|
Moral and Practical Dilemmas to Full Time Grinding
I had a serious conversation the other night with Sara about online poker, which reminded me I had meant to write about my hang ups with playing so much online poker. If I had had the success of Danny/Max/Sauce I can’t imagine I’d have any second thoughts about spending a significant amount of time playing poker. With the financial success that comes with being the best of the best, all doors of opportunity effectively remain open. The utility of my time spent over my poker career (2006-present) weighs in at about $4/hour. In economics they use a concept called opportunity cost, which means the cost of doing something can be measured by the ‘value’ of the opportunity you pass up. In a strictly fiscal sense, I would have been better off putting on the McDonald’s cap and taking orders from stoned/wasted college kids on the graveyard shift. If, as I get older, I continue to spend so much time on my present craft, will I be forgoing better opportunities? How great is the opportunity cost of playing online poker?
I’m not sure anymore whether the addiction came first, but in the beginning I truly loved poker. The potential to get rich, as well as the autonomy that comes with being a professional poker player were greatly appealing to my teenage self. Now that I’m a little older, wiser, and experienced from my numerous failures, the freedom to do what I want when I want is my greatest driver to continue studying and playing poker.
My mom in particular really hated online poker as it contributed to me dropping out my first semester of college in 2006. My dad has always been one to let me make my own mistakes, but even he was noticeably frustrated with my addiction to online poker as it caused me to badly manage my time. In 2007 I got a full time job, took some night classes, and used basically all my remaining time to work on improving at poker. This was the time of my life I was most obsessed and fascinated with poker, if I was in the same circumstances today I wouldn’t have dedicated half the time I did then to poker. By the end of 2007 I had a 10k bankroll and my parents had softened their opposition to me playing online poker, mostly due to me doing a better job reconciling real life responsibilities with my favorite activity. In 2008 I made my first attempt at making poker my sole source of income; looking back it’s easy to see why I failed. The greatest reason was poor bankroll management, but there was also a lack of discipline and not a strong enough work ethic to succeed. I remember Fnord telling me to shoot for 1500 hands/day. I could not muster 3 hours of grinding/day, and I’m not sure I’d be any more successful today despite having greater discipline and awareness of what it takes to make it as an online pro.
The zero sum aspect of full time poker – your financial gain means someone’s financial loss – is the classic explanation for why poker is a bad way to spend one’s time. I remember Pokerroomace, a former poster on FTR, had moved up to 1kNL before this moral argument became too powerful for him and he [mostly] stopped playing. These days I think this is a weak justification for not playing poker. Here’s an excerpt from former Leggo poster Somnius that debunks it nicely:
Another common mindset held by poker players and others alike, is that taking other people’s money while contributing nothing tangible in the direct exchange is a vice. An understandable grievance, it’s hard not to feel that way even a little bit sometimes. But to cast such an opinion is almost to say the value of the exchange is only realized in the exchange itself, the direct transaction the end in itself. This is simply not true. Sure, many capitalist transactions allow all parties material gain, but many don’t. When they don’t, another instrument of justification is usually applied, i.e. entertainment value. I’ve seen that used in this poker debate, definitely applicable. Nevertheless, my main submission is that it doesn’t even matter, the exchange is not the end.
To paraphrase, not all market exchanges produce winners on both sides. Poker is not unique in that sense. He goes on to remind us that the fish are playing poker to have a good time, and so long as you haven’t been a jerk you have contributed to their enjoyment of playing. The end result of the exchange does not represent the entire value of the exchange.
The zero sum nature of poker isn’t my greatest concern. Whether or not I should be contributing more to my friends, and more generally to society, is what bothers me the most. When I look back on how I spent my time in my 20’s, will I be satisfied that so much of it was spent in such a self serving way? Yet I struggle to think of an alternative to poker that is attractive as well as viable. Besides the lolmilitary, I’ve never heard of an ‘exciting, well paying and fulfilling’ job that was hiring young adults without a college degree. I don’t want to join a monastery or move to Africa to deal with the overwhelming poverty and hunger either. I’m not so selfless as to leave my blessings untapped. I do volunteer in my home community, which in the past has helped alleviate moral guilt that stemmed from being a serious poker player.
In the day to day sense I’d say online poker has proven over time to be a practical way to spend my time, since I make a little money and – in the best moments – challenge my brain to think creatively and under pressure. These are unquestionably good things. I just don’t know what I might be missing in the long term.
YouTube - Jesus Christ Was An Only Child - Modest Mouse
|