There was a pretty interesting article in Thursday\’s Wall Street Journal about a recent gathering at Harvard University, which set out to bring together some of the brightest minds in academia to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that poker is a game of skill. (Uh duh.) Howard Lederer was the main poker dude on hand, along with famed Harvard Law Professor Charles Nesson, Annie Duke, Andy Bloch, PPA honcho Michael Bolcerek, and a number cruncher who wants to run the math on billions of hands.
The WSJ\’s unscientific poll is currently running 77-23 in favor of skill. Read the article and you\’ll see this isn\’t about rehashing old theories and debates … because really, what do you think the poll results would be if we asked: \”Is life primarily a matter of skill or luck.\” I am guessing 77-23 might be pretty close to the results here, too.
In the article, Lederer espouses a new talking-point argument that I hadn\’t yet heard/thought of:
The \”vast majority\” of high-betting poker hands, he says, are decided after all players except the winner have folded. So if no one shows his cards, Mr. Lederer says, \”can you legally argue that the outcome was determined by luck?\”
Cool stuff — and good to see, in the ivory towers at least, a growing recognition of how some of what is currently shaking down in the poker world reaches into important future matters of internet law, international law, international business, and economics.
After his strategy session wrapped up, Prof. Nesson led the group to a bar for drinks. He was delighted, he said, at how the group \”pushed game theory to the level of metaphor.\” Sipping a scotch on the rocks, he tossed out the idea of creating a poker university, with himself as one of its teachers. Then, \”we could infuse all levels of education with the skills that come from poker,\” he said.