Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Internet Gambling > Internet Gambling

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 11-17-2005, 06:53 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: My typical day

I rather doubt this. The problem isn't so much the volume of fish; as most of us with thorough PT databases know, the net losers with either fish, LAG, or donk stats far outnumber the sharps. Search the world over, and you'll find at least 10 fish looking for a $200+15 SNG at any given time, the problem is how they're distributed, as they're inevitably distributed inefficiently. Were all the different sites conflated into one network, fish wouldn't have an problem finding each other, and the pros would be superfluous for "liquidity" purposes.

Now the "one network" scenario is extreme, of course, but more realistically, if you take the pros out of the equation, then the market would inevitably produce fewer sites. The value of pros for liquidity - and I would say that if they are valuable at all it's only to a small percentage of fish who play higher limits - is created only under current market conditions. Remove the pros, lose a small chunk of the player pool (even if that small chunk is a bigger chunk than their numbers would suggest, due to multi-tabling), combine a few sites and networks, and you're right back to where you started.

Having said that, that's not quite the point I was responding too, as TrueBritt was advocating the value of pros as providing "entertainment". Your reasoning resembles his, though, in that it's based on the benefits pros offer under current market conditions. What I think you're both overlooking is that if you remove the pros, market conditions change, and the fish can provide all the benefits you two have listed for themselves. Pros bring nothing unique to the table other than their finely honed ability to suck up a fish's EV.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:02 PM
FlFishOn FlFishOn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 142
Default Re: My typical day

I've tweaked a full-blooded Lib. My day is complete.
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:12 PM
Drac Drac is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Columbia Heights, MN
Posts: 15
Default Re: My typical day

This study in no way supports your claims that daycare leads to superior mental development vs. home care. It says "if you use a better quality daycare you will get better results". REALLY? Wow, what a great discovery! I can only hope federal dollars were used to conduct this great piece of research.

My comments have nothing to do with judging the OP on her choices in life. Every situation is very different. Daycare quality varies a great deal from place to place in the US. I imagine that, like many things, daycare in Europe and other parts of the world is quite different than here in the US so we may not be talking an apples to apples comparison.

I'm a stay at home father (playing poker with small children around is nearly impossible unless they are sleeping). My kids stay home full time until they are 3, then go to a Montessori "school" for three hours a day, five days a week. This is certainly not like your typical American daycare facility and is much closer to a school. My daughter (1st grade now) benefited greatly from the social aspects of being with children her age. As she had nearly exclusive adult interaction for 3 years she needed to learn how to deal with other kids. I find it hard to believe that her mental development was hurt in any way by staying at home with me. She is at the top of the heap in her class and is much more verbally/mentally advanced than any of the other kids we know that went to daycare. Maybe she'd be in college now if we had sent her to daycare. Damn!

Obviously I'm dealing with a very small sample size (and possibly a small level of bias [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]) but I just don't believe that kids are better off on average spending all day in daycare vs. at home with a parent. I'd really like to see some of these studies that claim this is true. Clearly there are instances of terrible parents and terrible daycare. Let's take out the extremes and find some data to support these claims.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 11-17-2005, 07:32 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: My typical day

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that would be an ideal world for the fish, just as it would be ideal if we could buy other forms of entertainment for free. However, that is not the reality. The reality is that the fish attract the sharks, and the higher the stakes, the more sharks there are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, so we're down to what's realistic, and I think we both agree on the reality of how fish and sharks are distributed. The analogy I was making to the roulette game with different stakes is how the poker landscape would look without the pros, though of course that's not how things are laid out now.

The problem is that you seem to be justifying your existence by claiming that you exist. Are you providing the service of a higher stakes but lower EV game to fish? Sure. The higher stakes games are lower EV, as the players are currently distributed, so the value that you're claiming to add exists only because you do. You say that you're selling the service, but you're creating the service too, in its current form.

If we're going to evaluate whether professional (or even simply highly skilled) poker players offer a valuable service to less experienced players, there are a few questions we have to consider. What unique benefit to I bring in offering this service? If I wasn't around to offer this service, what would be the alternative? These are the relevant questions, and yes, they require the ability to imagine a poker landscape different than that in which we are currently working. So the "this is just how things are argument" doesn't wash: again, I exaggerate, but just because the mob was doing what it was doing and getting away with it doesn't mean that racketeering was a valuable service.

