes, in the wrong hands, they apparently can be quite harmful…like rocks, swimming pools, automobiles, etc. I think poker can be a fun pastime for a lot of people…an occupation for some. For a few individuals it can certainly be harmful, but for some, many of the points made in the “Poker is good for you” article are surely true…it all depends on the person