|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: AQs-playable to all-in reraise? | |||
| yes |
   
|
58 | 55.77% |
| no |
  
|
46 | 44.23% |
| Voters: 104. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
06-12-2005, 09:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, I voted no. I think I'd be thinking about that guy the rest of my life and it just ain't worth it to me. I'm a winning player and I'll just look elsewhere for my game. [/ QUOTE ] I'm quite sure that you are either lying or kidding yourself. If it's the latter, I am certain that, while licking your chops, you would find a way to rationalize sitting down. That is, if the thought at all, even crossed your mind not to. You play poker to win other peoples' money. Period. 
|
|
#2
06-11-2005, 12:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
I have seen variants of this post before. Usually, it's along the lines of "If Charity Case A sat at your table..." or "If Degenerate Gambler Mr. X wanted to play you." Typically, the thread assumes that you would win 100% of the time against whomever sad-sack you were playing.
Here's the thing that makes me vote yes every single time: he would do the same to me. It's like asking a soldier in war if he would not kill the opposing soldier because the guy on the other side is a horrible shot. And another thing: the word parasitic continues to be thrown around for how our game is. I disagree. The outcome of poker is nature and natural selection at almost the purest level that humans can achieve. Life is a zero-sum game. Do you think a lion ever shows mercy when he's hunting?
|
|
#3
06-11-2005, 01:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
[ QUOTE ]
Life is a zero-sum game. [/ QUOTE ] You're totally wrong and it's not even close. There is no way human society (Life as far as you are concerned) is a zero sum game. I hope you're just trying to do some macho posturing here, otherwise, you're a sociopath.
|
|
#4
06-11-2005, 04:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
First of all, penguin...do you even know what a zero-sum game is? A zero-sum game is where there is a winner and a loser. I defy you to tell me that the grand majority of life(by life, I don't mean just human beings) is not clearly defined in those terms. Nature is a vicious place of winners and losers. Don't believe me? Watch Animal Planet or the Discovery Channel sometime.
Second of all, what you stated in your post seems to be a knee-jerk, boilerplate reaction to a concept which is not an indictment of life or value systems. What you sound like is someone in the throes of a preprogrammed hysteria. Lastly, I would not make a habit of denouncing someone as a sociopath. That is a very loaded term, and should not be taken lightly. I have never committed a crime beyond a speeding ticket. I pay my taxes, attend church regularly, and hold down a steady job. I have many friends, and most people who meet me seem to like me quite a bit. The words usually used to describe me are caring, compassionate, and sweet. All of this is to say that if you are going to insist on going through life undergoing irrational reactions to phrases, I suggest you seek professional help yourself.
|
|
#5
06-11-2005, 10:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
[ QUOTE ]
First of all, penguin...do you even know what a zero-sum game is? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I know what zero sum games are. I'm not sure you do. [ QUOTE ] A zero-sum game is where there is a winner and a loser. [/ QUOTE ] No. A zero sum game is where the amount won by the winner is equal to the amount lost by the loser. "Most economic situations are non-zero-sum" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum (along with every damn economics course I have ever taken) Robert Wright - "society becomes increasingly non-zero-sum as it becomes more complex," [same article] I stated in my post "There is no way human society (Life as far as you are concerned) is a zero sum game." I guess I was wrong there, you obviously think we live by the law of the jungle (since a system of laws in a civilized soceity is another non-zero sum game, you can't think you live under that). [ QUOTE ] I defy you to tell me that the grand majority of life(by life, I don't mean just human beings) [/ QUOTE ] I am pretty sure I said that I did mean human beings. I'm a human being, and I'm assuming you are too. Do you seriously think that if I'm hungry I should just kill and eat you? If not, stop trying to use lions to justify your arguments. [ QUOTE ] Lastly, I would not make a habit of denouncing someone as a sociopath. [/ QUOTE ] Ahh, but you think life's a zero sum game, so I should do whatever I can to "win" regardless of the people I hurt. Lets say calling you a sociopath causes you 1 unit of annoyance. If life was a zero sum game, then not calling you a sociopath would have caused me 1 unit of annoyance. So 1) If life is a zero sum game, you can't complain about me calling you a sociopath, and 2) since not calling you a sociopath wouldn't have caused me one unit of annoyance (perhaps 0.1 units for having to change my post), there's another non-zero sum situation. I'm not going to get (further) into personal insults, so snipped the rest of your post.
|
|
#6
06-12-2005, 01:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
Ah, screw it. I had this long rebuttal planned out, but I realized that I've been fighting on message boards all day long over absolutely nothing.
