OT: what would really kill sitngo profitability

[splashpot]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When a large number of people who believe in luck get ahold of the ability to play poker against me, it can only be highly profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

how many people in china have the discretionary income to play poker unprofitably?

how many people in china have the ability to work their way up through the micros?

I think OP has a great point.

[/ QUOTE ]
More people doesn't equate to tougher games. Just look at Party. If any observations are made, they definately have to do with race. The Chinese are seriuos gamblers. They'll gamble on anything. Introducing poker to a group of people who like to gamble as much as the Chinese do, can only help the game IMO.

(I'm Chinese btw)

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When a large number of people who believe in luck get ahold of the ability to play poker against me, it can only be highly profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

how many people in china have the discretionary income to play poker unprofitably?

how many people in china have the ability to work their way up through the micros?

I think OP has a great point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, I think this scare is the same sort of BS people were spewing in the 40's and 50's about women working and "taking men's jobs" and in the 70's about all the Asian students "taking Americans' places" in American universities.

You can make the exact same arguments about the Russians and eastern Europeans and Indians, and on and on, but it hasn't changed the landsacpe in the past and that isn't what'll do it in the future.

Plenty of Chinese people will soon have the income to play poker unprofitably, just as they'll also have the income to own personal cars and use lots of electricity.

[curtains]

I think the OP's point is actually quite absurd.

I'm also worried that one day ghosts will take up the game, maybe the type of ghosts that can travel through the computer screen and see your cards. That would make the game tough to win too.

Anyone have any other quick and easy scenarios of how poker can become remarkably unprofitable in the near future?

[Gramps]

I was in Macau (ex-Portugeese trading colony near Hong Kong in the Southern part of China) over Easter holiday this year. Sure, a fair number of people there were from Hong Kong and not the mainland, but at the casino my friends and I went to, every seat at every table was filled, with people playing Blackjack and Baccarat - the lowest minimums being $300 HK (about $40 US).

There's a fair number of people on the mainland making a ton of money, and they're willing to gamble away a lot of it. How that's bad for online poker players, I'm not sure. There's highly educated people in other countries where it's hard to earn a good (by US standards) wage that have access to the internet (i.e. Russia), but that hasn't "ruined" online poker by any stretch of the imagination. Don't see how China would be any different.

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Answer

Letting the chinese population get in on the action. Once they figure out there is a way to make more than 20 cents an hour by playing a game we are all dead. Thank god for an oppressive communism government keeping our games as fishy as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of the funnier examples of xenophobia that I've seen in a while.

Irieguy

[ChrisV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying they wouldn't be, but what makes you think the chinese will all be so good at poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

this is something im always unsure about.

is it still racism if its a good thing about the race?

like the obvious implication is that chinese people are good at math, which is a stereotype that people like to bandy about. it's essentially a positive thing -- being good at something can't really be bad. but it's still racist, isn't it?

it's like saying black people have big penises (penii?), or are good at basketball. it's positive, but i'm pretty sure it's still racist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone is so scared of the racism bogey today. The following statements are all, in my opinion, true:

- Blacks are on average better runners than whites
- Whites are on average better swimmers than blacks

Everyone is generally cool with that. But most people balk at the following, which I also believe is true:

- Asians have higher average IQ than whites, who in turn have higher average IQ than blacks.

Most people reject this out of hand without even knowing anything about the subject. Nevertheless I think it's true. There are basically no implications here, it doesn't mean we should treat races any differently, either in terms of public policy or individually. It just seems to be taboo to discuss the subject, after a century tainted by apartheid, the Holocaust, and numerous other racial crimes and biases.

Anyway my point of view is that it's not racism if it is:

(1) True, and:
(2) You don't treat individual members of races differently.

Sorry about the thread hijack. The most prestigious horse race on the Australian calendar, the Melbourne Cup, has just been run and tradition is to stop work and have a few drinks, which indeed I have done. More than a few, actually.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry about the thread hijack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not =P The OP was pretty much absurd.

