Ethics of professional poker

I had never really thought about your a or b points here, as I have never noticed either of those happening.
I guess that I don't really like either one happening, but that they're not as bad as other things discussed here.

I do object to showing your cards to a single person though. Not only is it against the rules, but it is unfair to other players, especially if the fish starts returning the favor. I also don't think that it leads to a collegial environment to have two players sharing information. If you really want to start showing your hand for that reason, just turn it up to show everyone.

lol @ people explaining away their softplay…

I’m pretty sure 100% of softplay could be explained away… he/she is my friend wife sibling etc. or he/she is a degen “trust me guys”

The truth is gambling and problem gambling more specifically isn’t some black and white thing. It’s probably closer to a spectrum.

Pro poker players might not exhibit the problem gambler as much as a losing rec. But when I see guys in the room every day who are breaking even at best and might not be considered problem gamblers by most , its still not normal behavior. Society would view someone who plays that much as a problem gambler even if they’re winning. Some people believe it or not (even if you’re winning) will claim it’s not a real job and thus you’re still a problem gambler for spending that much time at the casino. Usually these people don’t understand skill games vs house games.

If I’m putting long hours into something and not seeing a benefit that in and of itself could be viewed as “problem gambling”…

Basically where do you draw the line on who’s a problem and who’s fine?

It’s a slippery slope to allow any form of soft play bc most people will rationalize it away as harmless.

Again soft play and playing poker aren’t the biggest crimes here. There is a moral relativism that makes a ton loads of activities worse in comparison.

But then we could just rationalize any unethical or bad behavior by saying there’s always something worse out there.

Well the people didn’t change but their circumstances did. We live in America in 2024. People can’t afford to pay their credit cards, mortgages or groceries. However they still find money to play poker with and think it’s going to be a way to create some income. You’re playing against people living paycheck to paycheck. And until the government and economy changes that isn’t going to change. Casinos don’t go out of business very often. No matter what the economy is doing

I agree with this statement but don't fully agree with how you apply the logic of "problem gambling" being on a spectrum. For instance, you say:

If behaviour is "not normal" then it does not necessarily follow that it is a problem. It certainly doesn't follow that this "not normal" behaviour is harmful and therefore addictive. If someone is regularly losing and under financial stress, however, then the social consensus would be likely be they are a "problem gambler".

Saying that "society would view" playing an excessive amount of poker per week as problem gambling does actually have a precedent. In some states in Australia if you play more than 35 hours a week or 12 hours a day, then it is considered excessive, problematic and potentially harmful, to the extent players will be temporarily banned from playing. In this respect, society's view is equivalent to government policy, although whether this is the majority view is less clear.

The 12/35 hour daily/weekly threshold is largely informed by psychological research on slot-machines and online sports-betting. I don't believe this research has considered poker at all, but it would be interesting to see how the research would regard winning or even break-even players, since the issue of "harm" would de debatable. Can you say, for instance, spending less time with family and friends because you're playing poker is harmful? You'd probably only have a case for saying it is not harmful, if you argued that poker was a genuine profession.

If someone plays golf several times a week, spends thousands of dollars on a golf club membership, spends more money on lessons, lots of money to get the newest clubs, etc., but is an amateur who will never have a chance to make money golfing, would people say he has a "golf problem"?

They are sometimes called "golf tragics" or "obsessives", which suggests their passion can be harmful. Let's not forgot all those aspiring pros who lose money trying to make it (due to high travelling expenses/lack of guaranteed income). But considering golf is a recognised profession society is less likely to view it as harmful. Also golf is considered a form of healthy exercise and leisure activity (irrespective of the "golf rage" you will see regularly on the course/driving range).

ding ding ding

if it’s making problems with his personal life then the answer would be yes

the analogy has some aptness but it is not totally accurate. Golf is an outdoor social daytime (mostly) sport. Poker is an indoor, antisocial (you are literally taking peoples money, even if they are "friends"), night time game.

