The Article I Promised Is Now In Our Magazine

[William]

We all know that learning poker is good for the 2% of bright, intelligent people that can make something out of that knowledge (at the tables or/and real life), but how do you aproach the subject when it concerns the 98% that only loses money (often much much more than they can afford). Poker is an addictive game that ruins lifes if you can't controll it (and most people can't) and that is the only reason why it has (and still is many places) been illegal to play.

No question that the game is good for us, winning players, succesfull authors, owners of popular websites, affiliates, etc... but that doesn't make it right in the big picture, as we are only a very small fraction of the population and as we struggle for what is best for us, authorities have the duty to struggle for what is best for the majority of the population.

I am looking forward to reading your article as your arguments are almost always well thougt, convincing and realistic but there is not a chance on earth that you are going to convince anyone else than people making money from poker or people that have a gambling problem that poker is good for society.

Regards,

William

*

Edit/MH:

David Sklansky:

[ QUOTE ]
I was criticized a few months ago for not speaking up on the internet bill. I replied that I didn't feel like my field of expertise justified my taking a stance on the legalities or technicalities surrounding it. But that I was planning to write something describing many of the things about poker that would indicate it could be a very good thing to learn and sometimes play. I wanted to go well past the simple idea that it required more skill than other gambling" games. I wanted to show that learning poker is actually good for you. If I wrote something that could persuade non players of this fact, it should have an effect on their outlook toward legislation.

So I got ahold of my friend Dr. Alan Schoonmaker and together we came up with some, but not all of the valuable attributes that people can more easily acquire if they learn to play poker. And then elaborated on them. Most of these ideas have been written about before one place or another. But never all at the same time. And never by a recognized authority on poker or a psychologist who has extensively written about poker, including the pitfalls that can be associated with an obsession with it.

ANYONE has permission to reprint all or part of it ANYWHERE. As long as the 2+2 magazine or its authors are noted. The article is pretty long so most venues might prefer only excerpts or a summary. The simplest summary is just a list of the section headings. 24 I believe. I would love to see someone write out these 24 headings Ten Commandment style and offer it to all cardrooms to put on their wall. But the main reason for the article is to get out the word to lawmakers and the general public that POKER IS GOOD FOR YOU.



[/ QUOTE ]

[dlk9s]

Ok.

[Bobo Fett]

Mr. Haven, you evil man...you've now given David Sklansky's post the deadly trifecta: Ninja-bumped, stickied, and locked. Now it'll show up as unread forever! Forever meaning until the day it gets unstickied.

[edfurlong]

[ QUOTE ]
Mr. Haven, you evil man...you've now given David Sklansky's post the deadly trifecta: Ninja-bumped, stickied, and locked. Now it'll show up as unread forever! Forever meaning until the day it gets unstickied.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is going to drive me crazy. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Mike Haven]

You guys should have told me!

I'll fix it now.

[edfurlong]

Thanks for catching it before I ate the rest of my hair.

[Bobo Fett]

You're a good man, Mr. haven...no matter what Brandi says.

[Mike Haven]

One innocent attempted POB and she can never let me forget it. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[ChipFerFree]

[ QUOTE ]
but how do you aproach the subject when it concerns the 98% that only loses money (often much much more than they can afford).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not backed by facts -- please provide source...

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is an addictive game that ruins lifes if you can't controll it (and most people can't) and that is the only reason why it has (and still is many places) been illegal to play.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not backed by facts -- please provide source...

[ QUOTE ]
No question that the game is good for us, winning players

[/ QUOTE ]

This 'US' is not backed by facts -- please provide source that you are part of this 2% -- 'cause yer gammer indicates otherwise...

Regards,

Chips

[excession]

Lots of hobbies and games are addictive.
Chess, World of Warcraft, The Sims, Starcraft, Hunting, Magic the Gathering, Stamp Collecting, Steam Railways, Sports Fishing, Quilt-making etc. You will find examples of lots of people in society whose 'addiction' to these may impact on their 9 to 5 jobs, personal finances or personal relationships.

You need to stop assuming that
(a) folks that are 'addicted' to poker all have a 'gambling problem' - a great many enjoy the challenge and cameraderie - there is probably an inverse correlation between being a high volume player and an andrenaline junky and
(b) 'losing' players are all in danger of seriously harming their personal finances.

Approximately 1 in 3 adult males in the UK have tried online poker. Several of the younger guys in my office play. None are long-terms winners. They mostly play MTT's with buy-ins from free to $10 or so maybe once or twice a week. They are in no danger of poker having any significant financial impact on their lives. Their monthly poker spend is probably the cost of a night out per month and they get maybe 10-15 hours of entertainment out of it.

Of course there are gambling addicts out there who just 'take a shot' at a high stakes table with money they can't afford to lose with no regard for skill level or bankroll management and they will often lose. But they would have done the same on a spin of a roulette wheel or slot machines anyway. Their gambling addiction has ruined them, not poker. Poker happened to be the vehicle of their ruin, not it's cause.

The only exception would be a type of person who is already a gambling addict but who is somehow lured into thinking that he is safe to play poker as it's a 'game of skill, not gambling'. It is if you choose to play it as such, but of course he won't. Those sorts of people however are a tiny minority and there isn't utility in banning a hobby that gives pleasure to millions worldwide for the sake of protecting a tiny % from themselves.