Mailer vs. Kind (Regarding Ruthlessness in Hold 'em)

[McCutter]

The author Norman Mailer and the actor Richard Kind were both recently talking about hold 'em (in print and on-the-web). They both happened to talk about how hold'em is a ruthless game. Mailer liked this fact, Kind did not. Here are the quotes (Mailer from Esquire, Kind from The Huffington Post)

Mailer:"There's one thing about Texas hold 'em that I think is the secret to its immense success, which is that all of us have a touch of ruthlessness. In some of us it's very small -- 2 percent, 5 percent, 10 percent is a lot. A real prick might be 20 percent ruthless. It's hard to be ruthless. It requires all sorts of skills and courage, and it's self-destructive over a long period of time. Unless you happen to be a buccaneer, which very few people are. But in this game you can be ruthless as hell, and I can play with my youngest son, and we do get along, until we play Texas hold 'em. We never fight; we just roar with laughter when one absolutely screws the other. I think the reason it's sweeping the country is that it enables you to express the ruthlessness that's in you without paying a fearful price for it. And therefore it should be approved as one of the new medicines for human existence."

Kind: "I am in a wonderful movie called The Grand. We filmed in Vegas, had a blast, but my thoughts are concerned with poker and not cinema. Television has ruined the home game. Where once we played Omaha high-low, various games of stud, also split pots, and a variety of fun games with NO wild cards, the home game is limited to Texas hold-'em, high only, with an enormous increase in stakes. Everybody's dick is getting bigger, and the bloodlust to take someone down includes the hope of greatly increasing your fortune.

Now, poker was always a great way for guys (alright, and girls) to have a good time together. The goal was to make some money, but good times were key. Hold-'em makes one want to win, win, win in ways that the former games never made you feel. Conversation is not as free or friendly as it was and the stakes can make you more nervous because the consequences have multiplied. Once you've increased the stakes, that toothpaste cannot be put back into the tube. Hold-'em should only be played at clubs, anonymous, where you can be serious and serious about winning. I like to play quantity of hands not quality of hands at my home game. Someone help me get the Crest back in."

Any thoughts?

[SkinnyLittleTwig]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, poker was always a great way for guys (alright, and girls) to have a good time together. The goal was to make some money, but good times were key. Hold-'em makes one want to win, win, win in ways that the former games never made you feel. Conversation is not as free or friendly as it was and the stakes can make you more nervous because the consequences have multiplied.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is very well put. i've found that NL cash gets really dull really fast, and often the last thing i want to do with a bunch of friends is play that game.

i would think that this reaction might be the same with, besides people like me who have grinded through several hundred thousand hands of hold them, newbies who are turned off because the game is such serious business.