Obviously one is just "better for you" than the other, and that's the case for most sports. Anyway, to address the broader point you're trying to make, when does a hobby become a problem? Obviously there is no definitive line if you're not losing a lot of money and in moderation poker could obviously be part of a healthy social life (home game with actual friends where you don't lose too much).

Why golf is not poker, is because while poker and golf can be healthy, for a great many people, poker is just bad, and for some it is worse than bad. For golf? Yeah, maybe the unluckiest guy got hit by a ball once...

randomly came across thread.. figured it fits here.

cash game.. flop J9x one diamond.. ck to me, I bet with KJ.. turn K diamond, ck bet call.. river brick.. ck ck.. I table KJ and opponent says "I was so close" and show Q10dd.. everyone so locked in on the missed straight flush draw, the boring straight was missed.. during the next hand, I was replaying in my head and was like "I think he still had a straight" to which other players confirmed as well.. dealer denied it as he didn't want to admit he pushed the pot to the wrong player.

I redid the pot in my head and gave him what he should have won (rake/promo removed)..

pretty sure I'm a lock to get into heaven now.

Given the takes in some other threads, in before people start saying it was wrong for you to pass chips at the table.

General society doesn't just assume the golfer has a problem but it does assume the poker player has a problem. Not sure about you but I've never seen a movie about some dude punting his kids college fund to get his golfing fix but I've seen lots where about people destroying their families to punt off at the poker table.

I don't play golf, but I can't imagine there is typically as much friendly conversation on the greens as there is at the poker table.
While the walking outdoors part is healthier than sitting at a poker table, many people use golf carts which takes away most of the exercise.
And poker is good for older people to keep their mind sharp in a way that something like golf isn't likely to do.

What is bad about golf is not getting hit by a ball, but losing (spending) lots of money on the hobby, as I mentioned. People who play golf once a week could easily spend more on the hobby than fairly poor poker players who play once a week.

A few people have mentioned that people are losing money they may need to pay the bills. That is probably true in lower limit games, but if they weren't playing poker they would likely be losing that money on other casino games or even on the lottery. And I play mostly with people who own businesses or are retired from a career where they got very well paid, not people living from paycheck to paycheck. I don't think many poor people are playing in higher limit games where poker pros gravitate.

The movies are not real life, and a movie about a degenerate golfer would likely be very boring.

Though I don't really know any of these movies. Which films have there been about a poker player who is destroying his family due to his gambling addiction?

It's a good point in that there are many expensive hobbies and losing at poker could be an affordable hobby.

I would reject this idea with other forms of gambling. I think it's just bad to be a person who spends a big chunk of their money and life mindlessly mashing slots. No child aspires to that.

Poker is kind of half way in between. It can be legitimately fun in decent doses. While it might be legit fun to play craps on vacation, chronic gamblers are miserable SOBs.

It is mentally stimulating and sociable.

However, it is still gambling. Maybe some people really do have a golf problem but gambling addiction is common. I think some addicts get drawn into poker and sports specifically because they believe they can win, while they know they can't beat other stuff.

While it's not the worst thing, if someone said in your next life you can spend 1000s of hours and 5-6 figures on a hobby : skiing, golf, restoring classic cars, collecting art, rare books, gardening, etc. losing at poker would have to rank pretty low.

Most of them could win if they tried to learn. They're successful businessmen, retired doctors and lawyers, etc. who know a lot about their field. They're not stupid and mostly speak intelligently.

But they don't try to get better because that would take some studying time away from the table, which isn't fun for them.

Most of them even realize that their results would be better if they played tighter, but they come to the room to play, not to fold and watch. They can afford the losses, although they prefer to win than to lose, they enjoy the experience of playing poker badly more than they would enjoy playing the way winners do.

Golf clubs are often country clubs. In the minds of the average person belonging to certain clubs is a sign of great prestige, even if its a poor investment of time and a significant portion of someones income, the membership itself is seen as an asset.

