Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Teach your kids poker, not chess

momentofdeep.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 242 posts

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#111

Post by mod »

bush-bby wrote: post #3

>However, it is important to distinguish poker from a pure game of chance, like roulette. I feel like this is becoming an all too common trope on social media and for young people, where poker is portrayed as a risky but cool thing to do because you can convince people you’re skilled or better than others at it, and that means taking other peoples money with skill. Which is indeed something cool. Sure there’s reading…

I doubt it's very important, but you've got this pretty wrong.

Poker isn't a game of chance. It's a game of skill with an element of chance.

Kinda like life.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#112

Post by mod »

Bostonian wrote: post #2

There is an element of chance in chess. Whether an opponent plays an opening you have recently studied and how many mistakes your opponent makes is out of your control. The author says poker teaches you to focus on the process rather than the outcome. A chess player who wants to improve will not assume that winning a game means he played well -- he will analyze the game later, perhaps with a chess engine.

That chance lies with the player's outcome, not within the confines of the game. Poker has chance built-in to the game, where chess does not.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#113

Post by gwd »

jrockway wrote: post #37
mirceal wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mtg is poker on hard mode. You don't know what the opponent's deck has in it or what combos you need to defend against. The game meta + competitive play are wildly entertaining.

I've never played MTG, but do people "net deck" in that community? I've played other card games and I usually know their deck after seeing the first couple cards. Sure, maybe they added some special flare, but most people cut-n-paste from the Internet. (And those decks crush people that don't, unfortunately.)

I played in a MtG draft tournament once, and it was great. It gives everyone a level playing field (barring chance) and adds another whole level to the game. I got my butt handed to me in the "real" tournament. I've since run little draft tournaments with friends on occasion, and it's been a lot of fun -- nobody has to invest any more money than the packs they buy for that day; and nobody has to invest time play-testing decks to have a decent shot.

I tend to spend my time on other things these days, but if I wanted to get back into it, going for draft tournaments would be the way to go.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#114

Post by keiferski »

Chess is one of the few competitive games that hasn't been overtaken by an obsession with money. Sure, chess competitions have prizes, but the focus is on the skill of the player, not the prize amount. Chess also has an illustrious history going back thousands of years, which to me is almost more interesting than the game itself.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#115

Post by HPsquared »

routerl wrote: post #95

Nah, teach your kids chess, so that they can exercise their deductive/calculating muscles during that golden phase of childhood in which our brains are malleable enough to easily learn new languages: realize that artificial languages (i.e. deductive systems) are all functionally equivalent, and use chess as just another avenue into building deductive fluency; use multiple such avenues (e.g. music, Euclid). Call this…

Chess is logic, poker is rhetoric.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#117

Post by saagarjha »

le-mark wrote: post #39
dragontamer wrote: post #20

How about we play competitive Pokemon instead? Its got all the reads, bluffs, random chance, meta-gaming, math and strategy, and none of the gambling. ------ Don't get me wrong. Poker is a great game. But if we're talking about "reading" the opponent, relatively simple decisions that have deep mathematical backgrounds... a large variety of "simultaneous choice" video games (Pokemon, being a turnbased game with 60% to…

I’m a noob when it comes to Pokémon, I only learned to play with my kids. Seems like Pokémon alway devolves to who has the strongest (most hp, best attacks) characters. Sure there are all the special attacks, deck manipulation that can be done but it seems very shallow to me. What am I missing?

When playing against friends–sure, because everyone loves to spam Hyper Beam when they're playing for fun. Competitive Pokémon is entirely different.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#118

Post by awild »

derivagral wrote: post #51
dragontamer wrote: post #20

How about we play competitive Pokemon instead? Its got all the reads, bluffs, random chance, meta-gaming, math and strategy, and none of the gambling. ------ Don't get me wrong. Poker is a great game. But if we're talking about "reading" the opponent, relatively simple decisions that have deep mathematical backgrounds... a large variety of "simultaneous choice" video games (Pokemon, being a turnbased game with 60% to…

I grew up on Pokemon & MTG. Got competitive, made the Tour, etc. I am not sure I want to repeat this with my son. A friend is going through this with his child ( The upside is that a healthy exposure to "work doesn't equal outcome", risk calcs, and reading people are very helpful lessons to learn, so personally I'm a bit torn on this. I wonder if there isn't a happy middle ground these days that doesn't require a "bu…

I've recently got back into Card games after growing up on mtg, and there is a whole bunch of games where you don't buy random boosters but whole expansions. Netrunner/nisei being an example. They seem to still work with fomo, but you don't have to invest past a certain point to get actually creative/expressive play and deckbuilding.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#119

Post by croes »

danenania wrote: post #69

I believe it's Theory Of Poker by David Sklansky that has a great section in the beginning comparing poker to other games, and specifically to tennis, which I've never forgotten. I read this like 15+ years ago, so I'm paraphrasing, but it explains the core of why poker and other games mixing skill with chance are so counter-intuitive to humans and difficult to learn compared to games that are primarily skill-based li…

>in a skill-based game like tennis, the quality of your results will almost always correspond exactly to the quality of your technique

No it doesn't, you forgot the opponent. No matter how good you play, if your opponent plays better you lose.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#120

Post by wisty »

HPsquared wrote: post #115
routerl wrote: post #95

Nah, teach your kids chess, so that they can exercise their deductive/calculating muscles during that golden phase of childhood in which our brains are malleable enough to easily learn new languages: realize that artificial languages (i.e. deductive systems) are all functionally equivalent, and use chess as just another avenue into building deductive fluency; use multiple such avenues (e.g. music, Euclid). Call this…

Chess is logic, poker is rhetoric.

It's a bit like how the Spartans (IIRC) taught their kids to lie, cheat, and steal as long as they didn't get caught, because that's how the world works. Unfortunately, this kind of society seems doomed to collapse.
Post reply on HN