One Thing I'll Give Poker Players

I met Michael tonight at a bar called the Wild West, a large country-dancing bar in Houston. I've always found the patrons of the Wild West to be very interesting to observe. Since the focal point of the bar is a dance floor, the emphasis is on dancing. The stereotypical "Alpha Male" (or "top dog" or "stud" or however you wish to state it) of the Wild West is a strapped, square-jawed Texan with a cowboy hat, an award winning smile, and superior country dancing moves. The eye-catching women, like the highly sought-after females in almost any social setting, are curvy, blond, sexy, and complete with fabulous dance moves.

Michael and I, our lack of country-dancing skills rendering us both helplessly beta-male, lingered on the rail of the dance floor observing the action. We initiated one of countless similar conversations we've had in the past that focus on evaluating the modern-day dating scene. It's a conversation I think most women in our society would find discouraging if not downright revolting while men would likely find it either humorous or profound.

In our evaluation of the dating scene, it seems reasonable to label women as "stocks" and men as "potential investors". The long-term goal for most women is to find a husband while most of men don't have a long-term goal; they're just trying to get laid. This is the consummate conundrum in social interactions between single men and single women. As I stated to Michael tonight, "women are like tech companies trying to IPO for an obscene price in 1999, and the hoards of men lining up to buy are in for a letdown... unless they manage to sell right away [read: not get married]"

But talking about why marriage is generally an overpriced proposition for men and a sweet deal for women is (not only obvious, but) another entry for another day. What I wanted to say in this entry is that one of the things I like about poker players (the winning ones, anyway) is that based on my interactions with them, they seem more capable of putting emotions to the side in order to see things for their face value. In other words, they probably wouldn't object to the above quote that concluded the last paragraph.

I don't think people are usually quick to understand that in the same way stocks, houses, and cars can be evaluated both too high and too low, so too can romantic partners. However, I presume that many poker players I know (Mike McDonald, Ray Coburn, Shane Schleger, and Thayer Rasmussen, just to name a few) are capable of realizing this. And what enables them to do so is what makes them great poker players: the ability to evaluate their current reality in a calculative manner mostly free from the distraction of socially-programmed emotions. I believe it is these emotions that lead people to think a marriage contract will increase their value as an individual. It is no wonder unhappiness is a common byproduct of such an agreement.

Kudos to poker players for staying ahead of the curve. I suppose a relatively easy lifestyle is their reward.