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 Selver. Today on the show, we'll be
Speaker 2: talking a little bit of China. China, China, how should
Speaker 2: the second biggest economy in the world respond as the
Speaker 2: US becomes increasingly geopolitically unstable?
Speaker 1: And after that we will be pivoting to poker and
Speaker 1: a controversy that happened last week about an incorrect hand
Speaker 1: winning a pot in a very, very big spot. What
Speaker 1: should players and others responsibility be in a situation like that?
Speaker 2: Speak up players if the dealer focus up anyway. We'll
Speaker 2: get into that in the second second.
Speaker 1: Somebody has opinions. Yeah, let's talk about China. We are
Speaker 1: taping this on Monday, March tenth. China has just announced
Speaker 1: retaliatory tariffs on the United States taking effect immediately, but
Speaker 1: they will not be affecting goods that arrive in the
Speaker 1: country before April twelfth, Nate, Every single time we tape,
Speaker 1: there seems to be more and more news coming out,
Speaker 1: but all of it points to one reality, which is
Speaker 1: that the US is just trying to take a step
Speaker 1: back from its role in global politics, or rather in
Speaker 1: its role in building alliances and trying to be a
Speaker 1: diplomatic force for the good, creating somewhat of a power vacuum.
Speaker 1: And China as the world's second largest economy, there are
Speaker 1: some opportunities here. There's a lot going on between the
Speaker 1: US and China. I think it would be really interesting
Speaker 1: to try to, you know, flip the game theory. Last
Speaker 1: week I talked about game theory from the US perspective.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about it from the Chinese perspective and see
Speaker 1: what this moment in time means for how China should
Speaker 1: be thinking about its future and constructing its economic and
Speaker 1: foreign policies. What do we think about this?
Speaker 2: Uh, China's a real country either not this cute little
Speaker 2: puppy like Canada or something like that. They are the
Speaker 2: second largest economy in the world, the second largest you know,
Speaker 2: effectively military power in the world. They can do a
Speaker 2: lot of things to contradict the United States interest if
Speaker 2: we're in a zero some game when AI and other stuff,
Speaker 2: and like, it's a moment for she to think big
Speaker 2: and to think long term. And you know, because these
Speaker 2: things that Trump is doing, we'll take a long time
Speaker 2: to undo right, if Trump quit tomorrow and went back
Speaker 2: to Marrow Lago and Jade Vance takes over, then a
Speaker 2: Democrat wins I don't know, fucking Gavin Newsom or some
Speaker 2: shit like that, Right, a Democrat wins in four years.
Speaker 2: Even this six weeks, right, these two months now almost
Speaker 2: still would damage America's credibility, I.
Speaker 1: Think absolutely absolutely, And I think that's really important to remember.
Speaker 1: It's much faster to break things than it is to
Speaker 1: build them back up. They're also doing more. China has
Speaker 1: a lot of levers that it can push that it's
Speaker 1: not just tariffs. They're also blocking fifteen US companies from
Speaker 1: buying Chinese products, and they're just saying, you know, you
Speaker 1: want to play with us, we'll play with you. And
Speaker 1: what you have to understand about China is it can actually,
Speaker 1: like very strategically, can do like you know, it can
Speaker 1: do whatever the fuck it wants basically. So what they're
Speaker 1: doing is they're trying to mitigate the effects of some
Speaker 1: tariffs by saying, oh, okay, fine, the US post tariffs
Speaker 1: on you. Great, We're going to reduce your taxes.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: It can like just very surgically say okay, this company
Speaker 1: that's now being you know, subject to tariffs in the
Speaker 1: US has to pay fewer taxes than it did before,
Speaker 1: so that they can keep their prices the same. Right,
Speaker 1: it can push all of these buttons because it really
Speaker 1: can have this very directed approach to the economy that
Speaker 1: even with the executive orders and even with Trump trying
Speaker 1: to act more autocratically and bypassed Congress, we can't do
Speaker 1: that in the US, right, we don't have that sort
Speaker 1: of centralized power, and so that is actually something that
Speaker 1: when you're talking about game theory, who has you know,
Speaker 1: who has more muscle, who can push whom around. China
Speaker 1: can really do things that we cannot do in the
Speaker 1: United States.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again, in terms of a share of the economy,
Speaker 2: we went over this last time with Canada and Mexico.
