Is Poker Playing a better test for would be presidents?

[jogsxyz]

No, both are irrelevant.

[nightwood]

[ QUOTE ]

I will tell you this for sure. Poker (hand) discussions will yield much more discussion and require much greater thought and understanding than solvable 3 move chess endings.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're absolutely right about this. But .. solving a mate in three relates to the complexity of chess like say identifying the nuts for a given board to the complexity of poker.

So when you say a president should solve mates in 3 you say something like he should have a 1-2% understanding of chess.

So which part of poker do you want to relate that to ? If you want him to be a winning .10/.20-player it's defintitely more challenging than solving mates in 3.

[pokervintage]

[ QUOTE ]
So which part of poker do you want to relate that to ? If you want him to be a winning .10/.20-player it's defintitely more challenging than solving mates in 3.

[/ QUOTE ]

The question was "Is poker playing a better test...". A better test than 3 move chess endings. I am comparing 3 move chess endings to poker hand (situation) analysis and play making decisions.

pokervintage

[pokervintage]

[ QUOTE ]
*head asplode*

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm... is that how you sound with someone else's dick in your mouth?

pokervintage

[nightwood]

[ QUOTE ]
The question was "Is poker playing a better test...". A better test than 3 move chess endings. I am comparing 3 move chess endings to poker hand (situation) analysis and play making decisions.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well ok, but if you compare mates in 3 to poker in general, it's so obvious it's not even fun to discuss.

Regards

[hitch1978]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*head asplode*

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm... is that how you sound with someone else's dick in your mouth?

pokervintage

[/ QUOTE ]

You can get YOUR OWN dick in your mouth?