poker ethics: do you wonder about who you're taking money from?

[Wetdog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Quote:
Are we not, as habitually winning poker players, bigger leaches on society than people that abuse the unemployment/welfare program? We are taking money straight from the pockets of other people, granted a smaller population than that of the taxpayers of your given country.



Nope. We're more like entertainers and athletes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? You don't seem all that entertaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't answering for your entertainment.

[ QUOTE ]
The entertainment analogy isn't a very good one as people seek out entertainers for specifically what they are good at doing. While most casual gamblers don't care who they are playing with, and if given the option would chose to play with lesser skilled players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then they should play with their children for jellybeans.

[ QUOTE ]
If you're having doubts about the usefulness of your profession you are probably correct, and many people in other professions should feel the same way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no doubts of the usefulness of my profession. Poker is not my profession, it's a profitable hobby.

[ QUOTE ]
So perhaps the solution is to not hoard all the money you can, and give some amount back in a useful way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like Tsunami Relief, United Way and United Cerebral Palsy?

[hurlyburly]

[ QUOTE ]
If someone was walking down the street in front of you and dropped 20 bucks out of their pocket, would you pick it up and put it in yours?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you feel like you are picking money up off the streets, I envy your game selection skills.

If they can risk it, then it's up for grabs. We don't know each history or financial situation. We can only assume that money in play is leftover money after they've paid their bills, put a little away for Johnny's education, and donated to their IRA at the end of the month.

There are a quite a few people who make ends meet with poker because the profession they chose isn't a lucrative one, and learning to win at poker doesn't require a masters degree in mathematics or psychology.

[droolie]

If you have an ethical dilemna about this why not decide to give a % of all your winnings to charity. That way you can pretend you're Robin Hood and give to the soup kitchens your opponents will surely be eating in soon. You can even where the outfit while you play. Personally I dress up like Friar Tuck but I'm kind of chubby and the Robin Hood outfit makes my thighs look fat.

I agree with the sentiment that the losing players are the same idiots who habitually play keno, scratch cards and slot machines. Some of them have money to burn but most are losing money that could be better spent elsewhere. Intellectually they know they will lose in the long term but they simply rationalize that it's entertainment and entertainment must be purchased. They are sustained by the few good hands they have and that's all they care about.


To become a winning player is hard work and takes brains and a great deal of study. Poker is fair and everyone has the same opportunity to improve themselves. If someone is not willing or able to put in that hard work or is incapable of learning a complicated system they should not gamble unless they see it as the price for entertainment. I know for a fact that these guys gladly keep my money when I lose to them so I do not mind keeping theirs when they lose to me.

[Wintermute]

Right now I'm finishing up grad school... even though I am making substantially more money playing online poker in spare time now than I will at what most would consider a very well-paying "real" job that I will land when I graduate, I rule out the possibility of turning "pro" in poker. I basically have two reasons:

1) Job security: the legality issue in online poker may rear itsugly head one day; games may "dry up" as the public grows increasingly aware of the nature of poker (or at least the games may become more difficult to the point of not being as lucrative as a real job); you don't get health insurance, an opportunity for advancement/corporate respect, etc.

2) Morality of it. For some reason, taking a crapload of people's money in online poker doesn't bother me morally as long as it's not the primary source of income & focus in my life. If I quit school or didn't take a "real job" after graduating, I think I would feel oppressive guilt. Also, we are really producing nothing by playing poker. Don't kid yourself... at the end of the day, you can't point to a player whose money you took and say "now there is a satisfied customer". Now I know there are a few rich fish who go online to blow a couple grand from time to time and do actually call that fun; but I also know personally some folks who lose ballpark 10% of their already meager income in online poker games, the 10% that ought to be going into savings for their kids' college accounts, etc. Unfortunately, I suspect these folks make up the majority of the losing players we benefit from.

Just my $.02

[Kablooie]

Personally, i see Poker as one of the purer forms of socialism, in that it acts as a form of wealth transfer from rich stupid people, to poor smart ones.

but that's just me...

[moondogg]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, i see Poker as one of the purer forms of socialism, in that it acts as a form of wealth transfer from rich stupid people, to poor smart ones.

but that's just me...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hogwash.

Who starts rich and poor has no impact. There are plenty of "rich" people on this board who win money from broke degenerate gamblers and college kids.

However, it IS a transfer to the smart from the stupid, or rather, a transfer to the hard/smart worker from the lazy/dumb worker, which is pure capitalism. (Flame me all you want on this one, I won't respond)

[JDErickson]

I have been following one guy around for about a week now. He is absolutely the worst poker player I have ever seen. He has dropped over 5k so far and he doesn't seem to be losing steam at all or learning anything from his experience. He plays 5/10 6 max or 3/6 full and loses every time.

Yesterday I started feeling guilty and finally decided to give the guy a break after watching him dump 3 buyins at 5/10 6 max. I really hope hes not losing his paycheck and his kids will not eat this month. I don't know it just hit me about him yeserday.

[LinusKS]

I like the socialism argument. :-)

It does stand to reason, after all, if you're going to lose serious money, you've pretty much got to be rich.

Seriously though, poker players don't contribute to society. I mean, you're not entertaining anybody at the table any more than they're entertaining you, and if you want to get down to it, the losing players are the most "entertaining" players at the tables. Nobody likes losing their money. There's nothing entertaining about that at all.

If you're game is going to appear on the Travel Channel, then maybe you could claim to be an entertainer. Otherwise, no.

[driverseati]

As far as I'm concerned, playing at the poker table is like competition. I do not worry about it, it ultimately is not your responsibility to help these people in their lives. Most of these people you encounter you don't even have an interpersonal relationship with them. This is different than having someone drop 20 bucks on the street, since at the poker table, players understand that the money in front of them is at risk, and can go to anybody. They have full knowledge of what is going on and the situation, unlike the 20 dollar dropping scenario

To put it simply, if you win the lottery, are you stealing from taxpayers and the education system?

As compared to, say, robbing a bank.

[EjnarPik]

I consider it unethical to play poker for anything other than symbolic money.

But not as unethical as many other ways people make money everyday.

Poker-losers are not as bad off, as many other unfortunates of this world.

Ejnar Pik, Southern-Docks