Player's Stories

Is Poker in Trouble?
By Jason Pohl

I'd like to take a quick break from strategy in this piece to address the critical articles by Nolan Dalla and Dave Cinch. At their heart, they question the integrity of the game of poker and the dream of many poker players: becoming a "professional" poker player.

The Tournament Trail

Like many others, I read Nolan Dalla's article with trepidation and concern. Of course I find the revelations of miscreant behavior on the poker tour upsetting, but I am not shocked. I am just as disappointed to hear about the rampant exploitation of steroids in baseball or explicit drug use in basketball, not to mention tales of unchecked corruption in both corporate and government leadership. These are our idols, our role models, and our legends; I had hoped for better examples. But, idols, role models, and legends are also human beings, flawed just like me and you.

Just like every celebrity industry, poker contains its share of losers and wannabes, it should also not come as a surprise that the poker community includes a number of deadbeats, cheaters, and troublemakers. Every community consists in part of degenerates and lowlifes, so why would the poker world differ? Of course, the significant and unique problem facing us is that poker gained a notoriety many decades ago that has not been completely shaken. Throughout the mid- and late-20th century, books and movies often depicted poker players as con men and hustlers, liars and thieves.

Fortunately, while the reputation is nothing new, it is changing. Recent media has shown poker players in a positive light. In the movie Rounders, Mike McDermott is an innocent, honest young player, overcoming adversity in the card games of New York City. In the TV show "UpClose", Annie Duke is interviewed and respected for her skill and profession, offering legitimacy to her career choice. And of course, the WSOP and other tournaments are featured several times on shows that air regularly on cable TV (and have earned successful ratings I might add), each with stories of skill and courage. Attitudes and opinions about the poker world are shifting.

The Dream of Professionalism

I believe it is important that I also address Dave Cinch's article, titled "No, You Can't Be a Professional Poker Player." I like Dave's articles, which are often humorous and filled with legitimate considerations. David realistically points out that there are many deluded individuals in the poker world who mistakenly fancy themselves as "professional poker players". He also highlights the enormous sum of dreamers who erroneously judge themselves as long-term winners. Of course, if you are a regular reader of the articles at PokerPages, the chances are that you have a more accurate picture of the percentage of winners and losers in the poker world; I doubt you're surprised or unaware of this discrepancy.

What concerns me more is Dave's strict interpretation of who are "professional" poker players, and his clear belief that professionalism in poker is nearly unattainable. He states, "The very idea of a professional poker player is some kind of fanciful notion by somebody who got on a roll and won some money, and then romanticized it into a deluded self-image of "professional poker player." Half the Tom, Dick, and Harry's in the world who get on a little run while the card gods are smiling on them take this as a sure indication that they are now professional gamblers... The very aspiration to be a professional poker player is a dead giveaway that the suspect in question is undirected, lazy, and no-count."

Dave is not the first person I have heard express this belief. It is a fact that very few players make significant amounts of money playing poker. Of those players, an even smaller fraction survive the long droughts caused by bad luck, because only a relative few have the discipline and money management to survive for the long term. But do you really have to be one of the biggest winners to be a "professional" poker player? What about the far more modest dreams of many players: they just want to play because they love the game and do not want to work in the corporate world. Can they not be "professional" poker players? Of course, I believe they can and moreso, far more players are professionals than are ever given credit. It is achievable and it is reasonable, but to make it as a "professional" poker player, you must first know what a "professional" poker player is.

Naturally, I also know my fair share of drifters who seek poker because they lack direction and believe winning at poker is easier than a "real job." Many try to become "professional" poker players and fail, because at its core, poker is a practical meritocracy. If you are the best player at your table, you will be rewarded by winning money (in the long run). If you are lazy, undisciplined, or untalented, you will lose. We all know that such opportunity for fairness does not always exist in the corporate or government environments. And yet, the direct reward to the most talented players is exactly the reason many love the game and enjoy trying their fortunes at the tables rather than an office. Paraphrasing David Sklansky in Alvarez's book The Biggest Game in Town, "You are rewarded directly according to your ability, not according to what people think of you."

