In poker, what you don’t do or show in response to a deal can be a betraying as what you do.
The game of poker was best described to me as a game about people played by using cards. If you know your opponent very well, it really doesn’t matter what you have in your hand… just how you play the game.
The best hand in poker (At least Texas Hold’em) to be dealt is a pair of Aces. Against non-novice players, this hand will win a vast majority of the times it’s dealt. The trick is not to let people know you’ve been dealt it. You look at your cards and you start to think.
“Don’t react. First off don’t react. Okay, great hand… Do I play weakly and hope they play into me? What if they get ahead of me on a chance? Do I play strongly? Will they think I’m bluffing? Will they believe I’m strong and back off? Do I…”
And then it hits you… “How long have I been thinking?” In not giving any indicators… you give an indicator. The cæsura becomes just as much an enemy to you to betray the feelings you have. Your desire and need to hide a Tell has only created a bigger one.
I love Poker. While at the same time I suppose it should be more of a bittersweet acknowledgment of how deftly it reflects reality and the world around us.
end, part the first.
I dated someone (a while ago) that got into an argument with me over semantics.
We witnessed a couple (also) on vacation. The woman in the couple was walking about 10 feet ahead of her male partner who was following behind looking rather unhappy about the fact that he was dragging 3 large suitcases. The woman leading was carrying one small (personal?) handbag.
My (then) significant other noted that what we saw was how things should be. It was absolutely appropriate for him to be carrying the bags. I pointed out that he should be doing it if he wanted to.. not because it was expected of him. And thus the debate began. “Men should act in a chivalrous manner” vs. “Men should feel the desire to be chivalrous for its own sake not because chivalry is demanded”
As I was dumped within about 48 hours of this pronouncement… one can assume that agreement was never fully found.
To me the bottom line of this failed debate was that you do not live up to society’s expectations of you because society expects them of you. You live up to them (for lack of a better word) because you grok them or at least have made the conscious attempt.
Yes, you can fully do something for reasons that you are unclear on. But to deny the question of “why do we do this” is very foreign to me. Laws and rules are designed to aid society. I will happily stand up and state that there are laws and rules that exist that I disagree with in no uncertain terms. Do I therefore follow them blindly? Do I undermine them? Am I a radical felon hiding from justice?
I follow laws and rules. I’m also no fool, I will stand on the fifth amendment as to whether or not I have ever broken a law. But then again, let he who’s never driven over the speed limit throw the first accusation. That being said… following a law, rule, practice, or custom that I disagree with on a fundamental level takes careful consideration. Understanding of why I disagree with it. Doing my best to change it within the system if I reasonably feel it needs to be changed. And understanding the ramifications if it is broken. I may not wish to follow a law, rul… etc… but further, the consequences of violating it, may be more offensive.
At least in my world…
Truth is akin to conviction of belief with an understanding that your belief may always be wrong and that you must be open to change. The hardest part is hoping that others will afford you the same chance of change when their convictions are challenged.
The truth is… rarely are others open to having their convictions or belief argued with.