Speaker 2: No one country is that large a share of the
Speaker 2: US economy because we make a lot of our own
Speaker 2: stuff and our imports are diversified. So basically, China, Mexico, Canada,
Speaker 2: and the EU are between the EU as one country
Speaker 2: are the four largest exporters to the US and they're
Speaker 2: all about equal about five hundred billion dollars per year.
Speaker 2: But China has a lot of geopolitical influence, you know,
Speaker 2: the kind of smart form policy types to have perpetually
Speaker 2: been worried about China potentially invading Taiwan. They also have
Speaker 2: a lot of influence over over Ai policy. The US
Speaker 2: is concerned about a potential race with China on Ai.
Speaker 2: But yeah, one thing we're trying to do is prevent China,
Speaker 2: in various ways from getting access to the most powerful
Speaker 2: semiconductor chips right a lot of which are produced ironically
Speaker 2: in Taiwan, And so there are profound geopolitical implications, and
Speaker 2: China can create a lot more problems to the United
Speaker 2: States in terms of global alliances and things like that too,
Speaker 2: especially if, like if Europe is now like like, who
Speaker 2: are friends now? Maria? Who still likes us?
Speaker 1: Who likes Russia? Russia? Russia likes US.
Speaker 2: I don't want Russia to like US. I don't want it.
Speaker 1: There's a difference between what you want and what's happening.
Speaker 1: So who are friends right now? Russia likes US? I
Speaker 1: think North Korea is probably pretty happy with the way
Speaker 1: things are going.
Speaker 2: Japan. We've left Japan alone, haven't we? I mean India, India,
Speaker 2: we seem.
Speaker 1: To leave for now, for now, for now, But we'll
Speaker 1: see what happens. Right Seriously, though we don't have many
Speaker 1: allies left. Europe is really up in arms, literally trying
Speaker 1: to be up in arms and rearm and you know,
Speaker 1: trying to figure that out. China is very not happy
Speaker 1: and is trying to show that you know what, fuck
Speaker 1: you, you cannot push us around, and we really can't push
Speaker 1: China around, by the way, Like this is an incredibly
Speaker 1: powerful economy, it's an incredibly powerful diplomatic force, you know,
Speaker 1: if you're thinking about not just the economic stuff, right,
Speaker 1: but the type of precedent that the US is setting
Speaker 1: by cozying enough to Putin and saying, oh, potentially, like
Speaker 1: let's allow Putin to take parts of Ukraine. Like we
Speaker 1: don't know what's going to happen with that right now,
Speaker 1: but that sort of precedent may actually embolden China to
Speaker 1: try something with Taiwan in a way that it hasn't
Speaker 1: in the past because it's been i think restrained by
Speaker 1: some international norms. Those norms might be eroding, so we
Speaker 1: can potentially see kind of more aggression there, and that
Speaker 1: that's also not a happy place for us to be in.
