Poker is Good for You

[1p0kerboy]

Wow. A+.

I expect this article to become an important source in the struggle for legitimacy for poker.

[Sigurd]

Excellent article. I think it is a bit of a shame that some of it has been tailored to the US, but overall I like it very much.

[Cry Me A River]

[ QUOTE ]
As Barnum put it, "There's a sucker born every minute."

[/ QUOTE ]

No he did not:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There's_a_sucker_born_every_minute

Great article otherwise.

[mackthefork]

It's a good article and all true, and Mason's comments are fair and accurate in the editors note, however these guys are vested interests of poker, and as such, rightly so, the people who matter will not give their opinion any weight at all.

Mack

[jukofyork]

One of the best articles I ever read. A++.

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Borknagar]

My first objection, and an objection non-poker players may have, is that there are a couple of words missing after every 'headline'. Let me give an example.

Poker teaches you to how to adjust to diverse people "AT THE POKER TABLE."

Poker doesn't teach me what I should do in different situations in college or at work. It teaches me to adjust to diverse people so I can take more money from them at the poker table.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]


I expect this article to become an important source in the struggle for legitimacy for poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is highly unlikely. Just about anything said in that article about poker could be said about chess or other games not played for money. People opposed to poker will not be swayed by logic.

The people who oppose poker do so because they want to impose their morality on others or because they think that people who gamble are too stupid to make their own decisions. You cannot reason with such people. The moralists are on a mission from God. The nanny-staters are equally irrational in their beliefs that they know better than you how you should live your life.

It is a well-articulated statement, but it is preaching to the choir, and will have zero impact on those mindlessly opposed to gambling.

[Guruman]

great article tho. I emailed it to many people who know that I play poker but may not know why.

Thx David and Dr Al.

[Borknagar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I expect this article to become an important source in the struggle for legitimacy for poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is highly unlikely. Just about anything said in that article about poker could be said about chess or other games not played for money. People opposed to poker will not be swayed by logic.

The people who oppose poker do so because they want to impose their morality on others or because they think that people who gamble are too stupid to make their own decisions. You cannot reason with such people. The moralists are on a mission from God. The nanny-staters are equally irrational in their beliefs that they know better than you how you should live your life.

It is a well-articulated statement, but it is preaching to the choir, and will have zero impact on those mindlessly opposed to gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the first part of your argument, not so much with the second part. Don't forget that poker can be addictive and is an addiction to many people. This is a big reason why 'they' want to ban poker and unfortunately Sklansky's doesn't say anything about this in his article.

[IcemanDan]

Just submitted to digg. I copy/pasted to a blog because twoplustwo.com is blocked for submissions.

http://digg.com/other_sports/Why_Poker_is_Good