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

The Hustler's MBA

tynan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 74 posts

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#61

Post by paborden »

victorhn wrote: post #46
paborden wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the poker thing was strange ... but he didn't fully lose me until the SECOND time he suggested becoming a pickup artist. Ugh.

Can you elaborate more about why do you think becoming a pickup artist is a bad thing?

The author is essentially saying that learning to manipulate women teaches you to think strategically. He wouldn't say it like that ... but that's very close to what he's saying. He's NOT saying that it helps you learn social skills (which IS valuable and IS NOT really the point of what pickup is trying to teach you, let's be honest).

I could go on and on about this. But this Quora answer knocks it out of the park so I don't have to. Her analysis is spot on:

http://qr.ae/8VDLj

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#62

Post by anewguy »

fmitchell0 wrote: post #5

It's definitely an interesting concept, but does assume a certain 'buffer' level of class and income level to go down this road. Having a home to be in while you 'get up to speed in poker', having parents that understand and provide some sort of boundaries at 18 years old, assuming poker winnings will be the base 'bank' for all other ventures, and assuming that the networks you make at school are not very important a…

The marginal utility of college is declining. Our near ancestors got a lot out of a college degree. The author is noticing that we won't get nearly as much.

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#63

Post by ptmx »

htmltablesrules wrote: post #29
coryl wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If its about luck, than why do we see the same familiar faces deep into WSOP finals? Luck is only relevant if you're playing for the short run. Professionals generally make decisions that favor them in the long run against natural statistical deviations. That's why playing against a beginner is incredibly hard; they make poor choices that don't necessarily result in poor results. But put compare the results of that b…

But how much money does a poker player burn through before he/she is "good enough" to play in big tournaments and win decent money? A couple hundred thousand? A couple million? It's like when someone wants to trade stocks/derivatives. They may lose massive amounts of money before getting their sea-legs and that is a price that is far too high for most people (and their families) to endure without gaining anything tan…

Pursuing poker as a career is usually a poor decision for a variety of reasons, but the cost of learning is not one of them.

The overwhelming majority of poker hands are now played online, and the limits go as low as $0.01/$0.02 -- in today's poker landscape, the winning players tend to be those who initially invest a small amount of money and gradually climb the ladder with careful bankroll management.

The opportunity cost, on the other hand, can be very high. Many people waste a lot of time trying to become good at the game without experiencing any meaningful degree of success.

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#64

Post by ptmx »

msellout wrote: post #50
CodeMage wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's break it down: 1. The author proposes to replace college by "a modern curriculum that, on average, will produce people better prepared for real life than college". 2. This curriculum "can be funded initially with $5000 for poker". 3. This is because after the first dedicated year of learning poker, "you'll be able to make between $45-60 per hour for the rest of your life". 4. If you follow this plan, your "chan…

It's actually worse than zero-sum for the players, because the house takes a cut. Usually the house takes about $200 off the table every hour (plus tips to the dealer), so the rake matters less for higher stakes games. However, it's not necessarily true that half of all current players are losing. Because bad players will quit, it is possible that a majority of current players are taking money from a rotating minorit…

Mathematically, you're correct that it isn't necessarily true that half of all current players are losing. It isn't even necessarily true if the pool of players is fixed, since the game being zero-sum doesn't constrain the possible distributions of winners and losers very much. The reality, though, is that the vast majority of players are losing.

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#65

Post by jhartmann »

hhabgood wrote: post #41
ssharp wrote: post #39

College is proven way to improve productivity and lifetime earnings. And it's scaled fairly well. And unlike poker, it's not zero-sum. "In fact, apart from very specific cases, I think that school is a bad thing, not worth doing even if it was free." Very wrong. You're not going to become a doctor, lawyer, nurse, accountant, etc. by playing poker and traveling. You're not going to get recruited by an employer because…

I believe he notes that if you are going to school to become a professional (i.e. doctor) then it doesn't necessarily apply. To your point, you also aren't going to become a zookeeper or programmer by playing poker or travelling, but you also won't necessarily become one by going to college. You WILL become one if you make the effort to do so, it doesn't matter whether it's in college or elsewhere.