Speaker 1: Right when when we see that potential I don't know, right,
Speaker 1: I don't There's a lot of uncertainty around this, but
Speaker 1: I think that if international norms of behavior are being eroded,
Speaker 1: then that can be frightening for a lot of countries
Speaker 1: in Asia. Right. If you think that, oh, okay, this
Speaker 1: balance of power is no longer going to be held
Speaker 1: in check, then if I you know, if I were
Speaker 1: living anywhere there, I'd be a little nervous.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, you know, foreign policy did not change
Speaker 2: that much from Bush to Obama to Trump one to Biden. Right,
Speaker 2: And so the United States has lots of problems. That
Speaker 2: starts stupid borers, right, it has someone economic crises that
Speaker 2: it then spreads the rest of the world. But like
Speaker 2: you know, there is more of a consensus on foreign
Speaker 2: policy then on economic policy or social policy or whatever else. Right,
Speaker 2: And like you know, it's not even like Trump necessarily
Speaker 2: has like a coherent foreign policy vision exactly. It's kind
Speaker 2: of very zero sum mentality. We talked about that before, Right,
Speaker 2: It's it leans toward isolationism. And look, you'll hear plenty
Speaker 2: of critiques of Trump on this show. I would rather
Speaker 2: have Trump err on the side of isolations and than
Speaker 2: war mongering. If those are the two choices. But like,
Speaker 2: but you know, when states don't play an active role
Speaker 2: in the world, then you know there are power vacuums
Speaker 2: that potentially can can get filled. Right And by the way,
Speaker 2: I don't think Biden was particularly effective on China or
Speaker 2: really anything in foreign policy either. Frankly, you know, Trump
Speaker 2: at least at least has a little bit of the
Speaker 2: kind of rogue state factor where you don't know what
Speaker 2: the United States would do necessarily. But but yeah, I mean, look,
Speaker 2: the stereotype of China is that they're pretty good I
Speaker 2: don't know, tacticians, like maybe the global strategy, but like,
Speaker 2: but you know they are going to understand if both
Speaker 2: to secure their own future, you know, or to kind
Speaker 2: of you know, punch at the United States in a
Speaker 2: way to slow us down in the AI race too, right,
Speaker 2: I mean that's you know, maybe the most high stakes
Speaker 2: question right now in the world.
Speaker 1: Oh. Absolutely, I mean I think that they're very tactically savvy.
Speaker 1: And it was interesting. I was having a conversation the
Speaker 1: other week kind of about some of the downstream effects
Speaker 1: of the Trump policies, and right now, you know, we're
Speaker 1: seeing absolute chaos, you know, with the NIH and the
Speaker 1: science funding. A lot of institutions, including places like you Penn,
Speaker 1: are resending offers to grad students in the sciences because
Speaker 1: they're like, oh, we can't, we can't afford you anymore.
Speaker 1: It's really bad, right, And if you think about what
Speaker 1: that means for the future of kind of science, technology,
Speaker 1: scientific development in the US, there's a potential for brain drain,
Speaker 1: and people like, well, where are people going to go?
Speaker 1: Who's funding it? Like, well, this is pretty funny, because
Speaker 1: I think this is a great strategic opportunity for China
Speaker 1: to be like me, right, we'll fund it. You come
Speaker 1: here and you can have a lot of money and
Speaker 1: you can do your research here. And I actually think
Speaker 1: that some people might take them up on it. And
Speaker 1: that would be pretty terrifying, right if we have a
Speaker 1: brain drain from the US to China, And that might
Speaker 1: happen if you cannot get your research funded, if you
Speaker 1: cannot do work here and someone else And I say
Speaker 1: that they might take them up on it, because I
Speaker 1: know people who have gone, you know, to work in
Speaker 1: the UAE, who have gone to work in a lot
Speaker 1: of places that, like you would think they would not
Speaker 1: want to work in because of their ideas about freedom,
Speaker 1: et cetera, et cetera. But they do it because they're
Speaker 1: offered a lot of money, right, and money speaks and
Speaker 1: incentive speak. And I think that China is very tactically
Speaker 1: good on all levels of figuring out where the opportunities are,
Speaker 1: where the potential kind of where the potential to get
Speaker 1: ahead is, and so that you know, I would not
Speaker 1: be surprised to see some people, you know, some some
Speaker 1: brain drain potentially happening that way. And that's an interesting
Speaker 1: thing to consider when we look at you know, ten
Speaker 1: years out, twenty years out, technology and science.
