That's an interesting point that makes me think of something else.
Many of these questions about the "killer instinct" come up regarding
meta-game issues. In your pool example, the question about whether or
not you had the "killer instinct" related on how much you bet in each
subsequent separate game. No one disagrees about whether or not you
should play your best game doing it; the killer instinct and the
ethical questions usually come into play related to meta-issues.
For example, in the poker situation, do you offer the drunk guy more
drinks? Do you egg him on when he asks to increase the stakes? Do
you use every edge you can get that aren't expressly
forbidden in the rule book? Do you shoot angles?
These are all a level above the actual poker game, which I would define
narrowly as a "series of hands played in a social context". No one
questions that the "social context" is part of the game; the question
is whether or not you skate the edges of the rules to bend that social
context. It's a classic question between "ethical" and "illegal"?
I'm a terrible pool player, but I view changing your bet and playing
style to extract the maximum as reasonable. It's similar to taking
the worst of it in poker to project a loose table image to extract
later successful value bets. And, as a non-pool-player, even I've
known that classic hustle since I was 12 years old. It's hard to call
something truly ethically objectionable when it's the obvious thing
that everyone knows about and should be protected against.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
meta-issues are where this comes in
Date: 2005-07-22 16:17 (UTC)That's an interesting point that makes me think of something else. Many of these questions about the "killer instinct" come up regarding meta-game issues. In your pool example, the question about whether or not you had the "killer instinct" related on how much you bet in each subsequent separate game. No one disagrees about whether or not you should play your best game doing it; the killer instinct and the ethical questions usually come into play related to meta-issues.
For example, in the poker situation, do you offer the drunk guy more drinks? Do you egg him on when he asks to increase the stakes? Do you use every edge you can get that aren't expressly forbidden in the rule book? Do you shoot angles?
These are all a level above the actual poker game, which I would define narrowly as a "series of hands played in a social context". No one questions that the "social context" is part of the game; the question is whether or not you skate the edges of the rules to bend that social context. It's a classic question between "ethical" and "illegal"?
I'm a terrible pool player, but I view changing your bet and playing style to extract the maximum as reasonable. It's similar to taking the worst of it in poker to project a loose table image to extract later successful value bets. And, as a non-pool-player, even I've known that classic hustle since I was 12 years old. It's hard to call something truly ethically objectionable when it's the obvious thing that everyone knows about and should be protected against.