subject: A Definition of the Good and the Bad Qualities of Poker Players [print this page] A very clever Soviet satire is written about a con artist set out to win a bunch of money from a small town chess club. He convinces the avid members that he is a traveling master of the game and wishes to organize a tournament for the assembled group. He, of course, charges an entrance fee from all the players and proceeds to play "twelve identical matches" without a clue as to what he is doing.
This is the second chess match he has ever played, but he manages to place the pieces somewhat correctly and makes his moves to the awe of those surrounding the board. Like lots of folks when in the presence of greatness, they read a lot into the moves and pay close attention. Soon after beginning the games, he loses all of them but still keeps his sense of humor. The town is utterly amazed, but by then he has had the required time to run off with the entry fees. So, our traveling maestro may be a lousy player, but he is a winning one.
The novel is The Twelve Chairs of which there are both English translations and film adaptation DVDs actually available from Amazon.com. The first film adaptation of the book was actually a Mel Brooks comedy, which is a loose adaptation, recommended only for Brooks fans. The best Russian adaptation is the 1976 mini-series by Mark Zaharov, one of the greatest Russian directors of all time, though he may not sound as familiar as Tarkovsky.
At the heart of the satire is that a good player, poker or otherwise, can be defined by what his goal is. The fictional con man of the satire was an effective chess player because his goal was to make some money and run, and he did just that. In addition, he was ever so cognizant of his shortcomings as a chess player and structured a plan to play fast and get out with the money before the townsfolk were onto him.
There are numerous poker players out there who do not recognize their lack of ability. Poker players are blessed with an overactive ego, possibly due to the riskiness of the game giving the players a certain bravura. Unfortunately for them and fortunately for the good player, they didn't get the concept that poker is a complicated, demanding game which requires education and hands-on experience to succeed at all. For those who are clear on the concept, the game can be most profitable.
There are also the players who have simply learned a set of rules they strictly follow without applying much thought or trying to improve radically. They conceal their inferiority carefully enough to convey the impression of competence and mostly win in terms of overall profits. If that is their sole purpose for playing, than they may be called good players.
If one would look at poker as an art form, the above types of players do not cut the mustard as real players (we dare not call them bad players). True they sit on the stage of the poker club, do their little act, but they are not stars. The good poker player understands that the real joy of the game lies in learning its complexities and is eager to learn and to develop skills by experience at the table as well as reading the abundance of literature devoted to the game. Poker is a game of skill, theater, perception and strategy. The good player will be his own best critic and learn to emphasize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses to fully enjoy the game.
A Definition of the Good and the Bad Qualities of Poker Players