Speaker 2: If I were she, I would make Hong Kong, which
Speaker 2: is controlled because Hong Kong is one city, right, I
Speaker 2: would make that the most welcoming front imaginable to the west. Right, yep,
Speaker 2: Like it's an image play that's very smart, yeah, for
Speaker 2: like for right now, China doesn't have the image of
Speaker 2: luxury that other Asian cultures sometimes do. But this can change,
Speaker 2: you know, yeah, and it can change quickly. Korean goods
Speaker 2: have become prestigious, right, Obviously, Japanese is a very high
Speaker 2: prestige country. But you know, but those are countries that
Speaker 2: are democracy used and that have been nocratus for a
Speaker 2: long time and like you know, have like a flurish
Speaker 2: wishing artistic center, right, Like I don't you know people
Speaker 2: thought that China would democratize as it became richer, and
Speaker 2: like it kind of is that exactly?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's a really interesting thing to think about.
Speaker 1: What can what can China do to make itself look
Speaker 1: more appealing to Americans right to people who want to
Speaker 1: flee And I think that that is something that they
Speaker 1: are potentially not thinking through as deeply as they should,
Speaker 1: because to me, like great game theoretic move right would
Speaker 1: be okay, yes, you know, we're sorry. Like free speech,
Speaker 1: all this great stuff, like we will embrace it. You know,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump says, you can't say these words. You can
Speaker 1: say anything here right, Come to Hong Kong. We will
Speaker 1: give you money, We will give you pretty things. It
Speaker 1: will be nice. And Hong Kong used to be a place,
Speaker 1: you know that was incredibly welcoming before all of the
Speaker 1: you know, before there were the crackdowns on free speech
Speaker 1: and everything that has happened. And in the last five
Speaker 1: or so years, Hong Kong was kind of a mecca
Speaker 1: for a lot of Western a lot of Westerners, right
Speaker 1: they they went there and they're like, oh, this isn't China,
Speaker 1: this is different. I think that doubling down on that
Speaker 1: would actually be huge and would potentially give China an
Speaker 1: edge in a lot of different things because you see
Speaker 1: that they actually can like Australia right imports. I don't
Speaker 1: know how many Chinese evs right like, there are there
Speaker 1: are markets where China is actually kind of flourishing in
Speaker 1: different countries because they have technology that they're able to
Speaker 1: kind of develop. And I think that if they double
Speaker 1: down on a lot of these things, we can we
Speaker 1: can see kind of a big change in their geopolitical
Speaker 1: standing and in the way they're perceived in the world,
Speaker 1: which which I think could be a very tactically sound
Speaker 1: play for them. And we see and kind of the
Speaker 1: ev The reason I mentioned the evs is because with
Speaker 1: you know, tariffs et cetera, et cetera, Like that's actually
Speaker 1: something that along with AI is a place where they
Speaker 1: can start developing a strategic edge right now because there
Speaker 1: is kind of this opening that hasn't existed in the past.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but of course, you know, every auto manufacturer, Eleast
Speaker 2: American ones have like global supply chains, right, So, but yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean, look, I have friends who are like literally
Speaker 2: trying to figure out how to make bets on Chinese
Speaker 2: made evs gaining market share relative to Tesla. You know,
Speaker 2: that's you know, the stakes are pretty obvious with China.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, yeah, you know, there's a way forward there where
Speaker 1: they can actually make their image much more positive for
Speaker 1: the Western mind than it is right now. And I
Speaker 1: think that they should really try to be exploring that
Speaker 1: strategically because there is a vacuum and the US right
Speaker 1: now is not looking good, right the strong man politics
Speaker 1: are not looking good. That's a great moment for she
Speaker 1: to be like, hey, we're not the strong man, We're
Speaker 1: not the bad guys. Look at us, like we can
Speaker 1: actually be much nicer than what's happening in the United
Speaker 1: States and we will not betray our allies or whatever
Speaker 1: it is. So I think that there's a lot of
Speaker 1: moves that can happen right now that will not end
Speaker 1: well for the US now.
