So, You Want To Start Playing Poker? – Part 1

[shipitfish]

I have been asked a number of times by friends and acquaintances about poker. It is USAmericans' favorite game, and was so even before the boom. Post-boom, it's ok now for even the intellectual elite, who would otherwise frown on “gambling”, to like and enjoy poker.

I am somewhat used to the “Oh, so you're a doctor, I wanted to ask you...” syndrome of being a good poker player. As someone who also knows about computers, I have often been the person whom friends and acquaintances come to and ask their computer questions. Since I have barely ever used Microsoft products, I'm usually no help there — to their surprise. However, in poker, I'm well versed and knowledgeable in the ways that they need me to be, since I started from the very bottom games that interest new players.

When I started teaching my friend Dan how to play, roryk told me:

It seems fun and innocent and cool to be teaching someone, until one of the people you get into playing cards completely destroys their life with it. 90% of the people are suckers in the games, and more likely than not if you get someone playing, they are going to be a sucker. [...] So just save yourself some hassle and tell them not to get involved and that it is a brutal, frustrating game.

I gave that advice serious consideration, but in the end, rejected it (Sorry roryk). I have never had anyone come to me to ask about poker whom I judged to be susceptible to losing themselves in addiction. I have a good sense for this, but even if I do screw up and get someone involved who can't handle it, I am certainly not going to blame myself. Should everyone who ever served an alcoholic their first drink blame themselves? Of course not, it isn't their fault; it's a mix of bad genetics, bad environment, and a lack of self-control on the part of the alcoholic.

I model poker as an example of the typical USAmerican male hobby. Upper-middle class men spend a lot of money on their hobbies. Think of golf, for example. I know men who must dump a grand or two each and every year into their golf habits. They'll never make a dime of that back, of course. It's our culture; the “pursuit of happiness” appears right there in a one of our founding documents. Golf makes some men happy, so they dump all their so-called “disposable income” into it.

roryk is right, of course, many experts estimate that 90% of regular poker players are long-term losers. I've never seen hard data, nor a even rigorously computed estimation of that number, but it's still probably correct. But being one of the 90% is far from having a problem. If the player doesn't have a gambling problem, there isn't any inherent additional harm in giving poker a go and dropping a few grand a year in poker instead of golf. Indeed, poker losses can surely be mitigated by careful study to no more than any other hobby someone might undertake. And, the new player might even end up a winner for the year. I think it's a fun hobby and a great way to study the psychology of others, regardless of financial outcome.

The first thing I always tell people who have interest in poker, is that they will be losers forever unless they plan a rigorous, diligent, involved and constant learning process that will take up a large portion of their free time. As a new player, you must realize that to become a strong player, it takes study and lots and lots of active practice (not the passive practice of playing without an eye to game improvement). It takes discipline, concentration and nerves of steel. But, it's also rewarding, just as it is always rewarding to engage in competitive hard work with direct financial reward.

Having heard the caveats, you may still want to give poker a go. You have some “disposable income” and want to take your shot. Then, I suggest you set a budget for the hobby and be disciplined about it. It can be disheartening to realized you don't have the time to put in to learn how to beat the games, but any hobby one might engage in can turn out that way, despite substantial financial investments. It's important that you make an up-front budgeting decision on how much you're willing to spend on the hobby and stick to it. I am sure that every day, a USAmerican man realizes he's never going to be that good of a golfer but that he'll keep playing anyway because he enjoys it, but he surely does so on a budget.

Anyway, the upshot is that I have no qualms about helping people learn poker, with the caveats set forth. So, then the next question always comes: How do I get started and what type of game should I play? What should I read? Where should I go to start playing?.

I've answered these questions many times over during the past few years. I've decided, after tmckearney asked a few questions and I started putting down the usual answers, that I'll instead do a series in this journal, geared to help complete poker newbies get started. Each Sunday night, until I run out of things to say, I'll make a post helping new players navigate their way through the world of poker.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I think this response is overly negative. Perhaps it is just for effect -- but it does not seem that way. In fact, there's so much negativity there, that I don't even have the energy to pick at its pieces.

I have watched many people get hooked by poker and get stung. I've seen people lose their entire bankroll in one night. I've seen people borrow money to feed their poker addiction. But in that general class of scenarios, I believe one of two things always happens:

1) The person finally gets stung so badly that they step away. Sometimes with the help of a friend or family member. The night he comes home in tears after losing a few grand in a single night, a loved one steps in.

2) Nobody steps in, the person is unable to stop playing, and the worst case downward spiral that you describe ensues.

Case 1 really isn't that bad. It can happen in much more benign ventures -- business or relationship ventures even. I recently read how Steve Wozniak spewed off nearly *all* of his +200M from apple in divorces, failed businesses (cloud nine and others), and other failed investments. Life happens. Life goes on.

Case 2 is obviously bad. But life isn't a linear sequence of events (and this holds for both #1 and #2). You can't just point to the start and say, "Brad is bad for introducing Broke Deadbeat Loser to poker." There were surely *many* events both before and after Brad's introduction that precipitated the unfortunate downfall.

The only exception to this would be people outside the realm of normal acceptiblity. Perhaps Brad shouldn't round up the 8 year old neighborhood kids for some cut-throat NL (although I happen to think it is fine to teach kids about poker, if done properly). Or perhaps he should steer away from his buddy at work who is still attending Gamblers Anonymous meetings. And also his buddy who has absolutely no money and is always asking to borrow a little to cover rent and some food bills. But otherwise -- within the normal realm of balanced people who hold a regular job, I think it's no more dangerous than teaching a person drive (person could very well die driving a car).

