Speaker 1: Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, a show about making
Speaker 1: better decisions. I'm Maria Kanakova.
Speaker 2: And I'm Nate Silver. Today on the show, we'll talk
Speaker 2: about former President Donald Trump, who was convicted last week
Speaker 2: on thirty four at Filamy Charges.
Speaker 1: And we're also going to be talking about an update
Speaker 1: from the first week of the World Series. I'm going
Speaker 1: to go into some of the psychological mistakes I've seen
Speaker 1: people make. But we're also going to give a big
Speaker 1: shout out to Nate, who is deep in an event
Speaker 1: of his own, fifteenth out of over twenty five hundred
Speaker 1: players who started this event.
Speaker 2: And this week Thursday night, if you listen to this
Speaker 2: on Thursday, the NBA Finals begin. The Boston Celtics are
Speaker 2: at home against Dallas Mavericks. There's a big gap between
Speaker 2: betting markets and Cisco models. We will discuss why.
Speaker 1: So, Nate, before we get into the Trump verdict, I
Speaker 1: want to talk about I just want to nod to
Speaker 1: the fact that you're even here this morning, so in
Speaker 1: at like four thirty am, so I'm back on the
Speaker 1: East coast right now taping this from New Haven. So
Speaker 1: I get a text because as it turns out, I
Speaker 1: forgot to turn off my phone, so that was good. Sorry,
Speaker 1: it's okay, it's okay. Then I turned it off after
Speaker 1: that from Nate saying, you know, just bagged for the
Speaker 1: day in the fifteen hundred six Max. I am number
Speaker 1: fifteen of like three hundred and something left in chips.
Speaker 1: I'll still make the recording. And this is ten am
Speaker 1: my time, so Eastern time at seven am, Vegas time,
Speaker 1: and Nate is here and let the record show risky
Speaker 1: business listeners. Nate is a much more devoted host than
Speaker 1: I am, because damned if I would be recording after
Speaker 1: bagging at two am, five hours later, I would have
Speaker 1: sent a text to everyone being like, guys, we're really
Speaker 1: really sorry, we can't record today. I am fifteenth in
Speaker 1: chips and right now recording is negative ev for me.
Speaker 1: So anyway, Nate, thank you for being here. Let's get
Speaker 1: into Trump, so we'll.
Speaker 2: Talk about that. But look, I mean it happens. We're
Speaker 2: going to talk on this episode about kind of real
Speaker 2: life intruding into best laid plans, because we'd be hypocrites
Speaker 2: if we if we didn't. By the way, I don't
Speaker 2: want to make this Trump thing about us and me also,
Speaker 2: but It's another thing that, like, I did not plan
Speaker 2: on Trump getting convicted of all these felony charges while
Speaker 2: I was out at the World Series, and that also
Speaker 2: kind of blew up a day. But you know, we'll
Speaker 2: talk about Trump first on his own terms and then
Speaker 2: in the polast I would get more into planning versus reality.
Speaker 1: So let's do that. So, as our listeners probably know,
Speaker 1: last week, former President Donald Trump was convicted guilty on
Speaker 1: all thirty four charges that he was up on in
Speaker 1: New York. So Nate, let's talk about that. Let's talk
Speaker 1: about what that means. And actually let's start with the
Speaker 1: fact that you said that you did not expect this
Speaker 1: to happen while you were at the World Series. Is
Speaker 1: that because you thought that the verdict would be later
Speaker 1: or because you did not expect him to be convicted
Speaker 1: on all of the thirty four charges.
Speaker 2: Marie, I think you would probably have a better term
Speaker 2: for this than I would. It's a cognitive load kind
Speaker 2: of thing. Does some extent. I think people who are
Speaker 2: able to navigate multiple tasks are able to kind of
Speaker 2: shut things out and say I'm going to ignore this
Speaker 2: for now. Right at some point I understand that like
Speaker 2: Trump is before this jury, and if you've actually like
Speaker 2: looked at prediction markets, I'll took about that on the
Speaker 2: show from time to time. They had expected a verdict
Speaker 2: last week, and in fact expected a guilty verdict more
Speaker 2: likely than not. But no, this is not like two
Speaker 2: kind of the smart sharp traders. This is not an
Speaker 2: unexpected outcome. Trump had not been I didn't watch the trial,
Speaker 2: I want to be clear about that, but by the
Speaker 2: conventional wisdom people who watch it more closely, Trump had
Speaker 2: had not offered very much compelling argumentation. He had fallen
Speaker 2: asleep at various points during the trial. I think he's
Speaker 2: a little bit defiant obviously about seeing it as an
Speaker 2: opportunity for like a campaign exercise, spin exercise. And you know,
Speaker 2: I assume he thinks he won't go to actual jail
Speaker 2: at any point, although there's some chance in theory that
Speaker 2: he could. We are not legal analysts. I don't know
Speaker 2: if we're going not for much opinion about like is
Speaker 2: this the right case quote unquote to bring against Trump.
Speaker 2: I'm here to analyze public opinion a little bit more.
Speaker 2: And our guess is about what effect this might have
Speaker 2: on the polls most members of the public, if they
Speaker 2: were aware of the trial at all, did not expect
Speaker 2: a guilty verdict. I think because Trump has kind of
Speaker 2: of skated by so often with with relatively few consequences
Speaker 2: to become president after all for four years and may
Speaker 2: become president again for another four years. Expected there not
Speaker 2: to be consequences for his actions. So that's one reason
Speaker 2: why you might expect it to affect the polls, is
Speaker 2: because it comes as a surprise to to rank and
Speaker 2: file voters.
Speaker 1: But isn't it true? And please correct me if I'm
Speaker 1: wrong that New York is the only state where he
Speaker 1: has actually faced consequences because he did have to pay
Speaker 1: for you know, the hush many payments he did, and
Speaker 1: the defamation earlier, which.
Speaker 2: Is a separate case, right, and each Jan Carol sexual
Speaker 2: assault case. So yeah, New York is kind of and
Speaker 2: and you know, I don't know how much you want
Speaker 2: to get into the I mean, this was considered of
Speaker 2: the four criminal cases, which is separate, by the way
Speaker 2: from the defamation case, which is a civil case, right.
Speaker 1: This one was considered the weakest. Is is kind of
Speaker 1: the background that I had seen.
Speaker 2: Correct, I mean, the way Republicans would convey it is
Speaker 2: it's kind of like al Capone being convicted on income
Speaker 2: tax fraud instead of all the other stuff that al Capone, the.
Speaker 1: Guy was convicted, it didn't matter, that was on income
Speaker 1: tax fraud.
