Poker? But I hardly even know her...

Sorry for the corny joke, but I couldn't get it out of my head.

Writing is harder than you'd think. I have hundreds of ideas buzzing in my head, but none of them really are connected. So let's stick with the poker thing.

I love poker. And poker is one area I don't discriminate in; I will play any brand of poker. Texas hold 'em, seven-card stud, razz, omaha, blind man's bluff, if you can explain and deal it, I will play it for money. This probably relates back to my gambling issues, but hey, why spoil a fun time with mentions of possible pathology and addiction issues?

I think what I love about poker is two-fold. One, I love to gamble. I like to take my money and put it against someone else's, and let the better man win. Two, and more importantly, I love the game. It is a game of skill and luck; one is given bits of information, and each hand requires individuals to take the information given, deduce a correct strategy, and then bet money on this ability. Of course, one cannot mention poker's skillful elements without granting an honorable mention to its other side, the luck factor.

I don't mind luck in poker, for the same reason I don't mind randomness in the world. It keeps things interesting and fresh. If I wanted a predictable game of pure skill, I would play chess. While I like chess, I like poker a lot more. It is not just because the pool of people willing to put money on cards is much wider, it is because each game is different. If I play the same person in chess ten times, the games will begin to bleed together. We will use similar openings each games, in fact, several of the games might turn out almost identical. If I play the same person in poker ten times, you will get ten very different games.

Here is a thought: taking the luck out of poker would invariably reduce the amount of skill it takes to be good. To be at poker not only requires analytical and mathematical skills, but the ability to compensate for the luck factor. If the game was purely math, it would become just like blackjack. A trained monkey could become good at blackjack. Hell, there are computers that can play perfect blackjack and would always win money in the long run, if casinos let them try. Same thing with chess; they have chess programs that can compete with the very best chess players in the world. They have yet to invent a poker-playing computer program that can compete with the best poker players in the world.

Poker requires a skill that a game with no luck factor could ever have; it requires the ability to be adaptable.