Addiction diverts from and medicates the predicament ... escaping into a la la land of highs and diversion that forgets the existential "predicament" and what it feels like. It forgets and replaces one's experience-of-self-in-the-world, even one's self-concept, with the alternate experience.

"I would rather spend my life in a poker room and experience what I experience there, than experience my actual existential status and what that feels like. I would rather spend my days in a booze or heroin haze and experience what that feels like, than feel what life feels like for me otherwise." Etc. That's the motor of (psychological) addiction.

What i would say is Hi my name is Mira..my husband and i are Poker addicts, and we are fine with that. We will not be checking into rehab anytime soon. Hahaha. They say honesty is the best policy ey!

Thread was interesting until the dolt started posting his ramblings.

Grunching here, so apologies to anyone who's already covered this point.

I think we need to make a clear distinction between obsession and addiction. The way you seem to be characterizing poker would fall on the side of obsession, rather than addiction.

Addiction itself is an inherently negative aspect (of personality, life etc.) Addiction is a lack of impulse control, which results in reduced responsibility and impairment of life priorities. Addicted people are certainly obsessed, but the reverse does not necessarily hold true. Some could argue that obsession is addiction couched in positivity and productivity. Nikola Tesla - to use an example - was certainly obsessed with his work... Addicted? I wouldn't say. The same goes for others who were completely engrossed in their life's work. Is workaholism a true form of addiction? It can be, if it interferes with other facets and areas of your life.

Take two poker players. Both play 40 hours per week, both are +EV players, equally and properly bankrolled, and both think about the game non-stop. One eats healthy, stays fit, and has an active social life. The other is the opposite - doesn't take care of their health nor has a life outside of poker. Both are clearly obsessed. The former leads a balanced life. I'd argue that the latter is addicted, because they let their obsession consume their life. The one who leads a balanced life doesn't let poker consume their life, but let that be a part of it.

Good material. Bongfellow must think you are a dolt (since I covered the same material a while back). One exception I would take: the standard of addiction is more about escape from themselves than it is about consuming one's life. The two standards are related and with some serious overlap, but they are different.

It is foolish to try to get existential solace from a deck of cards ... as it is to try to get it from drugs. The addict is in violation of this, usually fairly ignorant of it, and in need of learning this.

The addiction experience is not unlike being on a treadmill. First one needs to see that they are on the treadmill, then they need to see the nature of the treadmill, then they need to see the nature of why they feel they need that treadmill "to survive."

Let's see your level again, bro.

Addicted means you do something to the exclusion of everything else. There is good reason for the phrase everything in moderation.

It’s almost comical. It’s about an hour drive to the room and I was going to make it in record time, something I often anxiously track, but for the first time since the very first time I made this drive, hundreds of trips ago, I missed my chute on the exit and ended up back on the highway. So instead, it was the slowest ever time.
The flurry of coolers continued.

1. I have A-Q suited heads up against a guy who raises pre nearly constantly. Flop Q-9-5. He called my check-raise, which he usually gets away from pronto. Right then I felt his strength. I know these things. But the turn comes a Q and there is no way under the sun to fold. Blank river and in spite of the strength of my hand, I just know, know, know that when I turn it over, a second and a half later, right on time, he’s gonna turn his over, as happens constantly in this cooler run, monster hand constantly beat, sure enough here it comes, 9-9 full house.
2. Next deal: I have K-Q of diamonds, he raises in position, heads up. I flop nut straight 9-10-J. Turn is a Q and he has A-K beating my King high straight with the only hand that will beat it.
3. Two hands later I have 7-8 of clubs, he raises, flop 5-6-7 two clubs. He takes my stack with A-K of clubs catching ace on river.

I move tables up in limit, old ploy to move through 3 levels if losing. This strategy once contributed to almost 100 wins in a row … if you win at any of the 3 you win for the session, generally. And I like to win.