Speaker 2: Look, let me so let me you want to give
Speaker 2: us a little bit. You know, I am worried a
Speaker 2: little bit because the argument that worries me a bit
Speaker 2: is that in authoritarian countries, oftentimes, if there is an
Speaker 2: opposition leader who you want to disenfranchise, then you trump
Speaker 2: up some legal charges that may range from technically correct
Speaker 2: but exaggerated to entirely fabricated. You know, Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor,
Speaker 2: had had talked about, I mean kind of campaigned on
Speaker 2: being tougher on Trump. Right, it's in Manhattan, the place
Speaker 2: where something like eighty five nine of the voters that
Speaker 2: jurypool voted for Biden, although to be fair, there are
Speaker 2: some of them consumed media from sites like truth Social
Speaker 2: Trump's alternative to Twitter slash x. But look, the fact
Speaker 2: that Trump has been prosecuted and criticized and persecuted that
Speaker 2: may feed into his appeal for a certain strain of voter. However,
Speaker 2: given that reality, which you cannot undo, for better or worse,
Speaker 2: this point I think Biden is much better off with
Speaker 2: a guilty verdict than an acquittal, right, because you can't
Speaker 2: take back the fact that there are all these charges.
Speaker 2: You can't take back the fact that, like you know,
Speaker 2: to me, the election overturning January sixth stuff is a
Speaker 2: couple of orders of magnitude, meaning literally hundreds of times
Speaker 2: more serious than anything involving a former porna. But you know, again,
Speaker 2: plans to always kind of match the deal reality. I
Speaker 2: think the more buttoned up prosecutions in the January sixth
Speaker 2: try have taken a long time. But anyway, Trump has
Speaker 2: been convicted on this first set of charges. He will
Speaker 2: almost for sure appeal. I would think the sentencing phase
Speaker 2: will still occur in July, just before the Republican National Convention.
Speaker 2: But that's where we stand.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And obviously I'm not an expert in the polling
Speaker 1: part of this, And so I'm curious because you know,
Speaker 1: I've been reading the news like I'm a good news consumer.
Speaker 1: I've been following the trial. I'm still a little bit
Speaker 1: bummed that it wasn't televised, but it wasn't so I
Speaker 1: was following from Afar and I have read kind of
Speaker 1: takes on both sides that, as you said, you know,
Speaker 1: given that this happened and that we can't control the timing,
Speaker 1: it's great that at least the verdict was guilty. However,
Speaker 1: I have also seen kind of the other side that
Speaker 1: this just strengthens Trump's position among a huge, kind of
Speaker 1: swath of Trump voters and that a lot of people
Speaker 1: see this as kind of part of his brand.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: This is the guy who said I can stand in
Speaker 1: the middle of fIF if I haven't even shoot someone
Speaker 1: and still be elected. And here he is saying, like, see,
Speaker 1: I don't follow your laws, like I'm you know, I'm
Speaker 1: a renegade. I'm my own man. And they're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, And this this just shows that, you know,
Speaker 1: the judicial system is corrupt. So I guess there are
Speaker 1: two separate questions here. One, do you have a sense
Speaker 1: now or is it a little bit too early to
Speaker 1: figure out how this is going to go down kind
Speaker 1: of in the polls in the Trump base? And two,
Speaker 1: and this is a kind of a separate question, let's
Speaker 1: talk a little bit afterwards about the judicial impact of
Speaker 1: this and kind of the delegitimization of the judicial system
Speaker 1: that Trump is trying to push as a story.
Speaker 2: So as gamblers or poker players, we think in terms
Speaker 2: of the marginal effect on something. Right, if you beamed
Speaker 2: to twenty twenty four from ten years ago, you'd be
Speaker 2: shocked by a lot of things. You'd be shocked that
Speaker 2: a a Town Trump had become president. You'd be be
Speaker 2: that Trump had was running for president again and in
Speaker 2: fact was tied her ahead in the polls, despite his
Speaker 2: various criminal charges, and how kind of his first term
Speaker 2: ended with January sixth, and with COVID, you'd be surprised
Speaker 2: that the trial wasn't in some sense a bigger deal.
Speaker 2: I mean, people have been pretty tuned out to this
Speaker 2: until the verdict occurred, in to even people like me,
Speaker 2: I guess, in the news business to some extent. However,
Speaker 2: people in our world, Maria, the poker kind of gambling world,
Speaker 2: think in terms of what's priced in quote unquote to
Speaker 2: the stock. So if you look at betting markets a
Speaker 2: week ago, which was just before when we're taking its
Speaker 2: its Tuesday morning Vegas time, in prodiction markets, Trump had
Speaker 2: a fifty three percent chance of winning the election before
Speaker 2: the verdict. Now that is fifty one percent, So he
Speaker 2: has follown by two percentage points relative to where he
Speaker 2: was pre verdict. And by the way, because people assumed
Speaker 2: before or that he was more likely than not to
Speaker 2: be guilty. If this had come totally on the blue,
Speaker 2: it might have been a bigger shift. But basically, like
Speaker 2: people putting money on the line, follow the conventional wisdom
Speaker 2: that outlined earlier, which is that you know, being a
Speaker 2: convicted felon is probably bad, right, I mean, this is
Speaker 2: kind of where we are probably in politics now. It's
Speaker 2: certainly worse for Trump than being an acquitted, accused felon who,
Speaker 2: even in New York could have been found guilty. I
Speaker 2: mean imagine that, right, That would have been I think
Speaker 2: a big feather in Trump's cap and a big disaster
Speaker 2: for Biden. Now, with that said, for the most part,
Speaker 2: now people are making educated guesses about the impact. There
Speaker 2: is some kind of instant turnaround polling, some of that
Speaker 2: shows Biden gaining a point or two. Net is actually
Speaker 2: one poll from Morning Consult that has Biden actually losing
Speaker 2: a point or so. But we don't have a high
Speaker 2: quality traditional pollster going and doing a proper sample with
Speaker 2: a proper amount of time, asking the right questions to
Speaker 2: a demographically balanced sample, because that just takes a little
Speaker 2: bit of time, and the Polsters apparently didn't necessarily plan
Speaker 2: and advance with this verdict occurring either.
Speaker 1: They're probably at the World Series of Poker with you.
Speaker 2: You never you never know, Maria, I mean, you never
Speaker 2: know who you'll see at the World Series. However, this
Speaker 2: is important because Trip raised one hundred and forty one
Speaker 2: million dollars in May, bolstered in part by this guilty verdict.
Speaker 2: He had a massive amount of four eight hour fundraising.