So if said person is not a member of these fringe off-limit categories, then even *if* he eventually comes crying and screaming to Brad -- Brad should not feel badly. Sure, he might end up feeling badly for a while. But after thinking it over, he should reach the conclusion that I present above. The person fucked up. Life happens. And life goes on.

[roryk.livejournal.com]

You do not understand what an addict is. People with a problem can be helped simply by a family member stepping in and stopping the behaviour. An addict is a different story altogether. An addict will lie to his family. The addict will steal from his family. Read my story about the lady. Do you think there was any way for her family to "step in"? Once someone is addicted to gambling or alcohol or drugs the only person who can stop it is the person. There is no way for the family to "step in" and curb the behaviour. You are describing someone who has a problem that has gotten out of hand. I'm talking about people with full blown addictions. Those are the people who lose everything, those are the real addicts you see on HBO TV specials. Those aren't people with problems that you are describing. If you live in a city, go take a walk outside and check out the homeless people. Look hard into them, don't just walk by them. They will give you some bullshit story if you talk to one of them but most of them are their because they are addicts. They used to be regular people with jobs and apartments. That's where they end up. There is no "stepping in" sometimes.

And then there are people who aren't addicts, who are problem gamblers like you describe, who don't have anyone to step in. They aren't even addicts, they just have a problem, but they can't get help for the problem because they don't know to. They are like people who have a traumatic experience and get messed up by it and never go to therapy and live the rest of their life screwed up by it. There was nothing wrong with them before, they could get help and be better, they just never do. They maybe can keep their job but their life is miserable. They never go all the way but they are always broke and scrounging around for money.

I don't think it is fine to teach kids about poker at all. People in the poker world are selfish, egotistical, greedy, money-loving people. Do you think children should be learning values from those kinds of people? I don't think so. I don't think my children should be looking at Antonio Estvandarie or whatever his name or those dirtbags on TV and imitating them and thinking they are role models. Do you think your child is going to learn the value of money looking at all of that money flying around without a care? Do you think he is going to learn the value of hard work gambling like that? Do you think he is going to learn about honesty and trust? Is your kid going to learn how to be responsible and dependable playing poker? How to get a job done, how to plan, how to tell the truth, how to care about other people and be empathetic. How to be a good person, to be nice and selfless? Or is he going to learn other lessons about being greedy. About lying to get what you want. About decieving other people. About being selfish. Will he learn about hard work sitting around just playing cards for money? What exactly is my kid going to learn playing poker again? Because all of those very bad things are REWARDED with money in poker. You think teaching kids poker is good?? Are you out of your mind? You want your kids to be playing poker? What kind of parent or parent-to-be are you?

[roryk.livejournal.com]

I think it is interesting to note that in the same comment you say:

1) Bradley should not feel bad if a loved one were to flush his life down the toilet and die, or come crying and screaming to Bradley if he were to ruin his life with poker once Bradley got him into it because there were many events that precipitated the downfall and Bradley was just one of them. "The person fucked up. Life happens. And life goes on." This is a loved one, mind you. Bradley's loved one. Like, you know, a family member. His friend. Someone he loves. Life goes on.

and

2) Teaching poker, a game where lying, selfishness and greed is encouraged and rewarded with money, is a good game to teach children to play.

You tell Bradley to have an emotionally cold, selfish and heartless response to someone he loves and in the same comment mention that you think teaching children a game that teaches them the same values is a good game to teach them.

You're correct, with your weird overly negative slant

[(Anonymous)]

First off, you're basing your entire rant on the apparent truth that the entire poker world is corrupt, high-stakes, hard-hitting, and geared toward devistating everybody who's involved. Second, you make the assumption that a system or game that involves deception, selfishness and greed is both worthless and horrible.

Speaking to point #1 -- Suppose Brad went to his friends house for dinner. The dinner was great. After they're shootin the shit and Brad complements his friend -- "awesome dinner buddy. amazing food." His buddy says, "thanks.. you know, sometimes I think about taking out a loan, leaving my job, and opening up a restaurant." Brad says, "wow, that would be a big risky step, but your cooking is amazing. If anybody could do it, you could."

Later that year his friend follows his dreams. Unfortunately the reastaurant business eats up all of his time. It's really hard on his family life. What's worse... it just doesn't work out. The business goes bust.

Life happend. His friend got roughed up pretty badly. Should he blame Brad for that after-dinner conversation that gave him a little boost??

Now for #2. First I'll ask you if a child should be allowed to play any game that involves the qualities "lying, selfishness, and greed." Or as I would word it "deception, and a willingness to put yourself first as an individual." Singles tennis, for example. It's one-on-one out there -- no fucking around if you want to be number 1. No lying there. But how about *any* card game that is beyond Uno (or even Uno, I think). Or chess. Or Scrabble. Good players learn to deceive, even in these games of total information. Deception or lying makes lots of games fun. Plus, it happens all the time in the real world -- it's reality.

Now, poker is different because the point system is money. It's not chess or scrabble. Is money the issue? What's wrong with teaching a child to budget a poker bankroll and play within it? Give a child $20, and instead of letting him buy baseball cards, let him play $.10/$.20 limit holdem. Then, if the child goes bust he learns a lesson -- no more poker! If he makes a profit -- boom -- another lesson.

A final postscript -- a good friend of mine found himself extremely addicted to chess for about two years. He played probably 15 hours a day. It was a big setback to his life and career. I helped him get back into chess (he played a lot as a small child). Should I feel badly that I set out the chess board one afternoon years ago?