Harvard Law School’s Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society is hosting a conference this Saturday entitled “Innovative Thinking: The Educational Value of Poker” featuring Jim McManus, Mike Sexton, and Dr. Alan Schoonmaker.
The conference will be a convening of academics, teachers, students, and other interested parties to analyze and discuss the educational value of poker. Jim McManus will present his new book “The History of Poker” (excerpt), analyzing past American luminaries, from senators to presidents to generals, for whom poker has been a significant aspect of their education. Mike Sexton will discuss the explosion of the popularity of poker, the lessons that poker teaches, and the manner in which the intense popularity of poker makes it possible to reach students. Alan Schoonmaker will present his article, co-written with David Sklansky, “Poker is Good for You”, analyzing the lessons of poker. The conference will be open, and anyone interested in the study of poker and in investigating the utility of poker is encouraged to attend.
For more information or to register for the conference (it’s free), visit http://gpsts.org/conference.
I’m disappointed that I won’t be able to attend this conference myself, and I very much hope that someone from 2+2 can bring back a thorough report. If you attend, please consider writing up a report- I’d be delighted to post it here and give you full credit.
I just scanned this article and have a quick counter to their main argument. They claim that poker does teach important life lessons. But the truth is that poker CAN teach life lessons, only if studied and approached methodically. Most casual players don’t learn any of these lessons because they don’t think critically about the game or about their play. Instead, they play to gamble and their mistakes are reinforced rather than overcome. That’s what makes poker dangerous — that there are losers.
I’ve wondered the same thing. I’m honestly not sure what percentage of players are actively trying to improve their games. Books like Harrington on Hold ‘Em sold phenomenally well, though, which suggests that quite a few players are at least kind of interested in improving. Not everyone spends hours reading poker forums, but they can still get some benefit from the game, I’d imagine.
When I raised this point at the first Nesson conference, Lederer had a fairly good response that even at the smallest stakes, plenty of pots don’t go to showdown. In other words, people aren’t just blindly gambling. Even in penny games, they are at least kind of trying. I’m inclined to say that even the losers can and do learn.
On the other hand, because many mistakes don’t manifest themselves in short term results, I worry that maybe people sometimes learn the wrong lessons. They regret making wise folds or take misfounded pride in bad calls because of the way a particular hand played out. So I do think that either some study of poker theory or a hell of a lot of experience is necessary to access the benefits. But as I said, the sales of poker books suggest that a lot of losing players are studying.