Speaker 2: I think money's a little bit overrated in presidential campaigns.
Speaker 2: But the point is, yet his base is really enthused,
Speaker 2: and by the way, Biden's base is really enthused too.
Speaker 2: They're tweeting lots of memes about, you know, Donald Trump
Speaker 2: in a prison jumpsuit and things like that. I wouldn't
Speaker 2: have dared to even watch MSNBC. What would have happened
Speaker 2: on Thursday and Friday and all of that right to me, though,
Speaker 2: these are not the voter who matter because their votes
Speaker 2: are already locked in. Instead, it's the kind of casual,
Speaker 2: normy voter who says, no matter what else, Donald Trump
Speaker 2: is a condicted felon, and even the New York Post,
Speaker 2: for example, which I used. The New York Post is
Speaker 2: like a benchmark of conservative but not totally red pilled
Speaker 2: Fox News opinion. They're trying to in a competitive news market.
Speaker 2: They're trying to, you know, they like the actual news.
Speaker 2: And the New York Post had liked the banner headline
Speaker 2: about Trump being guilty. They weren't trying to spin it
Speaker 2: too much. So everybody saw this headline about Trump is
Speaker 2: guilty of thirty six or thirty four. I mean, Trump
Speaker 2: is guilty of thirty four.
Speaker 1: Fallon each Inflation's rail. Inflation's rail.
Speaker 2: Another problem for Bide. But look, but like part of
Speaker 2: it is what are the basic, simple, stylized facts about
Speaker 2: the election? You know, for Biden, the fact is that
Speaker 2: prices are a lot higher than they were four years ago.
Speaker 2: Now you can debate that and say, well, most that
Speaker 2: happened in twenty twenty two, and inflation has slowed down now.
Speaker 2: And by the way, you've had inflation all around the world,
Speaker 2: and it's kind of maybe not entirely Biden's fault, and
Speaker 2: and and the jobs market is good. But in politics,
Speaker 2: when you're explaining you're losing, is the is the axiom,
Speaker 2: It's simplar like when Biden is the fact that Biden
Speaker 2: is eighty one years old, and I think often looks
Speaker 2: an acts like it is a simple fact. By the way,
Speaker 2: Trump is seventy seven, will turn seventy eight before too
Speaker 2: much longer. You know, that fact is very hard for
Speaker 2: Biden to overcome. You can spend and say, well, Trump
Speaker 2: is almost as old and Biden Biden is, you know,
Speaker 2: managing the toughest job in the world, and whatever else.
Speaker 2: We have better healthcare, But like the more explaining you're doing,
Speaker 2: you're losing it. In this case, it's Trump and his
Speaker 2: team on their heels, right, They're the ones who are
Speaker 2: saying this prostitution is unfair and how can you expect
Speaker 2: a jury verdict in New York to be fair? And
Speaker 2: blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, and I'd actually I'd love to just pause
Speaker 1: and just go deep, more deeply on to that point,
Speaker 1: because I think that elections aside, right, since we don't
Speaker 1: have the poll numbers yet, and we probably won't when
Speaker 1: this podcast comes out in a few days, but what
Speaker 1: we are already seeing is kind of what I'd alluded
Speaker 1: to before. The arguments that Trump has been making for
Speaker 1: quite some time about the fact that you can't trust
Speaker 1: our judicial system, right, the judicial system is corrupt, et cetera,
Speaker 1: et cetera, et cetera. And he's been making this argument
Speaker 1: at every single level of government. And I think that
Speaker 1: that's kind of another a long term consequence that might
Speaker 1: actually kind of last longer than this particular election, this
Speaker 1: particular trial, because what he's doing is undermining one of
Speaker 1: the pillars of democracy and the system that traditionally the
Speaker 1: American public has had the most trust in. And now
Speaker 1: we see that trust eroding because Trump keeps repeating over
Speaker 1: and over and over these statements which are blatant lies.
Speaker 1: But as a psychologist, I can say that it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter because the more someone repeats a lie, it starts
Speaker 1: to feeling like the truth.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Look, trust in almost every major American institution to
Speaker 2: some extent. The military is an exception, but almost every
Speaker 2: major American institution has declined over the past ten twenty
Speaker 2: thirty years. How much Trump is a cause of that
Speaker 2: versus a symptom is a debate I'm sure that academics
Speaker 2: and historians will have for a long time. I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, Trump takes advantage of low trust voters. We're
Speaker 2: in a downward trust spiral in the US. Trump is
Speaker 2: a major kind of cog in that machine, but not
Speaker 2: the only cog. I mean, I don't know, I Maria
Speaker 2: on the show. I want to be able to express
Speaker 2: ambiguous or ambivalent opinions. I have ambivalent feelings about the
Speaker 2: prosecution by Alvin Bragg. If I spent one hundred more
Speaker 2: hours looking at it, I might have stronger feelings one
Speaker 2: way or the other. But you know, I do think
Speaker 2: it's probably right. I think if you kind of surveyed
Speaker 2: most nonpartisan legal experts, they would say that, like to
Speaker 2: turn these into felony charges is not unheard of, but
Speaker 2: is unusual. And in a cistical sense, you would infer
Speaker 2: that Trump's status as a former president kind of as
Speaker 2: part of that. But you know, it's not great for
Speaker 2: the country that you have a active presidential candidate who's
Speaker 2: fifty to fifty to become president again, and that it
Speaker 2: took so long to bring these charges to trial, that
Speaker 2: the ones that do go to trial are I think,
Speaker 2: by anyone's definition, the weakest charges by in the more
Speaker 2: kind of partisan jurisdiction. It's not it's not ideal.
Speaker 1: No, it's not so, Nate. If I'm going to go
Speaker 1: back through this and try to metabolize all of it,
Speaker 1: what are the key Let's say two things I should
Speaker 1: take away from this analysis from our conversation.
Speaker 2: Look, I say number one, pay more attention to the
Speaker 2: marginal voter, not the cable news punted, but the marginal
Speaker 2: voter who was not paying attention to every detail in
Speaker 2: the white and the race for the White House, but
Speaker 2: who sees big banner headlines Trump convicted, Trump guilty. Number two,
Speaker 2: be patient as you wait for the polls, because these
Speaker 2: marginal voters are hard to reach. The quick and dirty
Speaker 2: polls may not reach them yet, so we're going on
Speaker 2: limited information. And number three, I think separate out the
Speaker 2: question of is this good or bad for the country
Speaker 2: from is this good or bad for Joe Biden and
Speaker 2: Donald Trump? Right, I mean, those are different questions. We've
Speaker 2: tried to mainly focus on the electoral impact here and
Speaker 2: not pretend that we're legal scholars.