1. I have pocket deuces. Guy raises on button. Flop 2-6-6. I check raise he moves in, and of course I fully expect a 6 to hit. It comes 3, J. He turns over J-6 of hearts, you know, right after I table my possibly winning hand. It isn’t release it to the dealer, it’s turn up the unlikely winner.
2. I have A-A … A-J of hearts on button goes wild pre, we get all-in … and then, flops the nut flush.
3. I have 10-10 on BB, button double raises. Flop comes 7-8-9 of spades. I have the black tens. I guess I should have folded. His pocket kings with Ks takes the pot, makes nut flush with As on river.
4. I have 5-5 and flop a set 3-handed. One guy with no win and one with 7 outs flush draw (after shippage on turn). I announced their hands and outs before river. Dead on. I lose.

The significant thing about the hands is that they are curing the addiction. It's withdrawal of a sort.

I don’t need a deck of cards. I don’t need the results of those trials to buoy me and to establish some counterfeit, hyped up sense of position in the universe, to cover up some deficient sense in this regard. I used to and that’s the crux of addiction. For the first time ever lately I even have an aversion to picturing myself in the casino … a lifelong high formerly. Ever since dropping out of school to play decades ago I’ve always been dependent in a profound way on this ploy. Not any more. End of addiction. And of course I have it in my head that the thing is a teacher, not a random event.

At this point I don’t even know how many of these hands are coolers. I do know this, I’ve never even heard of a flurry of coolers before, never used or thought of those words. My last 200 all-ins in 66 sessions, lost 192 as a huge favorite in almost all of them, and merely a huge draw in a few. The rote odds on this is definitely in the millions to one, as there have been constant 2 and 3-outer beats and one 1-outer.

Oh, and here are two of the winners. Guy that went busted the last two deals has A-A , I have A-J suited. It flops an ace, we end up all-in and I bust him 2 running hearts. Other one, I have Q-J diamonds up against A-A and J-J. Flop comes J-5-4, no diamonds. And I won the bleeping pot. I repeat, I won that pot. The decks is so upside down its outrageous.

Something else very strange. In this session, TWO ladies were apparently phobic on the escalator and approached me at different times about “help” riding it. One was very overweight and unsteady, and she was just afraid of falling. The other was a full-blown phobia, young gal in slinky dress, hand all over me and really panicking. Of course I’ve got my radar up about possible wallet or bankroll grab. But that wasn’t it. Real deal she was terrified. Two in one night??? Really?

Anyway, no one is in a better position to benefit from this run than me … and here it is at the perfect time. I don’t consider that random. That’s a Jungian teleological deal to me. Bet me.

Hi onehandatatime:

Some of what you say here was actually similar to the way I looked at poker many years ago. While I wasn't unhappy with my last real job, I viewed poker as a path to freedom and fully expected to make less money at it than I was making at my job at that time.

I also viewed poker as a tool to become healthier. Working five days a week and being called in for many overtime days is a lot different from poker. Also, in my case poker was sort of a supplement to something else I wanted to do, and this goes back to the 1980s, and that was to write about poker/gambling. In addition, I now had more time to keep my tennis game up. So everything worked out great for me

So with your attitude, I'm sure you have a good chance for much success.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi Synchronic:

I'm just curious, but do you ever have any fun? I suspect that's your real issue. You're not addicted to poker, you're addicted to being miserable, and I think a fair number of people have this problem. (So don't take this post personally.)

For people who want to be miserable, one of the best ways to satisfy this craving is to be a regular in a game that has a large short term luck factor. And from reading your posts in this thread, it's not the long term results that are important to you, and they should be to most winning players, it's the inevitable downswings that you may crave. And I suspect this is the case even if you're a winning player.

Let me give you a couple of examples how I have fun. The "top dog" under my name comes from a government union newspaper when I worked at the United States Census Bureau back in the 1970s. Apparently a number of "top dogs," also known as directors, retired within a few weeks of each other, and the union paper couldn't resist the headline. Of course, when I saw it I decided that being a top dog was something worth striving for so it's one of the fun things I do relative to this website.