So, taking a look at the relevant questions; the unique value that pros bring to the table is their skill in seizing their EV from another player, which isn't a value to the other player at all. The skillful player isn't defined by the stakes he/she plays at, but defined by the amount of EV that he/she sucks up. A fish can play another fish - at .05/.10 or 50/100 - and have a neutral EV, or play a pro and have a negative EV. There's nothing unique brought to the table by the pro except for the EV loss, and that is not a valueable service; rather, it's one the fish would rather go without.

Secondly, in the absence of the pros, the service would be provided by other fish, and provided far more cheaply. If I sell a product, but in my absence that product - and a better, cheaper product to boot - would be supplied by the market, it's pretty clear that I'm not providing a valueable service. There's a definite measure of value: remove something, and is what remains improved, or diminished? In this case, what remains for the fish from removing the pros is at best unchanged, but certainly not diminished. Hence, no value.

[ QUOTE ]
If the fish chooses not to do that, then he is choosing the entertainment of higher stakes over the profitability of lower stakes. There will be financial consequences for that choice.


[/ QUOTE ]

And just to be clear, the choice of the fish isn't relevant here. We're talking about our choice: the impact that we, as skilled poker players, have on others. I've made a choice to profit off of the mistakes of others, and I don't feel badly about it at all. But I know that what I'm doing isn't productive, or valuable; rather, it's my benefit at the expense of others. That's pretty much the opposite. Barry Greenstein recognized this fact (and discusses it in his book), and so tried to bring some tangible good out of what he was doing through charity work. I'm not the least bit concerned with the choices others make, but problems can arise when individuals lose sight of the effect that their actions have on others.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 11-17-2005, 08:31 PM
OrianasDaad OrianasDaad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 476
Default Re: My typical day

Seven and a half years ago, when my daughter was born, my wife and I started working alternate shifts to keep her out of daycare. I worked at night, and she during the day. We didn't see much of each other, that's for sure! I started playing poker full time during her first-grade year. I don't play during the summer. It's working out pretty well.

The few times she had to go to a daycare provider, she went to the "neighborhood lady" who watched my brother and sister every day growing up. She's family. Cheap too. We still vist her from time to time.

The other time she went to a daycare provider was when my wife got a job with one. My wife quit after a short stint there, for various reasons. I won't go into detail, but it was the experience that proved to my wife that day-care was not a good option.

Long story short - kids grow up fast. While discussing your situation with my wife, we decided that there will come a time when Oriana (that's our daughter) isn't as interested in hanging out with her parents anymore. We want to get in as much time with this amazing person while we can.

As far as social interaction, school will provide ample opportunity for that. These years are for you to instill a set of core values for your child. Don't give up this right.

As far as increased learning, I can only say that my daughter (2nd grade) reads at about a 4th grade level, and is at the top of her class in almost all subjects. She attends a private school.

[ QUOTE ]
I sometimes feel guity spending all my time playing cards instead of doing some real work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Check your premises. There's a reason that you feel guilty for sending your child to daycare so you can do something that you don't consider as "real work". Once you understand where this feeling comes from, then you'll have a better time making your decision.

These years cannot be regained.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 11-17-2005, 09:26 PM
JayCo JayCo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 173
Default Re: My typical day

[ QUOTE ]
I've tweaked a full-blooded Lib. My day is complete.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yet another eloquent dissertation worthy of a Bill O'Reilly. Of course I just have to be a bleeding heart liberal to support pre-school or to find posts and attitudes like yours ignorant. But it is possible you've made (yet another) bad assumption regarding my politics- I'll be lobbying for McCain in 2008.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 11-21-2005, 02:14 AM
Drac Drac is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Columbia Heights, MN
Posts: 15
Default Re: My typical day

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've tweaked a full-blooded Lib. My day is complete.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yet another eloquent dissertation worthy of a Bill O'Reilly. Of course I just have to be a bleeding heart liberal to support pre-school or to find posts and attitudes like yours ignorant. But it is possible you've made (yet another) bad assumption regarding my politics- I'll be lobbying for McCain in 2008.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, to drag this waaay OT now. How the heck can you support McCain after he caved in to pressure to support Bush? That crap they pulled on McCain in 2000 was absolutely disgusting. Then McCain turns around and kisses Bush butt in 2004? I lost all respect for him when he did that.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 11-22-2005, 04:00 AM
JayCo JayCo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 173
Default Re: My typical day

[ QUOTE ]
How the heck can you support McCain after he caved in to pressure to support Bush? That crap they pulled on McCain in 2000 was absolutely disgusting. Then McCain turns around and kisses Bush butt in 2004? I lost all respect for him when he did that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm quite incoherent since it's 3am, but here goes...

