Are atheists better poker players than theists?

[bocablkr]

I have stated several times that I am amazed at the number of atheists on this forum. I believe it is due in part to the fact that in order to be a good poker player you need to be mathematical, logical and analytical. I also believe those traits are more common among atheists than theists. Any thoughts? I would also like to see both sides rate themselves as poker players.

I am an atheist and consider myself a pretty good poker player (subjective of course). I have won over $80,000 the last 2 1/2 years in live games. Obviously there are great poker pros on both sides but I am interested in our forum members especially Notready, RJT and the rest.

I would guess that atheists are better. Mainly because atheists are concerned with reality while theists are, well, not. Theists, by nature of their belief in a higher power, are probably much more likely to believe in silly superstitions and "luck." Of course I have no evidence whatsoever to back up anything I have said. Just kind of the way it would seem to be.

And yes, in case it wasn't obvious, I am an atheist.

[hmkpoker]

I think we need a larger sample size than that.

And for what it's worth, I'm an atheist, and I suck at poker ^_^

[RJT]

From what I gather, NotReady (he talked about his game once, I think) “got game”.

I am only learning the game. I started earlier this year. I hold my own. Not a winning player, yet. Although, I don’t have the time to spend that I wish I had (especially after finding this forum) For a novice, I’d say I am progressing fairly well. (Mostly because of 2+2 books and these forums.) My biggest problem right now is developing patience – to wait for the right hands. Since, I am playing at limits lower than my bankroll allows, I too often will make a call because it is a relatively minor amount for me.

The novelty of the game – that eagerness to get into the hand is wearing off also, so this will help my future game. Also, I am getting tired of not making a profit when I spend my time on it. Time is money, too, as they say. I have reached a new plateau and this is where I am now. Got the basics down, played enough hands that I no longer am playing just for the fun of it. Now on to the next step.

As far as atheist/theist – it certainly depends on the individual. I can see how one might lean towards atheist being a bit more objective. But, I wouldn’t discount the theist and his abilities to observe the intangibles (the table texture for example, or reads on folk in a live game) as a plus. I don’t think either group has a monopoly on things like the intangibles or logic.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
I don’t think either group has a monopoly on things like the intangibles or logic.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for your input RJT. I agree with the intangibles being similar but I lean towards atheists being more logical.

[maurile]

Atheists are just luckier.

[imported_luckyme]

RJT - [ QUOTE ]
As far as atheist/theist – it certainly depends on the individual. I can see how one might lean towards atheist being a bit more objective. But, I wouldn’t discount the theist and his abilities to observe the intangibles (the table texture for example, or reads on folk in a live game) as a plus. I don’t think either group has a monopoly on things like the intangibles or logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Raw initial talent - theist or not isn’t relevant. Essentially the observant, people-focused salesman have a head start. Analytical types usually bypass them later by better overall application but not always.

Doyle Brunson strikes me as an intelligent, observant people-reading competitor, but weaker on analytical skill than DS, for example. There are other personality factors that weigh in at the top level given reasonable skills in both those areas. Non-tilt is one. There are always players at every level that would be relatively awesome if they had a stabilizer bar. Similar with discipline in general. At the upper end of winners, I’d rate discipline in it’s various manifestations as a big factor.

Since there are many roads to atheism, I wouldn’t read too much into the impression we get from the 2+2 forum. It’s doesn’t give us ‘atheist players’ it gives us ‘atheist players that enjoy posting to an analytical web-forum" a self-selecting sample.

I suspect a correlation (not necessarily causation) but not convinced yet.

luckyme,
if I thought I was wrong, I'd change my mind

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
I suspect a correlation (not necessarily causation) but not convinced yet.


[/ QUOTE ]

10-15% of the US population are non-believers. I suspect it is higher among the top pros and MUCH higher here on this forum. I think that is rather convincing.

[David Sklansky]

"I believe it is due in part to the fact that in order to be a good poker player you need to be mathematical, logical and analytical."

Probably only a few people remember that the start of all the religion debates occurred when someone put up a similar thesis, before this forum even existed, on the psychology forum and I replied something like:

"People who truly believe in the specifics of particular religions are much less likely to be good poker players given the importance of objective evidence evaluation that poker requires."

Nothing has changed in my mind.

[Bigdaddydvo]

Phil Hellmuth once said he can "look into his opponent's eyes and see into his soul"

PH obviously believes in an immortal soul and presumably a God who created it.

PH is thus a theist. Since PH is one of the best poker players in the world, we can necessarily deduce that theists outperform atheists at the poker table.