Speaker 2: The contrast to the Middle East is interesting, is like
Speaker 2: the marketing strategy right in the sense that like, you know,
Speaker 2: the Middle East turned countries will like sponsor huge soccer
Speaker 2: teams and things like that, right, and they'll and they'll
Speaker 2: have this marketing campaign more, Hey, come to Saudi Arabia
Speaker 2: and in the pictures we show you in the ads, right,
Speaker 2: it looks very progressive, and you know, and they'll bribe allegedly,
Speaker 2: bribe FIFA to host World Cups allegedly and things like that. Right.
Speaker 2: But it's a marketing strategy to paint a friendlier phase, right,
Speaker 2: and it probably is probably has worked on some level.
Speaker 2: I'm not looking at like what American perceptions are of
Speaker 2: the wealthier you know, Gulf state, Saudi Arabia, cutar, et cetera.
Speaker 2: I said kutar in one of the ways that you're
Speaker 2: not supposed to say it. There's like five ways you
Speaker 2: can say and I just kind of made up my
Speaker 2: own pronunciation there, cut the guitar anyway.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's I Actually, I think that that's a really
Speaker 1: that's a good analogy in the sense that foreign image
Speaker 1: laundering is something that countries have done many times over
Speaker 1: the years and sometimes successfully. And I think that and
Speaker 1: it's always a huge, huge part of any diplomatic policy.
Speaker 1: It's a huge part of you know, what the CIA does,
Speaker 1: right to try to massage perceptions of the United States
Speaker 1: and different countries. I think it happens all the time,
Speaker 1: and yet when you see an opportunity like that, you
Speaker 1: should take it. So I think the US should be worried.
Speaker 1: It should try to be figuring out how to make
Speaker 1: it so that you know so that these moves are
Speaker 1: not going to happen. Right, how do you like, how
Speaker 1: do you look ahead at the game theoretic board so
Speaker 1: that you can actually counter these moves before they happen.
Speaker 1: And that's not something that's happening right now, Nate. Let's
Speaker 1: do a quick recap. So what are our key takeaways
Speaker 1: from the current situation between the US and China and
Speaker 1: kind of where the strategic choices lie.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I guess a little bit. What we talked about
Speaker 2: before is like the US is abdicating its position in
Speaker 2: some ways as a global hedgemon. I'm using all these
Speaker 2: terms I learned in debate team years ago. The term
Speaker 2: that we'd use is soft power, right, where like the
Speaker 2: United States is seeing as being the most stable economy
Speaker 2: in the world, a force for stability and international order generally.
Speaker 2: Of course it fucks up and makes some mistakes, right,
Speaker 2: but an anchor of safety. And if the US no
Speaker 2: longer that then, you know, can China play that role?
Speaker 2: And I think that might actually entail having a friendlier face,
Speaker 2: and China has sometimes a friendlier face to the West
Speaker 2: in particular. I mean, Europe is looking around for hey,
Speaker 2: who can we trust here anymore? Looking for trade partners potentially,
Speaker 2: and so it's an interesting moment, right, I think their
Speaker 2: response is not necessarily to like go not to get
Speaker 2: drawn into Trump's zero some game, which isn't really a
Speaker 2: zero some game. I mean, we want global cooperation on
Speaker 2: all these things ultimately, right, you know, both China and
Speaker 2: the US weirdly have like an interest in like making
Speaker 2: sure that we're the only two AI superpowers, right, and
Speaker 2: that somebody else, I mean, at least whatever else doesn't
Speaker 2: kind of catch up. But yeah, it's it's a moment
Speaker 2: for she to think big, you know, the US maybe
Speaker 2: abdicating its role as kind of the leader of the
Speaker 2: free world. Whether trying to count as a free world
Speaker 2: or not is kind of an open question obviously, But like,
Speaker 2: you know, you counter sometimes the player who is being
Speaker 2: playing zero s in the non zero S game by
Speaker 2: being the bigger, better, more mature player yourself, right, And
Speaker 2: so maybe, you know, maybe we open up Hong Kong
Speaker 2: more and don't invade Taiwan until you consolidate kind of
Speaker 2: more power and more authority. I think. I think playing
Speaker 2: a long game is always, always, almost always beneficial when
Speaker 2: others are short sighted.
