7/27/2019 The Myth of the Socially Non Redeeming Activity.doc

1/2

A couple recent events spurred me to write this article. On a recent family holiday tocelebrate 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 wherehe states poker is "inherently unproductive from a social perspective." Both

individuals have been steadfast in their assertions that poker is not a positive activitythat benefits society. My counter assertion is that poker is no better or worse thanany 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 choosecareers accordingly. Their goals are generally two fold; wealth accumulation and

status. Wealth accumulation can be achieved many ways, but often the commondenominator 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 comesfrom 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 statusand enriching careers like doctor, lawyer, business executive, financial area or even

professional athlete. Poker player never seems to come up in either list. Why isthat?

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 inwhich 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 alegal 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 mostlyluck. 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 edgecan be negated by the luck element, but skill overcomes luck in the long term. Inthat 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 considerablestamina 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 longrun the better team/individual prevails, the same as poker.

7/27/2019 The Myth of the Socially Non Redeeming Activity.doc

2/2

The more important factor to me is that if you neutralize the negative social status ofpoker, 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 insociety. 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 societiesgreatest figures accumulated their wealth in sometimes questionable fields, but what

they did with their wealth defined them as noble and admirable. Alfred Nobelaccumulated great wealth making dyanamite in all its destructive forms but endowedthe 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 Gateshas 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 knownwhich is doing many great things.

Using examples that are closer to home, what attracted me to CardRunners as amember initially was the relative nobility of its owners. Certainly Taylor Caby and

Andrew Wiggins could have kept their skill edge to themselves and profited playingpoker 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 sharetheir 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 andCardRunners. They see CardRunners as a springboard to other socially responsible

activities. They want to develop other businesses. They suffer the social stigma ofbeing 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 pokerplayers. 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 intheir 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 youractions. Poker is not an inherently unproductive or socially unredeemable game or

profession. Do your part to prove me right!