Speaker 1: Nate, I am so excited for you. Week one of
Speaker 1: the World Series has wrapped. I unfortunately have left Las Vegas,
Speaker 1: so I haven't been able to play after the first
Speaker 1: two events because I have some other commitments. I'll be
Speaker 1: back next week. But you, while I've been traveling the
Speaker 1: world to glamorous New Haven, you've been running up quite
Speaker 1: the trip stack in the fifteen hundred dollars six max event,
Speaker 1: which is incredibly exciting. So you are in the money.
Speaker 1: So for people who don't play poker, that means that
Speaker 1: Nate has already cashed. So every single player eliminated from
Speaker 1: this point on is going to be making money. You
Speaker 1: are about to start day two of the tournament. So
Speaker 1: you found your first bag of the series, which means
Speaker 1: you've bagged up chips. There are over three hundred players left.
Speaker 1: I don't remember how many. I looked this up before
Speaker 1: we started taping, but I don't remember. It's like three
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty something like that. Does that sound right
Speaker 1: to you?
Speaker 2: And it's like, what those counts are? Delay? It's like,
Speaker 2: all right, so twenty five hundred started, of which about
Speaker 2: I think one to ninety remain, and I'm in fifteenth place.
Speaker 1: Sound yeah, So Nate, you are in fifteenth place, and
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about the three biggest mistakes I've
Speaker 1: been seeing at the tables in the week that I played.
Speaker 1: But it seems like before we get into that, it
Speaker 1: seems like you have probably not been making these mistakes
Speaker 1: because you are now fifteenth in chips. So just you know,
Speaker 1: first of all, congratulations, so well say thank you. We
Speaker 1: are say thank you, we are able to Okay, thank you, Maria. Okay,
Speaker 1: now I won't Okay.
Speaker 2: This is fun because we can put this episode in
Speaker 2: a little bit of a time capsule again in the
Speaker 2: realities of the highly produced podcast world. We are taping
Speaker 2: this on early Tuesday morning, Vegas time. It will come
Speaker 2: out in your feeds on Thursday. By the time you
Speaker 2: listen to this, the tournament that I'm playing right now
Speaker 2: will be over. I could have won my first bracelet.
Speaker 2: Much more likely suggests I will been knocked out at
Speaker 2: some point, you know, just after lunch today, and then
Speaker 2: be disappointed about that's about.
Speaker 1: Just after lunch. You're lasting through lunch. That's great.
Speaker 2: I mean, look, I do have a lot of chips,
Speaker 2: It's true, a lot of chips. I have a lot
Speaker 2: of short stacks at my table. So but like one
Speaker 2: thing I like to do if I make a Day
Speaker 2: two or Day three is to situate myself in terms
Speaker 2: of rational expectations, right, in this tournament. Last year, only
Speaker 2: ten percent of the field who made Day two made
Speaker 2: the final day Day three. Now I have a well
Speaker 2: above average chip stack, but even knowing that, I know
Speaker 2: that seventy five ish percent of the time, if I'm
Speaker 2: being realistic, my day will end with busting out of
Speaker 2: this tournament and deciding whether to enter a different tournament instead.
Speaker 2: So I think always kind of situating yourself and understand
Speaker 2: that you can have a great Day one and the
Speaker 2: odds are still against you. Just it's a very very
Speaker 2: hard marit to winning tournament or making a final table
Speaker 2: when there are twenty five hundred people. You need to
Speaker 2: kind of keep rolling the dice and having it coming
Speaker 2: up six is like three times in a row, or
Speaker 2: maybe more than that, more than that, right, like yeah,
Speaker 2: four times in a row. Right, It's pretty it's pretty
Speaker 2: hard for that to for that to happen. And having
Speaker 2: the first six and the second six come up six
Speaker 2: is is just kind of the first the first you know,
Speaker 2: halfway through the marathon, so to speak.
Speaker 1: Well, I think that that's a very healthy attitude. I
Speaker 1: think too many people get very excited about having lots
Speaker 1: of chips. That said, having lots of chips is better
Speaker 1: than not having lots of chips. And from what I
Speaker 1: know about your playing style, you're an aggressive player who
Speaker 1: knows how to push that advantage, which I think is
Speaker 1: really important. And I think you have a very good
Speaker 1: attitude coming into this. So now let's you know, have
Speaker 1: a positive mindset and say that this is going to
Speaker 1: be your first bracelet or at least a final table.
Speaker 1: And I say that completely selflessly because we have no
Speaker 1: swap in this event, because I have not played it.
Speaker 1: So so this is this is all you, and I
Speaker 1: really I wish you the best, and let me give
Speaker 1: you some advice for the three top things not to
Speaker 1: do that I've seen.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what have you been What have you been seeing that? Uh,
Speaker 2: that players shouldn't be doing?
Speaker 1: All right, So I've been seeing a lot of things
Speaker 1: that players shouldn't be doing. So I played, let's say,
Speaker 1: I played two World Series events this past week, and
Speaker 1: then I played a win event, so the Win eleven
Speaker 1: hundred event as well. So I've seen a few different
Speaker 1: player pools. And this is me generalizing from everything that
Speaker 1: I've been seeing, what are the three most common mistakes?
Speaker 1: By far? Number one that I have seen is what's
Speaker 1: known in psychology as the sunk cost fallacy, and what
Speaker 1: the sunk cost fallacy means is that you make a
Speaker 1: decision and then when the decision environment changes, when the
Speaker 1: information changes, when the data change, and your decision no
Speaker 1: longer makes sense. Instead of walking away, instead of saying, Okay,
Speaker 1: I made the right decision before it's no longer the
Speaker 1: right decision, you stay. You stick with it. You put
Speaker 1: good money after bad, you know, good time after bad.
Speaker 1: You stay in that decision because you say, well, I've
Speaker 1: already invested so much. In poker, there's a concept known
Speaker 1: as pot committed, meaning I've already put so many chips
Speaker 1: in the middle that I am committed to the pot.
Speaker 1: And I think that that is actually one of the
Speaker 1: stupidest concepts in poker. I mean, I just think it's asinine,
Speaker 1: like so so dumb. I cannot I can't even begin
Speaker 1: to say. Because decisions are not made in a vacuum.