The same goes for our name Two Plus Two as well as the gun you see on some of our book covers. These things were done for fun and it helps to make everything I do more enjoyable.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi Al:

I'm sure in some cases this is correct. But I think the opposite can also be true. Some people, even when they're married, appreciate being left alone some of the time. So in those cases, paying more attention to poker than to the spouse might even be helpful to a marriage.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi mira:

When I was a kid many years ago, I played a lot of tennis with an older man who was known to bounce his racket around. He always told me that it was cheaper to buy a new racket than pay for professional counseling.

Thanks for a great post.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi Hardball47:

You may be right in that I'm not distinguishing enough between obsession and addiction. On the other hand, when looking at your example, I would ask is there any reason to believe that the second person who doesn't take care of his health, etc. would do any better if he wasn't playing poker?

Best wishes,
Mason

Well, you already got more than you bargained for from me in this thread, because it just happened to be exactly where I was with the true addiction angle ... as opposed to the sort of layman type of addicted as you meant it. To each his own.

I won for 35 years before 2016 struck ... make that 33 of 35. I don't play to torture myself ... you are just seeing an obscene run of cards (that I have never seen before) which I admittedly don't take too level-headedly. . But your guess is pretty good, because, though I won't delve further specializing the thread, the nature of addiction is to hijack the pleasure/pain system of the brain in tenacious and insidious ways. Withdrawal is a bitch and there is very much a deliberate process of returning to balance. Withdrawal comes first and for me, losing equals withdrawal. I'd just never seen 66 sessions of cooler-ville, and that's what it took. After all those sessions I chronicled, it was the deuces full beat on river followed by A-A vs. A-J loss where I fully said ... "I don't even want to try to get that high anymore. I'm no longer invested in this game mentally OR EMOTIONALLY." Meaning, addiction over.

I give you credit for that guess, not that you need it but I'm giving it. Can't believe you had the expertise or balls to levy that against me. LOL> Fact is, the core of addiction, clinical addiction not just "ate up with the game" type stuff (which is a legit category of its own) ... is a hijacking of the pleasure/pain mechanism into the addiction and away from the demons.

I would say that the crux of the issue is whether any addiction can be classified as "good". We can agree that a drug addiction is bad and will ultimately lead to ruin if untreated. But what about a winning poker player? This person would be addicted to something that provides a positive return for every "fix". At least until the actual definition of addiction kicks in and any positive impact on their bank account is flushed down the toilet by the compromised social interaction and other traits associated with addiction.

Addiction is con (as in opposite of "pro") knowledge of oneself. "Con" is a good word for it in that it is a con job concerning our existential and emotional reality. If one esteems the philosophy to "know thyself," he or she concludes that addiction is disastrous to human beings. The "fix" of winning ( and its sudden disappearance) is exactly what I've written about extensively here. You sound like you have a very good handle on it.

Funny, I'm no longer invested in the game either financially or emotionally to anywhere near the degree that I always was. The last year, and the way I took it and processed it, did that. And that's a good thing. I might wander into the room once or twice a month, now, only very recently, without any (or much) of the baggage and investment I always had.

So I'm not being tortured by it now. Tonight. I stopped in. Third hand I'm sitting there I get pocket aces, one opponent SB. It flops a possible straight, and she has it of course, perfect gin for the one caller. Then the river comes an ace so I can beat all hands except the straight. Just more LOL.

The next deal I got three aces beat again. Two aces on board we each have ace, I check raised him and he smoothed, played small ball ... check, check on river. His kicker is bigger.

Two deals later. I have A-4 of clubs, button raises, four to flop. A-A-8. Check around to button, he follows, SB over-raises, and I'm sitting there with about $100 more than the raise. WTF. It looks to me like he could be just blasting the BS follow bet ... if he's got an ace of course I must be crushed. I don't have the answer to the flippin thing. I just shove myself. He indeed had a bigger ace, but I caught the 4. This kept me, I believe, from tying the all-time record for getting trip aces beat on the first lap played (would have been three times and I'm betting many have had that, but none have had it four times in first lap, or any one lap). I'm just a little hypersensitive about crap like this after a year of crazy coolers.

