Do poker players need a "thick" skin in order to beat the game?

[Mike Gallo]

I work in a very challenging environment. In order to succeed in my industry my employees need a "thick" skin. They need to handle criticisms well. They need to deal with adverse situations and solve many different problems. I analyze hand histories in the same manner in which I would analyze the work an employee has put into an account. The only difference that exists between the two, my colleagues consider me an expert in my line of work and my poker game needs constant improvement.

I do not mix words at work and some find me hard to work for.A known lurker who has worked for me can respond since he has first hand knowledge. I quickly point out my employees mistakes and sometimes need to discipline certain mistakes. People consider me tough but fair. I never critisize an employee personally I critize their action or poor performance.

Last night I read a post where a new poster incorrectly folded the nut flush draw.

Most posters explained why the poster made such a bad player. However none of them really got the point across the way Dynasty did. By no means do I intend to attack Dynasty or denounce what he did. One poster questioned the manner in which Dynasty answered the post and he replied. Nothing personal its just poker.

All of this leads to my question. Do poker players need a thick skin in order to survive and learn from the pitfalls associated with the game?

Anyone have any thoughts on this?