Penguin, you are right, and I am wrong. Maybe I could intellectualize my way to a reasonable position, but frankly, I'm tired, and I'm tired of fighting. I'm no sociopath. I am a decent man who is normally a moderate thinker, but I was trying to take a hardline position because I believed that is the only way to be about poker. Maybe it is, and probably, I'll think the same thing in the morning. But now, I'm tired, and I just don't want to fight about how cold and calculating I really can be...when the truth is that I'm a softy, and I'd no more play this guy than have sex with a drunk girl.
|
|
#7
06-12-2005, 11:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
[ QUOTE ]
A zero sum game is where the amount won by the winner is equal to the amount lost by the loser. "Most economic situations are non-zero-sum" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum (along with every damn economics course I have ever taken) Robert Wright - "society becomes increasingly non-zero-sum as it becomes more complex," [same article] I stated in my post "There is no way human society (Life as far as you are concerned) is a zero sum game." [/ QUOTE ] You are reducing the situation down to the individual. The fact that two people can both seemingly benefit(economically speaking) from the same transaction, without it costing someone, is an illusion. This is because there are systems in place designed to create this illusion. I can promise you that for every two people who are percieved to be both profiting from a given transaction, there are others somewhere else in the world that are paying the price for this to be possible. Now, it may or may not be exactly two, and it may or may not be exactly the same amount of money. But by Zero-Sum, I am not referring to the fact that an INDIVIDUAL must gain exactly what another individual loses, but that as a whole (human civilization in it's entirety), there is only one constant energy (capital). There is no extra money on the table, so to speak. It can niether be created nor destroyed. It can only be transfered from one to the other, with the process benefiting some, and costing others. If not on the scale of the individual, then as competing societies. Economists and writers that claim otherwise, are either ignoring or discrediting the big picture. There is ALWAYS cost. So the next time you mistakingly think win-win, just think of all the people around the world that have died or been enslaved (either knowingly or unknowingly) to afford such a seemingly perfect opportunity.
|
|
#8
06-13-2005, 01:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
[ QUOTE ]
First of all, penguin...do you even know what a zero-sum game is? A zero-sum game is where there is a winner and a loser. I defy you to tell me that the grand majority of life(by life, I don't mean just human beings) is not clearly defined in those terms. [/ QUOTE ] This assumption is contrary to classic economics, which assumes that all voluntary transactions are Pareto efficient (i.e., utility maximizing). In other words, if I pay you $10 to mow my lawn, and you accept and mow my lawn, you value $10 more than the cost/effort it took to mow my lawn, and I value a mowed lawn more than I value $10. It is a win-win result, not a zero-sum result. A zero-sum situation would exist if we both were in an airplane and there were only one parachute. Zero sum situations also frequently arise in life. However all of life is not zero-sum.
|
|
#9
06-12-2005, 09:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
[ QUOTE ]
There is no way human society (Life as far as you are concerned) is a zero sum game. [/ QUOTE ] Oh, how wrong you are!
|
|
#10
06-11-2005, 07:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: So.... would you sit at this table.
[ QUOTE ]
Here's the thing that makes me vote yes every single time: he would do the same to me. It's like asking a soldier in war if he would not kill the opposing soldier because the guy on the other side is a horrible shot. [/ QUOTE ] I disagree. It is unlike war because, especially online, you can choose your battles. If you are in a war, and you can win the war by fighting only the battles you want, it's a whole other game, IMHO
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