Speaker 1: It does not matter how many chips you put in
Speaker 1: one move ago you know, pre flop or on the flop,
Speaker 1: as long as you have chips left. If you now
Speaker 1: know that your beat right, if you now know that
Speaker 1: the decision environment has changed, fold walk away, keep the
Speaker 1: chips that you have. It's a huge lesson for life,
Speaker 1: by the way, being able to walk away, and I
Speaker 1: still have something left, and I should, you know, I
Speaker 1: should be able to use that. I think that's a
Speaker 1: really important life skill. But one of the most important
Speaker 1: that I've learned from poker is kind of that. And
Speaker 1: let me tell you a specific hand where I saw
Speaker 1: this play out that I think is kind of illustrative
Speaker 1: of this idea. So in this hand, I think we're
Speaker 1: playing eight handed, and I raise from under the gun,
Speaker 1: so I'm first to act, and I have pocket kings,
Speaker 1: so I raise, and then another player three bets me,
Speaker 1: so he re raises from the button. So that's, you know,
Speaker 1: very strong position. Obviously he'll always be lost to act.
Speaker 1: The button is yours, your best position. I don't love,
Speaker 1: you know, playing huge pots out of positions. So I
Speaker 1: four bet, which means I then reraise him. At this point,
Speaker 1: the only hand I lose to is aces, and I'm
Speaker 1: not particularly you know, you can't see monsters under the bed,
Speaker 1: so I reraise and he calls and we go to
Speaker 1: the flop, so it's just the two of us and
Speaker 1: the flop comes Queen High and it's all hearts. I
Speaker 1: think it's six or eight Queen, all hearts. I do
Speaker 1: not have the King of Hearts. I check, and he bets,
Speaker 1: and I call, even though you know, at this point
Speaker 1: I could be drawing dead, right, he could have Ace
Speaker 1: King of Hearts, right, he could have Ace Jack of Hearts.
Speaker 1: He could already have flopped the nuts. And he beats
Speaker 1: pretty big, but I can't fault to one bet and
Speaker 1: then the turn is an off suit king. So at
Speaker 1: this point I now have top set, and so I
Speaker 1: check and he bets again, but he bets really small, right,
Speaker 1: So he bets like a quarter pot, and I was like, okay,
Speaker 1: you do not have a flush right at this point,
Speaker 1: it really just looked like he just did not like
Speaker 1: that king at all. And so I raise because you know,
Speaker 1: that seems like the appropriate thing to do. And he
Speaker 1: does not have that many chips left behind, and you
Speaker 1: can just see him just completely pained, and then just
Speaker 1: like shakes his head and like puts all his chips
Speaker 1: in the middle and he turns over pocket queens and
Speaker 1: he's like, I knew I was be And I was like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, if you don't say that, right, if you
Speaker 1: know your beat just fold. He still had a lot
Speaker 1: of chips behind, but he just couldn't let it go.
Speaker 1: He had flopped, you know, top set. He knew that
Speaker 1: he was kind of ahead of me, and he even
Speaker 1: though the world changed on the turn, he just couldn't
Speaker 1: acknowledge it and he couldn't walk away. And I've seen
Speaker 1: that so many times.
Speaker 2: I mean, look, in his defense, he could think that
Speaker 2: you have a flush and he has some outs to
Speaker 2: draw to a full house. But yeah, poker players stick
Speaker 2: their chips in almost as a form of self punishment sometimes,
Speaker 2: you know, I'm a fish. And by the one thing,
Speaker 2: as you were speaking, Maria, you know, obviously if there's
Speaker 2: new information, I think also people need to give themselves
Speaker 2: permission to read things, things right, to say, maybe there's
Speaker 2: not new information. But I've had time to think about
Speaker 2: this more, and I just don't think it's plausible that
Speaker 2: my opponent is bluffing very often. Here. I had time
Speaker 2: while the dealer was dealing the cards to think about,
Speaker 2: like what bluff would Maria have in her range? And
Speaker 2: like in this spot, it's hard on these flushboards with
Speaker 2: the king coming, you know, making a life choice belatedly,
Speaker 2: that's a positive life choice is still better than saying
Speaker 2: it's a sunk cost. I can't make any change at all. Okay, Maria,
Speaker 2: let's go into your tip or mistake. Yeah, tips for
Speaker 2: last week. This speaks about mistakes were in the messy
Speaker 2: real world. Now, what's mistake number two you've been seeing
Speaker 2: at the time.
Speaker 1: Yes, the mistake number two is actually probably one of
Speaker 1: the most famous biases in psychology. And so it's always
Speaker 1: so fun to me as a psychologist to see the
Speaker 1: things that you know that theoretically should be very strong,
Speaker 1: see them actually in reality play out this way. And
Speaker 1: that's risk aversion. So this is part of Danny Knnoman
Speaker 1: and Amos Turiski's famous prospect theory right where losses and
Speaker 1: gains are looked at differently, and depending on how you
Speaker 1: frame losses, depending on how you frame gains, people will
Speaker 1: be more or less risk averse. And so what I
Speaker 1: have seen is that people have been too risk averse
Speaker 1: at stages of the tournament where they should be taking
Speaker 1: risks because they value kind of their tournament life too
Speaker 1: much and they don't understand how tournament poker works. So,
Speaker 1: as an example, I saw a hand I was not
Speaker 1: in this hand where someone raised, you know, someone re raised,
Speaker 1: and then this person ended up folding Ace King face up,
Speaker 1: aas King suited, having like thirty big blinds left saying
Speaker 1: you know it's too early, it's too early for me
Speaker 1: to flip, and it was just such a bad mistake.
Speaker 1: Right when I saw that, I was like, what do
Speaker 1: you mean it's too early to flip? You have thirty
Speaker 1: big lines. That's not that you know you should be flipping.
Speaker 1: You have to take those spots. If you're valuing your
Speaker 1: tournament life, valuing not busting so incredibly highly. That means
Speaker 1: that either you're playing too high. You know you're in
Speaker 1: the wrong spot, because that's not the rational decision to make.
Speaker 1: The flip side of this. At EPT Paris back in February,
Speaker 1: which was won by Barney Boatman, who's kind of an
Speaker 1: old school legend, there was a really great televised hand
Speaker 1: where they were at the final table, the final two tables,
Speaker 1: and someone ran kind of a big bluff against him,
Speaker 1: putting him to the test. Right, Barney had to call
Speaker 1: off all of his chips and it was a really
Speaker 1: hard call. Barney finally made it, and when his opponent
Speaker 1: kind of turned over the cards saw what Barney had
Speaker 1: called with he said, how could you call for your
Speaker 1: tournament life here? Like, you can't do that? And Barney
Speaker 1: looks at him and says, it's my tournament life, not
Speaker 1: my actual life. It's just such a great line because
Speaker 1: that's how you have to write. It's fine to be
Speaker 1: too risk averse when it's your actual life. It's when
Speaker 1: you're playing in a tournament. You have to make those
Speaker 1: calculated risks, have to take those slips, you have to
Speaker 1: take those spots, otherwise you ain't ever winning a tournament.
