What would the equivalent of a NLHE PhD be?

[MrMxyztplk]

Kind of a silly question:

What would the equivalent of a NLHE PhD be in terms of your mastery of the game?

5ptbb/100 at 1000NL?

[AKQJ10]

I'm probably going to regret trying to formulate a serious response, but here goes.

The only way to make sense out of this question is to think more generally about the meaning of comparisons across academic and non-academic fields. I can suggest some metrics:
<ul type="square">[*]time spent attaining mastery[*]exclusivity - i.e. how many people on Earth have attained a certain level of mastery [*]----&gt; But even across academic disciplines this item opens up a whole host of other ambiguities. Are we talking about mastery of the role of women in the economic history of medieval France, or mastery of economics? It's not at all clear to me that the scope in which one declares oneself an "expert" is anything but arbitrary[*]What's the average performance metric (for poker, winrate) among enthusiasts who have actually attained a PhD in another field[*]----&gt;But this is also messy. Chris Ferguson may have a math PhD, but there's no way of knowing how much of his "energy" or "smarts" he apportions to math versus poker. And at any rate, suppose he's just so brilliant that his tournament winrate reflects far more than a "PhD in poker". How would you find the lower bound of PhD equivalence?[/list]

I'm sure there are other ways to look at the question I haven't thought of.

I'm not going to poo poo your question because it got me to think about the difficulties inherent in attempting to credential expertise. But making meaningful sense of questions like "What's the equivalent of a masters in soccer?" or "What's the equivalent of a bachelors, only in chess?" is a thorny problem not confined to poker.

I was tempted to violate my moratorium on poo-pooing, but I edited this to keep myself in check.

[almostbusto]

MODS: please change my name to Dr. Almostbusto plzkthx. Dr.Dr.Dr.Dr.Dr.Almostbusto would also be appropriate.



SHIPIT!!!!!!!!!

OP,

that question is more than kind of silly...

regards,
Dr. Almostbusto

[Tulosba]

Hand me my diploma.

[ThaMaster]

i dont think u never fully master the game it is too complex

[Martin456]

wtf tulosba.. your winrates are absolutely sick, what site is this from?

[Tulosba]

Mostly paradise. I am almost always just onetabling though My MT ratio is only 1.29, my playing style is heavily read-dependant.

[Galwegian]

[ QUOTE ]
Chris Ferguson may have a math PhD, ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Does he? I though that he studied computer science? Also I thought that he dropped out before fnishing his Ph.D. - cos he was making too much money from poker. Is this false?

[AKQJ10]

Let's compromise: You're right that the discipline was compsci, and I'm right that he has a PhD. But it looks like his parents are mathematicians.

[engineer_mba]

Hi All,

Like AKQJ10, I will try to answer this question seriously. As some one who has two master's degrees, academia has always been a passion of mine. So without further ado, here's my thoughts on it.

A Harvard professor, Dave Sullivan, described graduate studies as learning to "create information" for a given field. Students with a PhD in computer science develop new algorithms, math students create proofs, and literature students write dissertations on the simulartities (or differences) within a collection of works. However, in every case they are always adding something to the body of knowledge within the field.

I also don't think results have a great deal to do with whether or not some one has a PhD. In college, we always joked that grad school was just for the people who couldn't get a job out of college. Although, quite seriously several of my friends did use grad school as a safety net when they didn't get a top job offer.

Albeit an extreme example, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have been extremely successful in their given fields. I believe most people would agree they have "a mastery" in what they are doing; however, neither have a PhD. I am also certain that every one knows a clueless professor who used academia as an escape from the working world with little success at anything. I simply discount the direct link between success and having PhD.

To specifically answer the question, I believe some one would qualify for a PhD when they become a cited authority on a given subject. For poker, examples of this would be Slansky, Malmuth, and Miller. There are definitely pro's who put up better stats and may earn more money playing, but I do not know a single author who has done more for the collective knowledge base than Slansky.

Just my two cents,

Leo