Speaker 1: All right, let's uh, let's take a break night and
Speaker 1: then talk some poker.
Speaker 2: Nate.
Speaker 1: Have you been on poker Twitter this past week where
Speaker 1: there has been a lot of controversy, shall we say,
Speaker 1: around one particular hand that happened at a circuit event.
Speaker 1: Have you been privy to this or have you been
Speaker 1: too busy at Sloan conference?
Speaker 2: You know Twitter follows me. Oh, the Twitter was down
Speaker 2: actually for parts of the day. Yeah, why don't you
Speaker 2: introduce I have seen the hand in question. Do you
Speaker 2: want to introduce this one though, Maria?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Sure, Okay. So we are at a World Series
Speaker 1: of PO circuit event, which is not the main World series,
Speaker 1: but this is kind of the circuit gives out rings.
Speaker 1: It's a big deal and it's down to the final table.
Speaker 1: It's down to the final three players. One of those
Speaker 1: players is Maurice Hawkins, who has at that point seventeen rings.
Speaker 1: I want to say, if he wins this ring, he
Speaker 1: will tie Ari Engele for the most rings in history
Speaker 1: in the circuit at eighteen rings. By the way, Ari
Speaker 1: just won another ring. Congratulations Ari, so Ari's now at nineteen,
Speaker 1: but last week he didn't have that ring. And there's
Speaker 1: a big hand where Maurice and another player are all
Speaker 1: in and the dealer fans out the board and MUCKs
Speaker 1: the other player's hand and says that Maurice has won
Speaker 1: with a straight. Maurice has awarded the pot. The other
Speaker 1: player is eliminated, and Maurice goes on to win his ring,
Speaker 1: ring number eighteen. It turns out that the pot was
Speaker 1: awarded incorrectly. The player who was eliminated had actually had
Speaker 1: a flush and was supposed to win the hand. This
Speaker 1: was all captured on camera in the moment, and so
Speaker 1: there's a lot of controversy around what went wrong and
Speaker 1: also kind of what is the role of the media,
Speaker 1: right because someone was filming this hand, what is the
Speaker 1: role of onlookers? What role do people have to actually
Speaker 1: make sure that the pot is awarded to the correct hand.
Speaker 1: Both hands were on their backs, we can see all cards,
Speaker 1: you can see what the winning hand is. Somehow the dealer,
Speaker 1: the other two players, the media, everyone on the rail,
Speaker 1: nobody speaks up and this poor kid is eliminated instead
Speaker 1: of doubling up, potentially changing the outcome. And this is
Speaker 1: this is a lot of money, right, we're talking. Oh,
Speaker 1: this is a difference in payout of over one hundred
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. This is life changing money. This does not
Speaker 1: happen often. But you know, how do we think about
Speaker 1: this and what you know, what should be done? And
Speaker 1: people are incredibly incredibly split on this, which actually shocked me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, has the World series done anything for him?
Speaker 2: Like I would give him?
Speaker 1: No? Okay, yeah, nothing has been done. It was it
Speaker 1: was basically a tough shit, dude. It's your responsibility to
Speaker 1: protect your hand and you're done well.
Speaker 2: First of all, the dealer it's an all in pot, right,
Speaker 2: so both hands are face up for the entire table,
Speaker 2: and he MUCKs the sensible loser's hand really fast, right,
Speaker 2: which was just strange. Right, there's no reason to rush it.
Speaker 2: He dealt the whole so it's one thing. Also, the
Speaker 2: guy said, oh I thought I won, right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so this is this is crucial. Yet on the video,
Speaker 1: the person who loses actually says, oh I thought I won,
Speaker 1: and instead of a knowledging that the dealer takes his
Speaker 1: hand which is still perfectly identifiable, and pushes it into
Speaker 1: the muck, which is the big pile of cards, which
Speaker 1: is something that you should absolutely never do.
