Do You Have the Killer Instinct?

[shipitfish]

nick_marden has given me two conflicting comments in the last few months. A few weeks ago, he told me that someday, I'm probably going to end up getting the bulk of my financial income from poker. More recently, after watching the Boston crew play in Las Vegas, he mentioned that I don't have the "killer instinct" necessary to make a living playing poker.

My immediate answer to was that I was happy with it either way. I love poker, and if someday, five to ten years from now, I decide to not work a regular job because poker dividends are enough to live on, I would say that's just great. However, if it turns out to be true that you need that "killer instinct" -- to be a true predator -- to make a living at poker, I'm sure that I don't want to be that person.

I think Nick's thoughts on this were influenced by the way he saw some of the most talented players from Greg's game playing in Vegas. He saw one bright young player happily looking, every single hand, at a sight-challenged man's cards, as he lifted them up to see. He saw yet another bright young player order beers for a drunk "fish" when the house had cut him off from alcohol. In other words, he watched as our little group proceed to fleece the Vegas games without mercy nor empathy.

I am sure at least half of those guys will become pros, and have long, profitable cash game careers. But, do you have to be that type of person to really win? I have read a lot from the top players, and some do argue that the "killer instinct" -- the true heart of a darkness -- is mandatory to be a professional.

I just don't think so myself. There are some truly kind and caring people in the poker world. People who have good hearts, who love and are loved, and who even talk with some regret about the sucker they broke twenty years before.

There is no doubt that people with the killer instinct are successful. Around the business world, tons of them have made billions. In the computer world, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and Steve Jobs, for example, come to mind as true killers who have shown no mercy and mistreated themselves and others as they raked it in. To be on the list of the wealthiest people in the world, perhaps mercy and empathy are risky liabilities.

But, I've also seen some very shrewd and successful business people who didn't conduct their affairs as predators. They have been good people, who connected and understood others, and became successful through those qualities rather than cult of personality and the force of an unbending, spiteful will.

Indeed, I am quite sure I wouldn't be a very good poker player without the empathy skills I've spend a lot of personal time developing. When I am playing my best game, I'm in tune with the other people at the table. I understand deeply why they want to be at the table, what their motivations are, and how their feelings and moods are guiding them. I view poker as a contrived social setting where I attempt to connect and truly understand people ... for fun and profit. Like most things in life, there's a bit of a sense to which I'm preying on that understanding of them, but it doesn't have to be pure evil nor pure good to be acceptable and enjoyable. I don't think I need to want to eat them alive to win.

Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps a sensitive and caring person can't, in the end, be all that successful at poker. What do you think? Is the killer instinct mandatory to win, or is it just one of many paths to successful poker play?

[Poll #533223]

Comments

winning instinct, not killer instinct

[(Anonymous)]

I often think poker players over-dramatize the effects of their beating another player at the poker table. It's wrapped up in actions such as saying "I'm sorry" after winning hands.

When I'm at a poker table, I see it as a level playing field (assuming nobody is cheating). I try my hardest to win every chip that I can. I accept the randomness introduced by the shuffled deck, and am not bothered at all by "bad beats." I also never feel badly about having the cards fall in my favor.

As such, I don't think of myself as having a "killer instinct." Rather, I think of it as a "winning instinct."

Away from a table, I would consider moral questions such as suggesting that a player stop playing, or switch to playing lower stakes. Away from the table I would also tell a player that it is possible to see his/her cards. (I typically give a player one notice at the table that I can see his cards, although I do so at my discretion, and believe protecting your cards is just part of the game.)

Basically, I think that whatever you do at the poker table (that is within the rules) is acceptable and actually makes the game fun. Any effort to start listing actions that fall under a "killer instinct" risk falling down a slippery slope. Soon it won't be acceptable to re-raise big on a bluff, because "surely" you'd only do that with a premium hand. (fold your QQ immediately by the way, because i have 55, and i've put in the 4th raise pre-flop)

As a final aside, I remember playing in a soccer tournament as a kid, the other team fired a shot at our nearly-open goal. Rather than let the ball go in, I reached up and smacked it down with my hand. I received a yellow card, and the other team got a penalty kick, which they missed. We went on to win the game, and my coach told me that I saved the game. In a way, I cheated, because an intensional handball is illegal. But on the other hand, it's part of the game. I was penalized.