But yes people do say things like this are a problem eventually for poor people who invest too much in a hobby. Magic the gathering, which I played at an extremely high level, is often cited as a problem for many of the players. Many people spend too much in both time and cash on the game and have no chance of getting better. In fact, tbe most delusional people I have ever known were mtg players and thats saying a lot. But having a magic the gathering problem is much less often cited as a problem than gambling games at a casino because it isnt considered gambling. The same is true with stock exchanges, real estate ventures, etc.

But even more so with golf because the activity itself is seen as prestigious. owning a nice pair of golf clubs and being a member of a sought after country clubs are prized assets.

Even so, if a poor person spends all his free income joining a club where invariably they are a bit of a misfit and cant even get the ball off the ground, and are spending money they cant afford playing golf it will be seen as a problem.

I agree that some of these other activities are seen as more respectable than playing poker. But that doesn't mean they are actually morally better activities.

In regards to the actual ethics of poker, I think they are best answered in Benjamin Franklins
work “on the morals of chess. “ which was written during a time when Chess was seen as a vice and a gambling game in early America. Its been a while since Ive read it but he carefully lays out a case that Chess has value despite not producing anything tangible and being a gambling game.
I think despite its trappings, like Chess, Poker has value as a game. And like Chess, a normal person wont want to spend hours dissecting its mysteries, they would rather go to the club or work on cars, or go golfing etc etc. But the game itself is good imo.

I've played many, many hours of golf, at a serious amateur level. I was a member of an exclusive country club for many years. I've worked at golf courses, golf retail stores and warehouses. I've probably suffered as much, if not more, pain and misery on the golf course as at the poker table. Overall, I'd say in terms of financial return for my labour, poker has been more beneficial (taking into account country club fees, amateur tournament fees, golf equipment, golf lesson fees, physiotherapist fees, golf psychologist fees as well as wages earned from various golf jobs). Ironically, I started playing poker via home games with my golf buddies. Also, let's not forget there was a strong gambling element to golf back in the day before the professional tour became so lucrative. And let's definitely not forget poker is a game of a skill with a gambling element. When a professional golfer enters a tournament they are taking a risk as well, since they ONLY make money if they make the cut; I've worked alongside a number of pro golfers who were probably net-losers in their golf careers after travelling expenses (and that's why they were selling gatorade in the pro shop and teaching bored housewifes and OMCs how to stop slicing off the tee).

I don't know, I found the table chat at most poker tables really low level. It has been commented before that maybe I'm out of touch - maybe I am, I was playing nosebleeds with people mostly double my age, but I would hardly call the conversation intelligent nor friendly and many times it was downright caustic.

IMO Sopranos S2 if you haven't seen it is the perfect encapsulation of how it can go from bad to worse for an ordinary hobby gambler. Obviously it's dramatized, but it's exactly the person you described, someone who has done well for themselves, is well-to-do, but just goes down the wrong path and gets in over his head gambling which is VERY ****ing easy to do. Many of the successful players here including myself have had the experience of just ****ing up and losing way more than one can afford to.

Yeah this right here basically ends that particular thread of discussion.

Maybe in my "next life" I would have different interests and talents, but none of those things seem interesting at all to me now.

Of course, I don't really know what losing at poker is like either.

Dont know that its ever been the main theme of a show or movie but it was a pretty common theme when i was growing up. That and the farmer betting his ranch to call in all in

Y'all know that golf is a gambling game, right?

It most certainly isnt. Just because you can gamble on a game doesnt define the game itself as gambling. Otherwise, basketball, politics, galas, polo are all gambling games. To a seasoned gambler all sorts of things could be perceived as plus ev gambling activities. “The nfl, great gambling opportunity! The stock market? I use a system of options and penny stocks to turn the stock market into my personal slot machine! Candy Land? Not a childrens game, its another skilled gambling opportunity with soft opposition to leverage my dice control abilities!”

Those arent gambling games though. If you were to say that lots of money has been wagered on golf and golf is very amenable to gambling, then thats a different story and also correct.