Speaker 2: You know, they have cameras because he knows, so you
Speaker 2: can always and you know, there are sometimes circumstances where
Speaker 2: if if one player thinks a few chips are missing,
Speaker 2: they can pause the entire table, if not the entire
Speaker 2: tournament for you know, for a long periods of time sometimes,
Speaker 2: I mean, so, it was just it was very weird,
Speaker 2: and also, like my experience has been that, like, especially
Speaker 2: in the four Card games, that players like actually go
Speaker 2: out of their way to point out errors when it's
Speaker 2: not in their best interests to do so, right, especially
Speaker 2: when the thing I'm thinking about is like kind of
Speaker 2: like you know, early in the World series, where the
Speaker 2: dealers are very new and not used to dealing. This
Speaker 2: is to hold them, so I don't know what the
Speaker 2: dealer's problem is, right, used to deal, they're doing all
Speaker 2: these types of different games, Like players are acting as
Speaker 2: like the eyes of the house, right and are go
Speaker 2: out of their way to like point stuff out. I
Speaker 2: actually had something work in my favor one time right
Speaker 2: where like I was playing Omaha uh eight, which is
Speaker 2: a high low game. It's a limit game. It's not
Speaker 2: all in game, not a pot limit game, I should say.
Speaker 2: And like I called with with hoping to win the
Speaker 2: low half of the pot. I had a bad call.
Speaker 2: I could badhand good pot odds just lo across country, tired,
Speaker 2: don't play am that much, right, and I don't have
Speaker 2: the best low and I'm about to muck my hand, right,
Speaker 2: but someone says, oh, you can't beat you can't win
Speaker 2: the high, right, you have any pair at all? And
Speaker 2: I did an a pair of asses and a bad kicker.
Speaker 2: The other guy busted out in the high had only
Speaker 2: a low hand right because my hand had not was
Speaker 2: not reprievable in the muck yet I was able to
Speaker 2: turn it over the dealer had not mucked quickly enough. Right.
Speaker 2: But the point is even then people are saying, okay,
Speaker 2: just make sure you didn't do something stupid and give
Speaker 2: away like half the pot, right. And so it's very
Speaker 2: odd that like nobody else at the table said anything.
Speaker 2: I have that one or two times where it's like
Speaker 2: did you miss that straight on the board, right, And
Speaker 2: no one else will say anything. Anyone kind of like
Speaker 2: picks themselves into saying, okay, well if it sure looks
Speaker 2: like there's a straight on the board, right, but no
Speaker 2: one else is saying anything, so I won't say anything.
Speaker 2: But it's it's it's very bizarre that, like a bunch
Speaker 2: of things that don't usually happen, the dealer has to
Speaker 2: make this mistake. The player has to be like, how
Speaker 2: are you not like sweating this hand? Right? I mean,
Speaker 2: they're a weird way. We need to get more detail about,
Speaker 2: like under what circumstances you might be mentally checked out?
Speaker 1: But like, yeah, so I think kind of from a
Speaker 1: broader perspective, I think there are a few things going
Speaker 1: on here. So first, like in terms of decision making, right,
Speaker 1: this is I think we should point out that this
Speaker 1: is a much higher emotion, kind of and hotter situation
Speaker 1: than normal.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: This isn't a normal poker hand. This is the final
Speaker 1: three players in a huge turn for a ring. Right,
Speaker 1: So emotions are running high and people are kind of
Speaker 1: people are much more kind of in the moment. This
Speaker 1: is much more consequential, right than if this had been
Speaker 1: an all in the day before. Right, with thirty players left,
Speaker 1: three hundred players left, however, a enemy. So that means
Speaker 1: two things for decision making. First, your decision making does
Speaker 1: get worse in those moments. But secondly, because the kind
Speaker 1: of the risk reward is so much higher and the
Speaker 1: consequences are so much higher and the payoffs matter so
Speaker 1: much more, you should be it's in those moments where
Speaker 1: you need to kind of be paying the most attention
Speaker 1: and so and so I think that we have kind
Speaker 1: of that sort of dynamic here where I think that
Speaker 1: the player who busted he did say I think I won,
Speaker 1: but then he didn't insist on it because I think
Speaker 1: that he's flustered, right, he just busted this tournament in
Speaker 1: this big spot, and he doesn't want to look dumb.
