At what point are you just a gambler?

Talking Poker · #1 03-09-05, 02:30 AM

I like the Sklansky quote. Yes, I realize in the short term, poker is gambling, but in the long run, I don't believe it is. There is no house edge. It is a beatable game of skill.

Regarding your question earlier Aeq, about me learning Triple Draw... How about an analogy?

Say you are a baseball player. Not one of the best in the world, but one of the best on your team. Sure, you have off days where you go 0-4, but by the end of the year, you know you'll hit .300 and make decent money.

For whatever reason (maybe you are in a slump, maybe you are bored, maybe you've just heard how cool it is), you pick up a basketball one day for the first time in your life. Turns out you really like it, and for being completely new to the sport, you think you're pretty good. So you decide to play for a while, practicing, and improving your game. Could you spend this same time playing baseball, knowing you are better at it? Sure....... but why not learn basketball too, in hopes of being one of the best in that sport someday as well? Especially if you are enjoying yourself along the way...........

Ok, this analogy has gotten a bit long winded, but hopefully you see the point I'm trying to make. And with different games of poker, a lot of the fundamentals are still there. Sure, you might not understand the nuances of a certain game, but concepts like aggression, pot odds, and so on - those are all useful tools that translate from game to game.

GeoffM · #2 03-09-05, 08:58 AM

In truth, I believe you become a gambler when food money is going on the table. You aren't a gambler until such time that you are wagering your well-being or your families well-being (God forbid) at a table or game.

Aequitas58 · #3 03-09-05, 01:55 PM

That's called a "problem."

I may be nieve here, but are there professonal blackjack players? What about professonal roulette players? Craps? Sure, a lot of money can be won playing these games (even if you eat the -EV) but don't most of these people have regular jobs - opposed to the overwhelming number of pro proker players?

Aequitas58 · #4 03-09-05, 01:36 PM

The house "edge" is the rake. Some people argue that the rake alone is often unbeatable for low limit holdem players. (Especially the rake at a B/M casino.)

On to the analogy. I don't like it only because *I* think it's faulty to compare athletics (a game of skill dealing w/ a person's physical attributes) to poker. Compare poker to chess. Backgammon. Possibly pool/billiards - but even then we veer off into another realm.

Obviously I've gambled at poker. (Everyone at this forum has...) But I've also gambled at chess and pool. A lot. Naturally, I am a gambler. I'll bet DCopper at the SuperBowl, and I'll also bet I make it to 1000 before anyone else does. But, when it comes to poker, something intrinsic tells me there is less of a risk. It's less of a "gamble" and more of an investment, like PShabi pointed out.

And just for the sake of argument, you're not going to find a good baseball and basketball player. It's two different body types. Someone can be "good" at both, but you're not going to find someone who can make good money at baseball and then be the best at basketball. Or vice versa.

I'm thinking of MJ off the top of my head.