Víctor

Let's talk about chess, poker, luck, and skill, because I'm seeing a lot of confusion right now. About me: I played poker for a living for 7 years. Now I coach chess. Chess and poker are both games of strategy. The strategy in poker is harder to see because it plays out statistically over many hands, obscured by luck. But it's no less deep. The top players in both chess and poker are wizards who will blow your mind with the depth of their understanding if you're lucky enough to get to talk to them. There's more luck in poker than chess, in the sense that luck plays a larger role in determining the outcome of one hand or session. But there is also luck in chess, in the sense that you can't predict what will happen in any given game. If you don't think there's luck in chess, you're not good enough at chess to understand how luck manifests. Poker is comparable to chess in terms of strategic depth, but it's like if at the end of the chess game, instead of getting a full point for outplaying your opponent, you get a 60% chance of getting 1 point and 40% of getting 0. The strategy is no less intense, it just isn't rewarded as strongly in one game. Playing poker is not the same thing as having a gambling addiction. Yes, some people have a gambling problem and it can be very harmful. But most poker players aren't gambling addicts. They just like to play poker. The degree to which the overall profitability of the poker industry depends on addicts is a valid question. There are many things we allow in society that have a potential for abuse. There are also many industries where a lot of the profit comes from a small number of "whales." Is poker particularly egregious in this way? It might be, but it's not that obvious.