Speaker 2: Ria, I got news for you now that we're into
Speaker 2: the second week of the World Series of Poker that
Speaker 2: like that virginal risk aversion bubble has popped a little bit.
Speaker 2: In the fifteen hundred yesterday, all my chips, or ninety
Speaker 2: five percent of them are from making hands and extracting value.
Speaker 2: The bluss were not working. I lost money on my
Speaker 2: bluff yesterday, and I'm so many people believe it or
Speaker 2: not actually like to fold to Sometimes people were getting
Speaker 2: a little bit rambunctious. I think you kind of get
Speaker 2: into this point in the tournament where maybe you have
Speaker 2: fired four or five or six entries. People are getting
Speaker 2: though a little bit friskier, I think, with kind of
Speaker 2: a lot of these smaller events. And the Mystery Millions
Speaker 2: is a tournament where you can enter like literally eight
Speaker 2: times if you want the first event after that. See
Speaker 2: people who are a little bit on tilt from you know,
Speaker 2: literally as we're playing, by the way, people are drawing
Speaker 2: prizes from this bounty pool winning a million bucks where
Speaker 2: two and fifty thousand bucks, right, and here you are
Speaker 2: plotting along your fifteen hundred dollars tournament. That was encouraging
Speaker 2: I think a lot more risk taking. So so this
Speaker 2: is self corrects a little bit. But I agree in
Speaker 2: CHERYLD that as a default, as a default, even in
Speaker 2: the poker world, as default, people are usually too risk averse.
Speaker 2: For the Barney Boatmen reason that it's just a fucking
Speaker 2: poker tournament, right, I understand that you make day two,
Speaker 2: day three, the money can be significant. It's just a
Speaker 2: fucking poker tournament.
Speaker 1: That's that's very true.
Speaker 2: If you're putting your life on your line to enter
Speaker 2: the tournament, then you've made a bad decision in the
Speaker 2: first place. So I can't really guide you. But but
Speaker 2: this is kind of a laboratory where you can repeat
Speaker 2: the experiment and enter a different tournament, especially the World Series.
Speaker 2: And so don't be a knit is one of our
Speaker 2: favorite things to say, and it means a neurotic risk averse,
Speaker 2: you know, turn in the punch bowl basically, Maria.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, So that's you know, that's number two. But I'm
Speaker 1: glad that you're saying that it's been self correcting because
Speaker 1: that actually goes to mistake number three that I've been seeing,
Speaker 1: which is people becoming too emotional and making decisions based
Speaker 1: on how they're feeling and what just happened, as opposed
Speaker 1: to based on data and based on kind of what
Speaker 1: they should be using in their logical rational decision making.
Speaker 1: So they're going on tilt and basically making just really
Speaker 1: egregious errors. So once again, you know, I think it's
Speaker 1: always good to have an example. I was playing this
Speaker 1: was I think it might have even been during the
Speaker 1: five thousand dollars event. No, it was a five hundred
Speaker 1: dollars event, so the second event, slightly smaller event. It
Speaker 1: was a freeze out, which is important, which means people
Speaker 1: can't read buy this is not the mystery bounty. And
Speaker 1: I had a gentleman to my left who'd been, you know,
Speaker 1: playing fairly. Well I didn't know him, but I think
Speaker 1: he played a lot of poker, and then he got
Speaker 1: into a spot against someone else where he was you know,
Speaker 1: on the river and facing a huge bet and he
Speaker 1: needed to decide whether or not he was going to call,
Speaker 1: and he just tanked. And it's a pretty turbo structure, right.
Speaker 1: The levels are thirty minutes long.
Speaker 2: Meaning that you're a chip count dwindles and real or
Speaker 2: in absolute terms.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so very quickly, so you need to act quickly.
Speaker 1: So here's this guy and he's been thinking for two minutes,
Speaker 1: so I very I think nicely, and the tables agreed, said,
Speaker 1: you know, I know you're in a tough spot, but
Speaker 1: just so you know, I'm going to call the clock
Speaker 1: in one minute, because you know, taking two minutes if
Speaker 1: you think about it. I said, I was going to
Speaker 1: call it at three minutes, right, so you're ten percent,
Speaker 1: which is ten percent of the time. And I gave
Speaker 1: him that warning and then he just like he you know,
Speaker 1: puts in the call and it's the wrong call and
Speaker 1: he loses the pot. And then he turns to me
Speaker 1: and he says, well, it's only it's only a turbo.
Speaker 1: If you're used to playing bullshit live events, this is
Speaker 1: not a turbo structure. I was like, well, empirically it
Speaker 1: is anyway, very next hand, I'm on the button and
Speaker 1: he's in the small blind and I raise and he
Speaker 1: just looks at me, and he goes, well, I'm all in,
Speaker 1: and he just shoves and rips it, and then the
Speaker 1: big blind folds and I have a six of spades,
Speaker 1: which is a good hand, but not a great hand.
Speaker 1: But given what just happened, I was like, I'm gonna call,
Speaker 1: so I did. He had Queen five offsuit. Luckily he
Speaker 1: didn't hit and I knocked him out. Don't be that guy.
Speaker 1: It does not matter if you just made a bad decision.
Speaker 1: Do not make another bad decision because of that. If
Speaker 1: someone calls the clock on you. You know I didn't
Speaker 1: even call the clock on him, right, Like, just do
Speaker 1: not be that guy. Make rational decisions. Do not punt
Speaker 1: with queen five offsuit, even though you still have a
Speaker 1: ton of chips, just because you're pissed off and you
Speaker 1: think that you know that someone's picking on you.
Speaker 2: I think the guy thing like not to be too
Speaker 2: like woke here or anything. The guy thing is important though,
Speaker 2: because like men with other men don't want to lose face,
Speaker 2: and that can like manifest itself in different ways. But like,
Speaker 2: I haven't been quite in that spot as often as
Speaker 2: people seem to react to you that way, even though
Speaker 2: I would have been probably more aggressive about just calling
Speaker 2: the clock and not giving him like a warning. I
Speaker 2: do think that, like, you know, men who feel like
Speaker 2: they're embarrassed by women. I mean, this is not like
Speaker 2: some deep breakthrough here, right, but like you know, men
Speaker 2: who feel like they're embarrassed by women can kind of
Speaker 2: go on tilts in different ways, and they might if
Speaker 2: they're embarrassed by another guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I think that's very true. And I actually
Speaker 1: wrote an entire piece about sexism and poker on my
Speaker 1: substack this week, and some a guy also going on
Speaker 1: tilt to a female gave me a ten ten thousand
Speaker 1: dollars main events seat, so I'm very grateful for that.