I really think that is the takeaway that I got from the post as well. You become what you put your effort into, no amount of schooling is useful without the desire and drive to really make someone successful. While many of us here don't agree with the exact path he lays out, the gist of the message is to only go to school if you have a really good reason for going and the drive to make it worthwhile. Hustle and drive are key factors to success in this world, anything you can do to improve those will definitely be more useful then a college degree. These skills/personality traits are also not taught/picked up very well from classroom studies. I have been in college two different times in my life, and the first time I had no business being there. I was driven and wanted something the second time. Definitely much more useful the second time around, even though it was expensive. If you don't have that purpose and drive, go figure yourself out first.

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#66

Post by peacemaker »

runjake wrote: post #49
peacemaker wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make the point that playing poker is a crazy idea to rely upon and then go and say all you need to do is "create a product/service that creates recurring monthly income" How is that any easier or reliable?

For what it's worth, that's what this site is, well, used to be about. I can't answer to "easier" but if you stick with it, it's a pretty reliable outcome. 13rules' comment got me rather nostalgic about the kind of content and comments we used to see around here. And before anyone nitpicks, this account is only ~3 years old, but I had another for two years prior. Anyway, I welcome comments like 13rules'.

Oh me too, but I wouldn't want people to think just creating a business that gives you a recurring income is a simple thing to do. Neither is playing poker for a regular income.

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#67

Post by peacemaker »

13rules wrote: post #38
peacemaker wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make the point that playing poker is a crazy idea to rely upon and then go and say all you need to do is "create a product/service that creates recurring monthly income" How is that any easier or reliable?

If you commit yourself to playing poker 40+ hours a week, to improve your skills, get to a point where you are making $40-60 an hour, and do that as a full time job for a few years you can make money. What happens on a downswing? If you run into a string of bad luck and bad beats? You can be a great player and go for months without making money. Worse, let's say that you do this for two years. At the end of that two…

I both play poker and have had several business failures so I know what you're talking about. It's my personal opinion that both options are very difficult to rely upon for creating a decent, livable regular income. I'd also say both paths give you plenty of skills you can use in other fields.

If I had to choose between the two I'd pick the business route for the reasons you've listed. But relying on one or the other to work out and pay your bills is "crazy"

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#68

Post by qdog »

natrius wrote: post #60
qdog wrote: post #53

If one is disciplined enough to go for 4 years following a rigorous schedule, sure go for it. I doubt most people could follow this program for 4 years. It took me 8 years to get through college (those 9 am classes were too damn early...), and I had no idea what I was going to eventually do. Many people entering college are not highly motivated, and certainly not motivated with the iron will required to play winning…

"While going to Stanford or somewhere and getting a CS degree might pay off, you don't actually have to go to freaking ivy league schools if you don't have the money or want the debt." The idea that one has to go into debt to go to a top-level school is an outdated one. Every fancy school I got into was cheaper than the University of Texas after financial aid.

You didn't get the same financial aid at UT?

My impression is that if your family makes too much (ie: 80k or 100k/yr), you aren't getting anything but student loans.

A friend of mine went back to NYU a couple years ago to finish his degree while he was working, I think he still racked 50 or 100k in loans.

Obviously if you can go to a school with a lot of scholarships or grants, debt isn't an issue.

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#69

Post by qdog »

paborden wrote: post #30
potatolicious wrote: post #4

He lost me at the part where the secret to life is becoming a professional poker player. Because in a highly competitive game of chance you're pretty much guaranteed to come out on top to the tune of $50-60 an hour... Does this post strike anyone as completely f'ing delusional? Perhaps applicable to the author, one of the greatest card sharks alive today, but seems silly to the vast majority.

I thought the poker thing was strange ... but he didn't fully lose me until the SECOND time he suggested becoming a pickup artist. Ugh.

I thought he was talking about some kind of street basketball underground I wasn't familiar with, just skimmed past that.

Re: The Hustler's MBA

#70

Post by 13rules »

peacemaker wrote: post #67
13rules wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you commit yourself to playing poker 40+ hours a week, to improve your skills, get to a point where you are making $40-60 an hour, and do that as a full time job for a few years you can make money. What happens on a downswing? If you run into a string of bad luck and bad beats? You can be a great player and go for months without making money. Worse, let's say that you do this for two years. At the end of that two…

I both play poker and have had several business failures so I know what you're talking about. It's my personal opinion that both options are very difficult to rely upon for creating a decent, livable regular income. I'd also say both paths give you plenty of skills you can use in other fields. If I had to choose between the two I'd pick the business route for the reasons you've listed. But relying on one or the other…

Good point ... most poker players and entrepreneurs all have a little 'crazy' in them I think :)
Post reply on HN