The Sociology of Poker?

[carddown]

I'm looking for a book or article on the group dynamics of Poker. Is there a Sociology book that covers anything similar?

The closest model I can find for the game is pack behavior in predatory animals- who are also, you know, cannibals.

CardDown

[xxx]

Probably too small for what you are looking for, but there is a section in Ace on the River called poker society.

[theweatherman]

poker is much more of a lone wolf type activity. You weed out hte weakest player and gun for them. If youuse other s to help you find the weakest player than thatis just fine, but always in the backof your mind there is the idea that I am in this for myslef. At the end of the day its my bankroll that matters, and such I will fight anyone that comes in my way.

I see no pack oriented ideals at all.

[carddown]

Weatherman, I was mostly kidding about the pack analogy, but there are some similarites. You are right about the players uniting to pounce on the weak, but sometimes there is also pack-like behavior in other situations, like when the whole table rolls over in submission to the boss dog by refusing to call him. There usually is a pecking order established at a table, and it is not always based on stack sizes alone. Some players assume dominance by reputation alone, others try to establish it by "strutting" with an imposing table image, or with loud banter or aggressive betting. The table captain role is an easy one to identify, I'm also interested in the roles other players take at the table and the struggle for dominance within a group of people in competition.

CardDown

[soko]

If sombody to write a book about exactly what you just posted it would be so freaking common sense I would probally fall asleep after the first few pages. Bascially you just wrote the entire book minus the 100 pages of filler material it would require to have something actually considered a book on the topic.

[four eight suited]

Clearly a VERY shortsided view of sociology is held by your responders to this post. I think its funny that a forum filled with psychology responses would snub the whole field of sociology like that. You ever notice those tables where everyone is always limping in? You think everyone individually has rationally decided that they want to limp in to every pot? I think this has great relevance to the Asch conformity experiments. Poker tables, while certainly filled with unique individuals, clearly have a certain group dynamic to them, thus are well within the realm of sociology.

How about Erving Goffmans Dramaturgy theory? It is essentially described by the 'all the world's a stage and all of us are merely actors' quote. It would describe how players fit into their roles as TAGs or LAGs or weak/passive or whatever.

Hundreds of pages could easily be written applying many of salient theories concerning the Symbolic Interactionist perspective and their application to the poker society and even to individual tables.

I think mike caro might think there is some significant sociology occuring at the poker table. How could he possible group players so accurately into so few models? While controversial, mike offers a depiction of player types by race, an approach taken by many sociologists.



Maybe not so common sense? Sorry, kinda defensive about the whole sociology thing, sure it was easy major at duke, but I guess I learned a few things too.

[Al Schoonmaker]

Nicely stated. In "Ace on the River," Barry Greenstein says that traits of winning players include being greedy and self-centered. Traits of losers include compassion. Poker is a predatory game: The strong eat the weak.

Regards,

Al

[JohnnyHumongous]

[ QUOTE ]
Nicely stated. In "Ace on the River," Barry Greenstein says that traits of winning players include being greedy and self-centered. Traits of losers include compassion. Poker is a predatory game: The strong eat the weak.

Regards,

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

That's really depressing.

[ QUOTE ]
Nicely stated. In "Ace on the River," Barry Greenstein says that traits of winning players include being greedy and self-centered. Traits of losers include compassion. Poker is a predatory game: The strong eat the weak.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's kind of a radical synopsis - Greenstein clearly doesn't go in for the "merciless assassin" ideal.

For example, Greenstein says several times in the book that a good player makes the "live ones" feel good about playing, so they'll play more, including quitting before you clean them out if need be.

[carddown]

I appreciate the replies, but I haven't found the tidy little package that I was hoping for. Much has probablly been written on what I'm interested in, but from a different perspective, as table image and player types . Any suggestions on where to find superior coverage of those topics?

Thanks,
CardDown