And I guess I have some issue with the "fact" of the relative IQ of all these races. I am not convinced that IQ (or any test, in fact) can accurately calculate "natural intelligence," whatever that actually means. This doesn't make it a useless test -- it just makes it limited.

I guess what I'm saying is, by the time children can be given an IQ test with any degree of accuracy, environmental factors have already substantially affected the development of the brain of the child. So it may not be the case that Blacks are *necessarily* less intelligent than whites -- it may simply be the case that, on average, blacks grow up in poverty more often than whites, and are therefore more often negatively affected by environmental standards, before (and probably after) they take their first IQ test.

Anyway, something to think about. Thanks for replying to my post though =).


And yeah, as a country we are way too PC. But generally the anti-PC people are anti-PC to a fault as well (because, I guess, they are trying to prove a point). There has to be a happy medium in there.

[microbet]

[ QUOTE ]

Everyone is so scared of the racism bogey today. The following statements are all, in my opinion, true:

- Blacks are on average better runners than whites
- Whites are on average better swimmers than blacks

[/ QUOTE ]

You're just pulling that out from down under. I'm sure there are no stats on this. Here are two possible explanations for why blacks dominate sprinting, neither of which imply blacks are faster on average.

1. There is greater genetic diversity within the class of people generally considered black than there is between the class of people generally considered black and the class of people who are generally not. I'm not 100% sure on this, but I have heard it and believe it has to do with humans existing in Africa a lot longer than anywhere else. Given that, you would expect all sorts of outliers from that class of people, but not necessarily a different average.

2. America rules and dominates a lot of athletics and our athletes come from the poorer parts of the population.

Whites are better swimmers? Well, maybe not enough pools in the hood.

[ QUOTE ]

Everyone is generally cool with that. But most people balk at the following, which I also believe is true:

- Asians have higher average IQ than whites, who in turn have higher average IQ than blacks.


[/ QUOTE ]

Outside of the problems with testing, I'm sure IQ is not solely determined by genetics. Even things like prenatal nutrition can affect IQ.

I know that doesn't necessarily mean as it stands different groups don't have different IQs, just that the cause isn't necessarily genetic.

I'm not saying there aren't necessarily differences, just that they aren't really established.

The big problem is that race can not be defined well enough to study any of these issues.

Have you ever seen the studies on infidelity? In some countries as many as 10% of people who think they know who their father is are wrong. Take this back 1,000 generations and tell me you know what race you are.

Anyway, I'm sure I said some pretty suspect stuff in there and I'm not even drunk.

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]


- Asians have higher average IQ than whites, who in turn have higher average IQ than blacks.

Most people reject this out of hand without even knowing anything about the subject. Nevertheless I think it's true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, as long as you think it's true then I agree that most people would be wrong to reject your premise.

Irieguy

[ChrisV]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not convinced that IQ (or any test, in fact) can accurately calculate "natural intelligence," whatever that actually means. This doesn't make it a useless test -- it just makes it limited.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, intelligence is a pretty nebulous concept. But just because it's hard to measure doesn't mean it doesn't exist. IQ tests, flawed though they are, do a pretty good approximation. Actually it's similar to the ICM debate that's been going on over the last little while. The anti-ICM side's argument is basically "Tournament equity is a hard thing to measure. Therefore, let's not even try".

[ QUOTE ]
I guess what I'm saying is, by the time children can be given an IQ test with any degree of accuracy, environmental factors have already substantially affected the development of the brain of the child. So it may not be the case that Blacks are *necessarily* less intelligent than whites -- it may simply be the case that, on average, blacks grow up in poverty more often than whites, and are therefore more often negatively affected by environmental standards, before (and probably after) they take their first IQ test.

[/ QUOTE ]

These factors are all well known. Studies which take them into account still show IQ differences.

You would be hard pressed to find a psychometrician out there who doesn't believe in racial IQ differences. It reminds me of global warming, or evolution, two areas where the Right has tried to give the impression that there's scientific uncertainty when there isn't. Racial IQ differences is the Left's pet denial.