Speaker 1: So everyone, do not make this mistake unless you're a
Speaker 1: bounty with ten thousand dollars on your head, in which case,
Speaker 1: you know, please do emotionally tilt and give me your chips.
Speaker 1: But Nate, I think that that is a you know,
Speaker 1: great place to wrap it up, and to say again,
Speaker 1: I trust that you will not make any of these
Speaker 1: mistakes today. I hope you play well and may the
Speaker 1: may the cards be with you, because that's you know,
Speaker 1: that's the one thing that you can't control. So Nay
Speaker 1: Risky business is still a young show. You know, we're
Speaker 1: we're a month old, and I have already learned more
Speaker 1: about basketball than I have learned during my entire life,
Speaker 1: and here we are doing yet another basketball segment. Last week,
Speaker 1: I when I told you that I was ready to
Speaker 1: go to a next game, you informed me that unfortunately
Speaker 1: they were already out, so you know, so that that
Speaker 1: wasn't that wasn't great timing, So we'll have to go
Speaker 1: next season. But you've also informed me, and I didn't
Speaker 1: know that we're now starting the NBA Finals, which sounds really,
Speaker 1: really exciting, and I'm gonna I'm gonna get some real
Speaker 1: excitement going once I finally go to an NBA game.
Speaker 1: I'm sure you will teach me to love it. But
Speaker 1: for now, let me ask you who's playing in the
Speaker 1: finals and why do we care?
Speaker 2: Mario? Are you? Are you anti sports and you want
Speaker 2: to read The New Yorker? Are you one of those
Speaker 2: call us at sports ball and things like that. I'm,
Speaker 2: by the way, your hometown team, the Boston Celtics, is
Speaker 2: one of the two teams involved in the NBA.
Speaker 1: That's exciting.
Speaker 2: I did. The other team is a Dallas Mavericks. Who
Speaker 2: are I guess I was gonna say younger. They're not
Speaker 2: that young, but they kind of overachieved expectations this year.
Speaker 2: You know, I did a kind of preseason preview for
Speaker 2: my newsletter subscribers at Silver Bulletin. Talked about every team.
Speaker 2: Although I was very bullish in the Celtics. I was
Speaker 2: kept on the Dallas Mavericks would even make the playoffs,
Speaker 2: and here they are in the NBA finals. So what
Speaker 2: the fuck do I know?
Speaker 1: I suppose so I didn't know who'd be in the finals,
Speaker 1: and Nate, you don't know who would be in the
Speaker 1: finals for either for.
Speaker 2: Different reasons, I would say, But at the point is
Speaker 2: the point is well taken?
Speaker 1: No, for the record, let the record show I am
Speaker 1: not anti sport, and I'm very excited about getting excited
Speaker 1: about sports once i know more about them.
Speaker 2: Anti sport are you British? They call it like sport
Speaker 2: singular instead of.
Speaker 1: Playing anti sports sport. I just all right, fine, fine,
Speaker 1: my fake English accent friend, I am not anti athletics
Speaker 1: sports teams.
Speaker 2: Okay, after you're not. You're not helping yourself here, I
Speaker 2: don't think. Here's what I want to discuss though, and
Speaker 2: we'll be short with this segment. There is a gap
Speaker 2: here between kind of what the stats would say and
Speaker 2: what the betting markets say. So, the Celtics in the
Speaker 2: regular season went sixty four and eighteen, winning sixty four
Speaker 2: games is a very very very good record. Dallas, by contrast,
Speaker 2: went fifty five, zero and thirty two. They were a
Speaker 2: number five seed. The Celtics were a number one seed.
Speaker 2: The Celtics are twelve and two so far in the playoffs.
Speaker 2: They have virtually swept every series. The Celtics have an
Speaker 2: average victory margin of more than ten point eight points
Speaker 2: per game or more than ten points per game, which
Speaker 2: is one of the best in NBA history this year.
Speaker 2: So if you look at this system like, I'm gonna
Speaker 2: promote a system called EPM, which is by at the
Speaker 2: site Dunks and Threes. It's a good, very good basketball
Speaker 2: analysis site that rates individual players and has team projections.
Speaker 2: Their projections have the Celtics with an eighty six percent chance.
Speaker 2: Eighty six percent of the Celtics, who, by the way,
Speaker 2: are have a home court in Boston's a good home
Speaker 2: court advantage an eighty six percent chance of winning the finals.
Speaker 1: Now, if I go down there, pretty high chance.
Speaker 2: It's a pretty high chance. But the NBA is a
Speaker 2: game where a game of dominant compare, for example, a
Speaker 2: basketball game to a football game. In the NBA, each
Speaker 2: team has over one hundred posessions, maybe even one hundred
Speaker 2: and ten or one hundred and twenty, given how fast
Speaker 2: paced the game is nowadays. Right in the NFL, a
Speaker 2: team might have what is it like, you know, twelve
Speaker 2: or thirteen possessions in a game, so roughly one tenth
Speaker 2: as much. If you roll a dice one hundred and
Speaker 2: ten times versus twelve times, then you match the kind
Speaker 2: of long run statistical distribution much more closely with a
Speaker 2: larger sample size. So in the NBA, small edges shooting
Speaker 2: thirty nine percent from three point range instead of thirty
Speaker 2: six percent. That plays out when you're taking all these
Speaker 2: shots per game, so that the better team usually wins
Speaker 2: in the NBA, like almost no other sport, right Michael
Speaker 2: Jordan's Bulls when he was on the team won six championships.
Speaker 2: The Warriors won whatever it was three and four years.
Speaker 2: So again, my favorite basketball stat site, dunksan threes dot
Speaker 2: com gives Boston an eighty six point four percent chance
Speaker 2: of winning. If I believe that number, I can go
Speaker 2: down to the sportsbook here I'm staying at the Cosmo,
Speaker 2: I guess, or anywhere in Vegas and make what, in
Speaker 2: theory is a very very profitable bet. That bet implies
Speaker 2: they only have to win seventy percent of the time.
Speaker 2: Seven zero eighty six is a lot higher than seventy
Speaker 2: to a gambler or a poker player. And yet, Maria,
Speaker 2: I have not I have not made that bet yet,
Speaker 2: despite having been in Vegas all week?
Speaker 1: Why haven't you made that bet? Nate?