Get ready to laugh ... I took that as a sign I was going to own the guy. Nitty game, any serious move before flop took the pot, but every time he shoved his little stack (kept buying in for minimum $60), everybody folded and I called him and beat him.

When they are dealing you voodoo, you gotta play some voodoo. That's my story.

But none of it matters much. The game is not in the role of "agent of an addiction" for me any more. This last year's experiences, my reading and writing, including in this thread, ended that. To be clear: an "agent" of addiction is the chosen substance or process that gets you high. The game is no longer in that role for me. That doesn't come easily. So, quite a valuable little thread, imo.

There are feelings underlying every psychological addiction, such as helplessness, emptiness, anxiety/fear, pain ... and the desire to escape. It's way down there under layers and decades of crap stacked over top of it. A return to the scene of the crime - when the impulse to escape started taking over - with willingness to be aware instead of unaware, is what is needed. Just trying to quit the agent without bringing up the reason for its use, is usually a shallow "recovery." As the statistics bear out.

I'm your huckleberry if you want to understand an escape from self poker addiction. Not because I'm an expert, because I'm not.

Glad I found the ignore button just in case someone else decides to post a good comment.

It's really helpful, isn't it? I wish a mod would either ban this guy for refusing to listen to them and other members or at least lock this thread.

mod incoming one time, ban this donkey plz.. green, red, purples where ya at?

I keep checking but don't see that anyone has actually reported one of his posts (maybe I missed it), which is the proper way to ask for mod action instead of publicly like this.

I hate this thread. The title's question is answered by a clear 'no' unless you change the definition of words, which makes for a rather useless thread. But, it was started by Mason, and Mason is responding to Synchronic, so I'm not going to be the one to lock it or ban him.

However, I will state again what I stated almost 2 months ago: this is not a thread for posting bad beats. There are other places you can do that. Posting them here does not add to the discussion in a meaningful way.

I know a few high functioning alcoholics. I'm totally fine with their addiction as it doesn't ruin their non-drinking life. Like them, poker addicts are fine if it doesn't ruin their life outside of poker. It's not a problem until it is. The question will lead to subjective answers, and who are we to judge what's ok or not anyway?

Sure why not that sounds about right. Got a question for you though, what does a high functioning alcoholic look like? Cause the word alcoholic gets thrown out and my mind automatically assumes and associates a lot of negative things. Please explain, I am truly curious. Thanks in advance

One of my female friends drinks about two bottles of wine a night each night and still makes it to work in the morning and run marathons in sub-four hours. Her and her boyfriend came to visit me in Sydney from Melbourne, this is how it went: Their flight in the afternoon was delayed so they went to the bar at the airport for a few drinks. Then they drank on the plane. Then they met me at a bar at about 7pm and drank non-stop till 2am. The next day they invited me to lunch at 1pm where they started drinking, then we went to see a band at the Opera House where they drank all night. Then we went to play pool, but since Sydney has lock-out laws where you can't get a drink after a certain time at night, they left to go back to their hotel where they had pre-stocked alcohol. Then the next day they invited me to lunch to have a few drinks before their flight.

A colleague admitted that his first day of not having a drink for 24 hours in a calendar year was in September. He was notoriously known for drinking anyone under the table. One evening he drank 25 pints of beer then walked 7km home. Didn't affect his work life at all.

I think you'd be surprised at the chronic alcoholism in Australia and the UK.

The most famous example I can think of is the Canadian snooker player Bill Werbeniuk (Jimmy White and Alex Higgins also come to mind). Try drinking 43 pints whilst playing world class snooker then going to a pub for a "real drink".

I think there are Problem players and Pathological type -players of this type since 1980 are considered to be persons DSM-IV disorder patients. This disorder often progresses, the player loses control of his game and the cash budget. So the addiction is ranging