Hi Everyone:

I thought I would open this idea up for discussion. Most of us would agree that gambling addiction is a problem for some people and in extreme cases can ruin their lives. But is this also true for poker?

Obviously, if you lose at poker, being addicted to it does have the potential to cause some problems. But it's always been my opinion that it's okay to be an addicted poker player as long as you win at it.

All comments are welcome.

Best wishes,
Mason

Absolutely not, unless you define addiction in a way that removes the negatives, in which case such a discussion is pointless. How are you defining addiciton?

"Cause some problems" is such a soft inoffensive way to describe it. How about "destroy your entire life" or "cause everything you value to vanish"?

Poker unambiguous addictive!
The problem begins in losses as you said, so a player must to keep the laws Bankroll so the losses will not be extreme, which will make serious problems.
Is it okay? Each and his choice.

It comes down to definitions really.

If you are going by the clinical definition of "addiction", then by definition, no it can't be o.k. It means you put it ahead of everything. Health, relationships, career, everything.

You would not say (for example) "My girlfriend is addicted to running, she runs so much that she no longer gets her period and her hair is falling out, but that's o.k because running is good for you right?" would you? If someone is "addicted", then by definition its messing up their life.

In addition, what do you mean by "winning"? "Making a good living"? Or is ".85 bb/100 at 5NL" winning as well? Because then, once again, being "addicted" isn't going to be good for you, no.

Grunching.

Probably not. What defines the addiction is being unable to set and keep strict rules about play. This should necessarily compromise the life-balance continuum.

Maybe a Bobby Fischer of poker could handle it, but only for a definite amount of time before the result of neglecting reality seeps in.

Poker's not going to be around forever so it's important to live a balanced life and have a backup plan.

I have only been playing for about four weeks now, and I can see how one can get addicted playing poker online. I don't play with the rent $$$, just what I can afford to play with.

Great subject.

Addiction is about escaping one's actual existential, emotional landscape via an agent, whether chemical or behavioral ... as a way of life. That's never good in a holistic sense. It means you are attempting to displace all existential angst (anxiety, pain, emptiness, worthlessness, low self-esteem) via the agent. This is a disastrous course of action and goes against all philosophical and psychological counsel to "know thyself."

That said, one certainly can benefit from the intensity and energy pouring out of the addictive mindset. In poker, one can make tons of money. In endeavors of all kinds one can acquire great skill, talent, and accomplishment.

Ultimately, it is disillusioning to escape into addiction, even one with big upsides, if the casualty is knowing oneself, and even being oneself. Addiction erodes and destroys integration of one's actual emotions into one's experience of self. From there, they lurk destructively in the subconscious to profound detriment of the human being.

This is exactly what I have been dealing with in leaving the game lately (over last two years). One can modify an unbalanced relationship with the game, where it becomes a card game and job instead of the great escape. For me, playing was a huge diversion/distraction, and winning was like an injection of well-being and a total "float" over everything else.

That's not living your truth, which of course we all have difficulty with. To the extent a rational life includes being in touch with and dealing with the actual emotions and truths inside our consciousness, instead of escaping them, addicted playing is irrational and less than genuine. The human condition is ripe for it and rife with it.

The whole discussion assumes a big distinction between "addicted gambling" and "addicted playing." Mixing the two loosely doesn't get at the point. Addicted gambling obviously is disastrous to one's life, even if you have a run like Archie Karas. Addicted playing is far less toxic, of course, not of the same ilk, but still has the goal of escaping, but this time with the uncontrolled "thrill of gambling" element removed, or at least tamed.

It's a great subject. It's central to the experience of many, many players ... I would estimate the vast majority of non-casual players. I'll paraphrase some Objectivist psychology: If one's peak career moments are disillusioning rather than fulfilling, then the pursuit is irrational. I always felt exactly like that during huge winning streaks ... high of course, but also disillusioned. Poker chips and strip clubs are an effin' joke to the human spirit when they are displacing one's actual needs.

Practically there are a lot of marginal winners that play a ton of hours and win 5k-10k a year. They may or may not be addicted to the game but if they miss a lot of family life, are out till 5 am and screw up at work, spend ridiculous hours at casinos and miss out on kids baseball game, etc, does the fact that they win matter? Of course it's definitely better than being a big loser and hurting yourself financially but many people cause problems for themselves in poker. Still others win or lose are able to balance poker with the rest of their lives -- they may play a Lot (like others golf a lot, ski a lot, hunt a lot, etc) but balance it with work and professional lives. So depends on the individual a lot I think. Interesting topic.