Similarly, Diego Maradona once scored a goal in the world cup by punching the ball in with his fist. The referee could not see the punch because it was shielded by his head, and looked like a header from his angle. Many soccer fans see this as a devious, yet fantastic goal -- one of the best in soccer. The Hand of God goal. Maradona certainly had a "killer instinct." Then again, a foul is only a foul if it's called by the ref. Maybe Maradona just had a winning instinct.

The excellence instinct

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

I believe the "inform them you can see their cards once" rule is mandatory, particularly if someone is elderly or sight-impaired. I have taken advantage of card-exposure once a warning has been issued.

As for ethical questions of telling people, I think it's mandatory as well. Twice I've grabbed someone away from the poker table and said, in true .*Anonymous fashion: "I believe you have a gambling problem. Always remember that I told you this. You should get some help." I am only inclined to do this when I have witnessed multiple occasions where the gambling problem is clear.

I would not go so far to say that "whatever is within the rules". Bob Ciaffone can't write down a sentence to cover every possible situation. There has to be some sense of what's beyond reason and decency.

I would not, for example, live life saying: "I'll do anything that isn't explicitly illegal." There are lots of swindles and exploitations that can't easily be legislated against, but are still ethically wrong all the same.

I guess I would say that my poker "instinct" would best be called the "excellence instinct". I always try to do the best job possible at anything I do in a fashion that is ethical beyond reproach. That's my approach to poker as well.

killer instinct

[(Anonymous)]

I was not one of the 2 players mentioned above, but I would still like to say that I don't think you are aware of what the killer instinct is. I don't like giving free poker lessons so I'd rather not really get into it, but I will say this. The killer instinct is more being able to take that drunk guy's money with no mercy, rather than feeding him more beers that he should not be having.

Re: killer instinct

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

I've responded to your comment in a separate post.

killer instinct

[reddogace.livejournal.com]

What you seem to be describing as "killer instinct" is "doing whatever it takes to win". I think poker is not viewed in the public's eye like professional sports and "cheating" seems almost acceptable. I've always viewed poker like a job. At my job I'll kiss my boss' ass even though I may not regard him highly at all, this in turn may give me a promotion. Is that cheating? No, but it's doing what it takes to get ahead.

There is poker etiquette also. If I ask to see every called hand I would gain much valuable information, but most players view this as bad poker etiquette. I don't care I want to see them - This isn't cheating. it may work for or against me. It may annoy some to death or get others on tilt, I won't make friends that's for sure. When I sit at a table I'm not there to make new friends, I'm there to get the money, everyone is my enemy - ironically - even my friends that sit at the table. If my friend lifts his cards to high, I may warn him once, if he does it again - I'll take his whole stack. Maybe later when He's wondering how I put such good read on him I'll say "you shouldn't lift your cards so high." Is that killer instinct, maybe. Cheating, maybe?

Drunk people paying cards are just idiots, I'll gladly take there whole stack, that way they'll learn there lesson. I never drink playing cards, for good reason. Like a drunk driver getting caught, I'm happy he's going away to jail - servers him right. If a drunk guy loses his mortgage, serves him right, don't be so stupid.

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

Perhaps we've come across a difference in life philosophies, then. I've gotten exactly every position and promotion I've set my mind to. I've certainly engaged in flattery, but I've never flattered someone I didn't deeply respect and admire. My current boss, for example, is high on my list of people in the world I most admire.

Is it cheating if you flatter someone you don't respect? I'm not sure, but it's certainly inhumane, ruthless, and unkind. I certainly have diminished respect for people who do that regularly.

As for the possible abuses you talk about; I actually believe the practice you mention is against the rules, so the example is lost on me.

As for drunks, I have thought a bit about it, and am still unsure what the ethics are. I certainly think encouraging them to stay in the game when they try to leave is wrong, but sitting their quietly taking there money? I don't know; it certainly wouldn't land on the top of my list of "things I'm most proud of", but I don't think I mind doing it either. It doesn't feel unethical, anyway.