Chess And Poker Games
I haven't played poker yet. My ordinary mind somehow associates poker with gambling even though it also acknowledges there's much skill in this game.
I've only watched poker matches, probably if I concentrate better, I may understand the intricate details of how it works.
Even the basics are not sticky enough to be retained by my mind. It's a problem of will and not much interest overall of the game itself.
Chess, that I've played on and off. I like the game because of the structured thinking it brings to my mind, often overriding the emotional flows that try influencing my decisions.
You have to think a couple of moves ahead, anticipating what the opponent could do and planning your response accordingly. And all of this is happening against the backdrop of a deterministic setting that provides a sense of control and predictability.
With poker, the backdrop is that of a probabilistic landscape, uncertainty reigns and the ability of managing incomplete information.
Unlike chess, where the board is fully visible and the outcome hinges solely on strategic choices, poker introduces randomness through what is called the shuffle and deal.
You can play perfectly and still lose due to a bad draw.
This probabilistic nature is why poker feels less intuitive to me. It demands comfort with ambiguity, which clashes with my preference for structure.
Why do I gravitate toward chess?
If you and your opponent play the same moves every time, the result will always be the same. It’s like a math equation: input A + B always equals C.
Thanks to randomness in poker, the cards you’re dealt are unpredictable, and having skill (betting strategy, reading opponents) does indeed influences the outcome, however chance also plays a significant role.
Probably Determined
I think one of the main reasons why both games are popular in terms of getting mainstream attention is because how applicable they are as a mental model/framework to view life itself.
Is life probabilistic or deterministic?
A simpler answer could be yes and no. But there's "or" in the question, which implies picking one over another.
How about think of it as a spectrum rather than an either/or choice?
On one end, you have situations with high control such as solving a math problem or following a recipe. Because of skill and logical thinking that dominate, these are chess territories.
Also, I’ve observed that the spectrum of control in life often depends on how much information and influence you have over a situation.
In chess-like scenarios, you tend to have more visibility and control over your actions, like when you’re building a piece of furniture. The outcome largely depends on your effort and decisions.
External factors such as other people’s choices, market trends, or even the flimsy weather introduces uncertainty in poker-like scenarios.
You can prepare, but you can’t control everything.
At least for me, this duality is why both games resonate, since they teach us to navigate life’s mix of certainty and chance.
On the other end, you have low-control situations. It's not necessarily under your control if your joke lands well at a party, for example.
These are poker territories where you manage probabilities and adapt to whatever cards you're dealt.
Square Peg In A Round Hole
In terms of process and outcome, I feel that chess is overly straightforward.
Chess feels like a debate where the better argument wins. Poker feels like a negotiation where you’re never sure who’s holding what.
Life rarely gives you a clear board like chess. More often, you’re playing poker, making decisions with incomplete information, hoping your read on the situation is right.
Most of life happens somewhere in the middle, hence a spectrum we move back and forth based on the context and variables at play.
I think that at least removes much of the either or mentality with the rigid need to control everything or surrender entirely to chance.
Here's an interesting observation that's not hard to notice.
It’s people (myself included) tend to get frustrated when they apply chess thinking to poker situations - trying to control what can't be controlled - or poker thinking to chess situations - leaving to chance what they could actually influence through skill and preparation.
*Thanks for reading!! Share your thoughts below on the comments.
Quite an interesting read! I love how you’ve related these games to real life situations. Chess is indeed way more straightforward than poker and poker requires this extra skill but they both require one thing - focus.
!PIMP
@hopestylist here!
Indeed. Focus is an underlying theme with both. Even a little distraction or trying to wing it could spell disaster in terms of outcome. Arguably, practicing focus is harder with poker. The background setting is more lively.
Thanks for stopping by :)
And that’s why poker is more technical. You need focus and you don’t too, lol. Anyways, I don’t play poker. Only seen it in movies.
!PIMP
Congratulations @takhar! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 45000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP
I am familiar with both games but I don't gravitate towards them as much. Chess is quite tasking even though the board is well exposed and displayed.
I like the secrecy that poker exudes. No one knows the hand that they'll be dealt with. It is mysterious 😁
Yes, the mental energy consumed for chess can heat up the mental operating system very quickly lol.
I like the mysterious aspect of poker, inspired to develop a poker face because of that but not faring well in that domain. Still easy for me to laugh at nothing seriously worth laughing for :)
Thanks for stopping by :)
😂😂😂
My pleasure
This is a brilliant mental model. The chess vs. poker spectrum is a perfect way to frame life's uncertainties. It strongly reminds me of the shift in physics from the classical, Newtonian worldview to quantum mechanics.
For centuries, the universe was seen as a giant, deterministic chess game where every effect had a clear cause. Then, quantum physics revealed that at the fundamental level, it's all about probabilities and managing uncertainty—a cosmic poker game.
Your final point is the most crucial one: the real skill is knowing which game you're playing at any given moment. Thanks for a truly thought-provoking read.
Good way to frame it, in terms of quantum physics revealing the probabilistic aspect of the universe. In that model, it's probable that randomness always plays a part on how everything is unfolding but this may also be happening within a deterministic framework already in place. Say moving from point A to point Z, via land, the sea, or the air, maybe teleportation too. Many variance but still the same two points.
Yes, that last part is really an ongoing process of getting good at reading the situation. And these situations themselves can be dynamic also as they unfold.
Thanks for stopping by :)
That's a fascinating way to put it—the "Point A to Point Z" framework. It adds another great layer to the model, capturing that tension between a set path and the random variance in between.
A real pleasure exchanging ideas with you.
The best sportsbooks are the ones that combine fair odds with smooth usability. According to one mybookie, the site offers competitive lines across NFL, NBA, soccer, and even niche sports. That kind of coverage means you’re never short on betting opportunities. The same review mentioned their bonuses are transparent, which adds value for new users.