I suspect the vast majority of regular and pro poker players are addicted to poker.
I don't think you can put in the time and effort it takes to become a winning player with out it.
But it can be managed and good players start playing emotionless.
But if you rush and tilt your relationship to the game indicates addiction.
There's a great desire to deny this for many reasons.
Try to stop playing poker for 30, 60 or 90 days and see what happens. You'll have the answer for yourself. If you react emotionally to that idea you should identify this as an area to work on.
If it's your living you should have enough put aside for a little sabbatical. Time away will almost certainly benefit you and your game tremendously.
A well known poker coach I worked with in the the poker boom said the great thing about the poker boom was that it would create enough addicts to last our lifetime. So far he's been proven true. I play B&M.
Mason, I think you can be a winning poker player who is addicted but if it has negative effects in other areas of your life you should modify your addiction to minimize or eliminate those.
But that's just like my opinion man...

Hi gandtaman:

But if you're a winning player, one of the negatives is removed.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi Shane:

But if you're a winner will this happen?

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi Synchronic:

I think you're describing someone who gets addicted because of his occasional big wins. But what about someone who's a more consistent winner and has good overall results?

Best wishes,
Mason

I know you're not fond of the sporting comparisons, but I think it's relevant here.

Athletes can get addicted to exercise, which although it might have some short-term performance benefits, over the long term it can lead to a number of maladaptive outcomes, such as body dysmorphia, depression and burnout.

I think gambling addiction could work the same. You could argue a mild addiction for a winning player could work as a motivator, However I think over time any benefits would be eroded by any number of physical and mental long term problems associated with gambling addiction.

It always comes down to what role the game has in the player's consciousness as to whether it is addiction. When one of the primary motives is escape (of wider life) or transporting oneself out of an otherwise dysphoric experience ... that's the voice of addiction.

Big wins by casual gamblers can give birth to a "gambling addiction." Separate topic from "playing addiction."

The edge player who is addicted to playing as an escape from wider reality (both external and internal realities) is a common phenomenon. Because it is common in human nature. No news flash there.

There's a book title out there called "Addict Nation." I haven't read it, so don't recommend either way, but I love that title. If you grow up in this culture, you are being seriously influenced toward addiction. Of course there are levels of addiction and at the mild end of the spectrum it isn't all bad at all. Nature of the beast: man. If you aren't Buddha-like, you are gonna be on the spectrum. So clinical addiction can be further defined as crossing a certain threshold of this escape/mood-alteration/alienation spectrum, where the entire strategy is to elude what is actually happening in the self. That's alienation, bro. If knowing oneself is rational, that is irrational.

But there is more than one problem with an addiction. How are you defining addiction?

Having one's mind fixated on any single subject is detrimental to the personality. There's a classic novel 'The Defense' by Vladimir Nabokov describing a mental collapse caused by obsession by chess.

The final position in that novel is actually a cute puzzle.

Hi Jeffage:

Excellent post.

Best wishes,
Mason

Like the old saying goes in poker, "it depends"

On it's own, an addiction is a problem no matter what. If someone is neglecting family & other priorities just to play cards it will never be ok, especially if it's also tapping into their life roll.

HOWEVER, if someone is seeing success and approaching it in a productive way (ie being focused, studying their game, etc and not just spending countless hours playing cards just for the sake of playing cards), I think it's more than just an "addiction" and I probably wouldn't ever have anything bad to say to someone like that.

In fact in that case having the traits of an "addict" is a benefit because you need to be passionate to the point of being an "addict" in order to be truly successful at anything. The problem is that it's harder to justify a strong work ethic & competitiveness with poker because of the gambling factor.

You could put in long, focused sessions while reading productively & going over hands and no matter what the outcome, a lot of people are going to look at you as a degenerate and think you have a problem.

This is rarely the case with athletes, artists, and actors.

For example during his amateur days, Mike Tyson would basically train from morning to night time. His "rest day" which was once a week was basically what a lot of athletes regular day looks like. On his free time, he would watch footage of old fights until he fell asleep. He pretty much breathed boxing.

If a poker player put THAT kind of dedication into their craft, they would probably have their entire family trying to set up an intervention even if they became a millionaire.

I think their best case scenario is a being a "functional addict"

Actors and musicians come to mind. So long as they show up for their paid appearances, they can do all the coke and heroin they want... but I doubt their families would say they're "okay".

Being a workaholic is another one where an addiction is conveniently overlooked because our society sees hard work as a positive.

In summation, IMO having a balanced life is always going to be best. From my outsiders perspective, having addictions of any kind seems kinda terrible.

Hi Elrazor:

I definitely agree with you on the athletes, and also agree that your other point can be valid especially if the gambling addiction gets stronger over time.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi ganstaman:

I'm not defining it. That's because an addiction where you win has to be different than a typical gambling addiction.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi Kid:

My comments are below.

Best wishes,
Mason

This is what most psychologists would say.

Again, psychologists would say that too much of anything is not good for you. Also, aren't you describing a workaholic here?

I can agree with this.

To others this is true. But if you understand how the large short term luck factor works this shouldn't be a problem.

I agree with both of these statements. But just because others think you have a problem doesn't mean you do.

Again, the issue here may be the short term luck factor. It's difficult to explain to someone who has little knowledge of gambling that you can have a large short term downturn and still be a strong winning player.

I agree.