Defining Professionalism

The articles by Nolan and Dave were separately written and printed, and on face, they may seem to be discussing two very different ideas. But in truth, the concepts of professionalism and professional standards are at the heart of both articles.

We need to redefine our goals. What is happening on the poker tour is nothing new. Alvarez wrote about the WSOP in 1981: "The seventy-five entrants in the big event are all mental athletes of exceptional ability, the fine tip of the pyramid of well over fifty million players. But they are not much to look at: mostly middle-aged and overweight, with sallow, pouchy faces, bloodshot eyes, nicotine-stained fingers, five-o'clock shadow." He's writing about our legendary players, pointing out just some of their flaws and humanity. But does that diminish from their poker skills? Of course not. They are legends for their skill, their cunning, and ultimately their results. Even when a legend dies broke and alone, we shake our heads and wish it had all been better for him; but he is still legendary.

And that leads me to the idea of a "professional poker player." It is neither a fanciful or ubiquitous notion, but instead is clearly defined. A "professional" is defined in several ways:

1. Conforming to the standards of a profession: professional behavior.
2. Engaging in a given activity as a source of livelihood or as a career: a professional writer.
3. Performed by persons receiving pay: professional football.
4. Having or showing great skill; expert:

Clearly, it is not impossible to achieve these standards playing poker. You must receive pay (i.e. be a winning player), show great skill (a prerequisite for long-term winning), and engage in the activity as a source of livelihood or as a career (career simply means "a chosen pursuit"). Notice that no mention is made of winning more at poker than one could achieve at another job. Nor does it suggest one must be rich or keep from losing his money on booze, drugs, women, or other gambling games. Being a "professional" poker player is technically just a matter of results. But that is not enough to be professional in the most positive sense. A consummate professional also conforms to the standards of his or her chosen profession. What are poker's standards? Doyle Brunson and his core poker treatise Super System provides a solid answer. He includes: courage, competition {with class}, and honor.

We cannot remove those players who are arrogant and argumentative, classless and crass, scandalous and shameful. It is understandable that many of our poker celebrities will own some of these negative traits. But celebrity is not equivalent to professionalism. Just as I choose not to follow the example of drugged out basketball stars or steroid-pumped baseball players, I choose not to live my life like many of the greatest poker players on the planet. I would love to play with the same world class skill as the greatest poker celebrities, those players who have won the largest tournaments and graced the photos of popular poker magazines. But I also want to be a professional with courage, class, and honor. I am no more perfect than anybody else, and I know of not a single person who would claim they are the model of what all poker players should be. But at least we can try; some of us will succeed better than others.

So, why should we kid ourselves into believing the best players are also necessarily the best people to follow on our path? If we want to change the perception or reality of the poker world, it is up to us to first enforce Doyle's poker standards in our own lives, and then surround ourselves with players of similarly high standards.

Beyond Ethics: Setting the Rules

We have a unique opportunity in the poker world today. A sizeable segment of the public views poker as a legitimate contest of skills and wills, intelligence and courage. Our community is growing at a phenomenal rate, and a new generation of players has grabbed the game with intensity, many spurred by the success of Rounders or other media. Soon, TV will offer us another long-term, legitimate vehicle for the promotion of poker into the mainstream, in the form of the World Poker Tour (WPT). I firmly believe corporate sponsorship is one step behind.

So, now is the time for tangible solutions. We've defined what it really means to be a "professional" poker player. The next step is to create a body of rules and standards to help enforce the ideals of Doyle Brunson and many other professionals. WPT has the opportunity along with tournament directors and cardroom managers to implement a higher level of ethics at tournaments and side games alike. The prohibition of deal-making, last-longer bets, and player-to-player sponsorships head the list of possible rule changes. But until then, let's not go overboard. We have focused on a dilemma. Our role models aren't so perfect as we wished. In the end, I guess we'll just find a new role model, even if that ideal candidate is hard to find. After all, there's always Mike McDermott.

If you have any questions, or comments, please feel free to email me at jason@pokerpages.com.

Previous Article | Article Listing | Next Article

Comments? Please post them in our Poker Forum.