Poker Articles

This article was written by Bill "Zimba32" Seibert, administrator of the popular poker training website CardRunners.com.  

A couple recent events spurred me to write this article.  On a recent family holiday to celebrate my father's 70th birthday, I received another version of "the talk," where my conservative, religious father informed me once again that poker is just "gambling" without any socially redeemable value.  The other event was reading Gaucho2121's In the Spotlight interview as I put it together for CardRunners where he states poker is "inherently unproductive from a social perspective."  Both individuals have been steadfast in their assertions that poker is not a positive activity that benefits society.  My counter assertion is that poker is no better or worse than any other activity.  What defines your personal redeemability within society is how you conduct yourself, not what you do (assuming its legal).

Many people are influenced by what "greater society" deems responsible and choose careers accordingly.  Their goals are generally two fold; wealth accumulation and status.  Wealth accumulation can be achieved many ways, but often the common denominator is hard work and applied skill.  I would assert that poker is certainly one of the best for wealth accumulation for those that have what it takes. Status comes from participating in an activity that society values highly.  It can be a socially noble career like a teacher, scientist, or social worker of some sort.  It can be the status and enriching careers like doctor, lawyer, business executive, financial area or even professional athlete. Poker player never seems to come up in either list.  Why is that?

I believe poker isn't considered socially redeemable because it is considered "gambling" with all of its negative connotations.  I looked up several definitions of "gambling" online.

-Gambling (or betting) is any behavior involving risking money or valuables (making a wager or placing a stake) on the outcome of a game, contest, or other event in which the outcome of that activity depends partially or totally upon chance or upon one's ability to do something.  - Wikipedia

-Illegal participation in games of skill or chance for money and/or other items of value.

-The voluntary risking of a sum of money on the outcome of a game or other event.

My understanding of poker doesn't comport to those definitions listed above.  It is a legal game that combines skill and luck in a competitive game of cards versus other individuals.  You are not guaranteed to lose to the "house" as in all casino games and the preponderance of the skill edge defines it as separate from games of mostly luck.  My father argued that at best it was the same category as horse racing where some skill element in selecting the horse effected the luck element, but it was still gambling.  The difference I see is that you are are betting on yourself and your skill edge versus your opponents in your competition.  In the short term, that skill edge can be negated by the luck element, but skill overcomes luck in the long term.  In that respect, it is similar to competitive sport.  In poker's case it is more a mental and psychological battle versus a physical battle, although it takes considerable stamina as well.  In sports, the ball may bounce the wrong way or the referee may make an incorrect call ithat influences the outcome in the short term but in the long run the better team/individual prevails, the same as poker.

The more important factor to me is that if you neutralize the negative social status of poker, then what are you left with to define your activity, status and nobility?  As I stated before, what defines your status should be how you conduct yourself in society.  As long as the way you accumulate your wealth is legal, then how you choose to spend it defines your legacy and standing in society. Some of our societies greatest figures accumulated their wealth in sometimes questionable fields, but what they did with their wealth defined them as noble and admirable.  Alfred Nobel accumulated great wealth making dyanamite in all its destructive forms but endowed the Nobel Prizes which have changed the world.  Andrew Carnegie made great wealth from industrial revolution industries that preyed on the poor but endowed many educational institutions around the country. Many would argue that Bill Gates has become the world's richest man by creating non-optimal software and stifling competition, but he has endowed the richest non-profit the world has ever known which is doing many great things. 

Using examples that are closer to home, what attracted me to CardRunners as a member initially was the relative nobility of its owners.  Certainly Taylor Caby and Andrew Wiggins could have kept their skill edge to themselves and profited playing poker for years to come. While there was definitely a profit and experience motivation in starting CardRunners, they also had a desire to give back, to share their knowledge with others.  When opportunities have arisen, they have reached out to others in need because they can afford to due to their success poker playing and CardRunners.  They see CardRunners as a springboard to other socially responsible activities.  They want to develop other businesses.  They suffer the social stigma of being poker players but are able to have a vision to make CardRunners the best it can be.  CardRunners has helped enrich hundreds and thousands of other poker players.  The cumulative social effect of having these people conduct themselves nobly in society would be quite an impact.

To sum up my points, what defines your status and social redeemability is not the mode of wealth accumulation but rather what you choose to do with the wealth you create.  There are so many people with good hearts who accumulate little wealth in their lifetimes.  They may contribute on a daily basis in their actions and careers.  There are others who may achieve great wealth in socially accepted and status-filled fields like doctor, lawyer, business, or athlete who never think to contribute back.  For those fortunate enough to profit as successful poker players, you have the luxury and responsibility to give back. Giving back may take many forms; you can donate, invest, help others.  It has a three fold benefit; you benefit society, you improve the status of the poker player within society, and ultimately you feel good about your actions.  Poker is not an inherently unproductive or socially unredeemable game or profession.  Do your part to prove me right!