I can still back McCain mainly because I think he's a man of integrity who also possesses a brain. IMO his party loyalty / support of Bush in 2004 came from his belief that it was in the country's best interest to do so, and he put aside his personal political interest to serve that. (He also avoids participating in and reacting to negative campaigning better than most, IMO- he came out strongly against the group trying to smear Kerry's Vietnam service record even while casting his support for Bush.) Having said that, it sounds like you & I agree that McCain was misguided in his support for Dubya then. However, he does strike me as a pragmatist who seems unafraid to diverge from blind adherence to the party line or to criticize this administration or his party if he feels it is merited (e.g., his public & active lobbying that Cheney is dead wrong to oppose an anti-torture amendment, his ongoing championing of campaign finance reform, a willingness to go across the aisle and work with Democrats on occasion, etc.).

Like any politician, he's far from perfect, but I believe he acts more out of conscience and a coherent, thoughtful perspective of issues. His actions generally strike me as attempt to actually get something accomplished rather than just acting out of blind party loyalty and/or political expediency. I have been periodically disappointed in his support of W (since IMO W's administration has taken the Republican Party and the country as a whole giant steps backwards), but as of today I see no other prominent politican I'd rather see in the Oval Office than McCain. While virtually every prominent member of the GOP openly critical to Bush's policies has become more or less silent or has been quietly pushed aside (Powell et al), McCain remains vocal and active in moving agenda items he feels important forward, oftentimes in contrast to White House public stances. (Let's not forget his classic Daily Show bit looking under the couch cushions for the elusive WMDs.)

I'm registered as an independent, but I'd be shocked if in 2008 I didn't end up voting McCain both in the Republican primary and final election.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 11-22-2005, 12:16 PM
Zetack Zetack is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 656
Default Re: My typical day

I'm somewhat skeptical of day care, although I'm sure there are some good one's out there. Pre-school, however, I feel is so valuable that even full-time stay at home parents ought to consider sending their kids. They do, however, tend to run 4-5 hours a day, not all day.

Let me throw my biasis out there though, cause they may have an affect on my opinion. My Mom was a stay at home Mom who didn't start working till I was a teen. But she thought so highly of pre-school that she actually helped to found one so I could go. (She'd been unable to find a montossori type program in our area when I was a kid and thought that was an important type of experience). and she was really commmitted to being a full time Mom. Educators run in my family and I have a huge bias towards that kind of thing.

I have a stepdaughter in kindergarden. My wife pur her in pre-school when she got divorced, the Grandparent's picked her up after pre-school and kept her till my wife got off work. When my wife moved in with me and quit her job, we made the conscious decision to keep sending her to pre-school because we thought it was so valuable. My wife did sub at the preschool and probably ended up being there once a week or so, including sometimes in our daughter's class so there was some interaction there.

Results? According to her kindergarden teacher she's the most advanced in her class in pretty much all areas. She blows me away with what she can do, writing, reading, math, computer skills... She's also bright, curious, full of life and energy--pretty much downright wonderful (OK, for you parents, yes of course she is five, she has the temper tantrums, the whines the...well you know the list--just like every other five year old). Now she's an incredibly bright kid, but pre-school was a very imortant part of her development, and for an only kid the social interaction just can't be overstated.

I also like pre-school, because many parents seem to be absolutely clueless when it comes to raising kids. My wife is now full time at the pre-school and its simply unbelievable what some of these parents think and do. Give the kid a little early sanity in their lives at pre-school eh?

Anyway, I'm skeptical of day care generally, as I said. And the joy of poker is the incredible flexibility it offers. If I were the OP I think I'd strive for a little more balance. Try a pre-school, have the child home a little more and then juggle the playing time so you still get the hours in that you need.

Just my take on it.

--Zetack
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 11-22-2005, 01:37 PM
boscoboy boscoboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 64
Default Re: My typical day

"I'm registered as an independent, but I'd be shocked if in 2008 I didn't end up voting McCain both in the Republican primary"

this is gonna be hard for you to do
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.