Speaker 2: Partly because I should say, full disclosure, I probably will
Speaker 2: by the time you listen to this. Have made some
Speaker 2: amount of bets somewhere on the Celtics. But like, look,
Speaker 2: one reason, a couple reasons why. Number one is that
Speaker 2: I have repeatedly been low on the Mavericks throughout the season, right,
Speaker 2: which may mean that there is just something that I
Speaker 2: don't understand and I have to, like concede that the
Speaker 2: public betting public, which is very sharp and the aggregate
Speaker 2: knows something or not noticing that that I don't, but
Speaker 2: like has a better read on the situation. Now, look,
Speaker 2: the NBA Finals is such a big public event that
Speaker 2: you have a lot of how should we say, a
Speaker 2: lot of dumb money on the series. Sometimes one belief
Speaker 2: of that I think maybe is not dumb is that
Speaker 2: Luka Doncic is a Dallas Maverick superstar. I don't what
Speaker 2: you want to call him. He's kind of like plays
Speaker 2: point bar guard, but kind of like a small forward
Speaker 2: slash unicorn bowling ball in his own way. He is
Speaker 2: pretty clearly the best player in the series. I think
Speaker 2: people are now calling him maybe the best player, at
Speaker 2: least the best offensive player in the NBA, probably not
Speaker 2: the best all around self.
Speaker 1: So what you're saying is he's the Caitlyn Clark of
Speaker 1: the team.
Speaker 2: Caitlyn Clark is off to a little bit of a
Speaker 2: rocky start here, actually, Maria, Yeah, no, yeah, I don't
Speaker 2: think he would be flattered by the Caitlin Clark comparison.
Speaker 2: No he is. I'm not sure how you what's the
Speaker 2: right compare. I mean, he's not super athletic, So I'm
Speaker 2: not like, oh, he's the Michael Jordan or Lebron James,
Speaker 2: because those guys are like much better athletes. We get
Speaker 2: into like a little bit of like racial profiling. I mean,
Speaker 2: Larry Bird is not the worst comparable for Luca necessarily
Speaker 2: where he shoots, he rebounds. Larryberd was a better defensive
Speaker 2: player than Luca most likely, but Luca's more dominant. He
Speaker 2: can take over a game. We're talking about dominance here
Speaker 2: and in general, when you have the best player in
Speaker 2: the in the game, then your team wins, especially in
Speaker 2: the finals where everyone's playing maximum minutes, maximum effort, so
Speaker 2: it's a best player versus best team thing. I think
Speaker 2: the kind of public believes heavily in the best player.
Speaker 2: They kind of also think the Celtics are chokers. They've
Speaker 2: been in the finals before, they've made deep playoff runs
Speaker 2: ended badly. That's probably just like it's look, I think
Speaker 2: you're bad. Is probably halfway between the stats and the public,
Speaker 2: which means I should go and make some type of
Speaker 2: bet on Boston. Maybe emotional because Boston has burned them before,
Speaker 2: but you know, by the numbers they are a fantastic
Speaker 2: basketball team, they're at home. They're very deep. They do
Speaker 2: have very good players. I mean, Jason Tatum might be
Speaker 2: the sixth best player in the league, Jalen Brown might
Speaker 2: be the you know, thirtieth best player, Derek White might
Speaker 2: be the twenty eighth best player or something. Right, they're
Speaker 2: very deep, and I think you know, you hear people
Speaker 2: at the poker tables being like, well, well, I don't know,
Speaker 2: the Celtic are jokers, Like it's actually a reason to
Speaker 2: bet on the Celtics when like generic poker players are like,
Speaker 2: who don't know that much about basketball?
Speaker 1: Are?
Speaker 2: That's you know, they're the ones who are like helping
Speaker 2: to set the market line. I think their rationales are
Speaker 2: not that compelling. But at the same time, I'm not
Speaker 2: sure I want to bet that much against against Luca.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I think that that's a really that's a
Speaker 1: really great point about how betting works in general. Right,
Speaker 1: you do need to have some sort of idea about
Speaker 1: where you are relative to the public, but also how
Speaker 1: much you personally are willing to risk, right, Like, can
Speaker 1: you risk ruin with with these odds or not? And
Speaker 1: I think usually, especially from what I understand of sports betting,
Speaker 1: the answer usually is no, Please don't right that there
Speaker 1: is uncertainty and emotions do get into it on every
Speaker 1: single line, and as accurate as a market might be,
Speaker 1: as accurate as a line might be, there will be
Speaker 1: kind of emotional betting and shit happens, right Like, this
Speaker 1: is a game of individuals, And I think that that's
Speaker 1: kind of the other point you're making. Someone might be
Speaker 1: having a great day, somebody might be having an off day,
Speaker 1: somebody might be a superstar, someone might choke you. Just
Speaker 1: you can't account for all of those variables, and I
Speaker 1: think that that's important in a game like that basketball.
Speaker 2: So I'm going back to the beautiful Paris Horseshow Casino
Speaker 2: in just about two and a half hours. Maria, When
Speaker 2: are you back in town?
Speaker 1: So it is now Tuesday. I will be doing a
Speaker 1: multi country tour between now and then. So from New Haven,
Speaker 1: I'm going back to New York and from there I
Speaker 1: am going to Ireland and then on Saturday evening, so
Speaker 1: late on Saturday, I will be back in Las Vegas
Speaker 1: ready to play on Sunday. Now, this depends on how
Speaker 1: well I've slept, how rested I am. But assuming everything
Speaker 1: goes smoothly and I'm well rested. I'm actually going to
Speaker 1: be playing my biggest buying event of the summer, the
Speaker 1: twenty five thousand dollars eight handed event on Sunday, and.
Speaker 2: Well I will be away. I'll be in California briefly
Speaker 2: on Sunday and then back in New York. So we're
Speaker 2: not doing a very good job of coordinating our schedules.
Speaker 1: Maria, you know we're not. But this just means that
Speaker 1: you and I don't have to compete for bracelets. We
Speaker 1: can both win bracelets in separate events. Perfect Risky Business
Speaker 1: is hosted by me Maria Kanikova.
Speaker 2: And me Nate Silver.
Speaker 1: The show is a co production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia.
Speaker 1: This episode was produced by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer
Speaker 1: is Gabriel Hunter Chang. Our executive producer is Jacob Goldstein.
Speaker 2: If you like the show, please rate and review us
Speaker 2: so other people can find us more easily. And if
Speaker 2: you want to listen to an AD free version, sener
Speaker 2: for Pushkin Plus. For six D nine a month you
Speaker 2: get access to ad free listening. Thanks for tuning in.