Speaker 1: He doesn't want to be like, no, I think I
Speaker 1: won and then realize that he didn't actually win, and
Speaker 1: he you know, I think that all of these things,
Speaker 1: all of these emotional things, are clouding the moment. But
Speaker 1: I think that the other part of this, and the
Speaker 1: reason that I was really interested in this, because as
Speaker 1: you know, I'm writing a book about cheating, is kind
Speaker 1: of what is the responsibility of different people in this hand?
Speaker 1: And obviously, like ultimately the mistake is absolutely the dealers, right,
Speaker 1: and the players, but the dealers, the speed of mucking
Speaker 1: was huge, But is it you know, people were very
Speaker 1: were incredibly torn. And to me, this is the interesting
Speaker 1: part on whether the media should have spoken up, right,
Speaker 1: And I was shocked at how many people are like, no,
Speaker 1: they should absolutely not speak up. They should not insert
Speaker 1: themselves into the story. I'm like, are you kidding me? Right,
Speaker 1: As someone who is a member of the media, who's
Speaker 1: been trained, you know, to not be part of the story,
Speaker 1: that completely goes out the window when it becomes an
Speaker 1: ethical issue. Right, So we are trained you do not
Speaker 1: become part of the story. But if you see that
Speaker 1: someone got stabbed, you call nine one one. You don't say, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm just observing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a prime directive of Star Trek. Like, it's
Speaker 2: not a rule, the prime directive. I don't know, I'm
Speaker 2: not as much of us, but like, you're not allowed
Speaker 2: to interfere in a primitive alien culture, right, there's no
Speaker 2: rule like that in the poker book. In fact, the
Speaker 2: rule is that cards is that cards speak.
Speaker 1: Right, cards speak, Yes.
Speaker 2: Cards are face up in the sand. It's not a
Speaker 2: case where somebody incorrectly mucked, then you can't do anything
Speaker 2: about it, right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is this is a case where both hands
Speaker 1: are tabled, and so I think it's absolutely the ethical
Speaker 1: responsibility of someone who notices it to speak up. Let
Speaker 1: me give a less extreme example, like imagine, Nate, I'm
Speaker 1: set on a beat to cover life in Central Park
Speaker 1: right in New York. So I'm there kind of observing
Speaker 1: and I'm writing about this, right, I'm not going to
Speaker 1: interfere because I'm just watching people. And then I see
Speaker 1: someone's wallet get swiped. Do I not say anything because
Speaker 1: they because a person didn't notice and they're just standing
Speaker 1: having a conversation, Or do I say, hey, thief, right
Speaker 1: and actually point out that something that your wallet just
Speaker 1: got stolen. Of course I'm going to say something. I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna even if you're not dying, I'm going to say, hey,
Speaker 1: someone just stole your wallet, right, like we need to,
Speaker 1: I'm sure, I think.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, if I were covering a political
Speaker 2: campaign and I detected illegal activity, right, I wouldn't tell
Speaker 2: the police about that. I'd write about it, or I'd
Speaker 2: choose not to. I don't know. I mean, it's like
Speaker 2: the analogy. But like, look, I don't.
Speaker 1: But that's different. So we're talking about something where you
Speaker 1: can immediately right where you see a crime being committed
Speaker 1: in the moment, and you can immediately do something. If
Speaker 1: you detected a legal activity in a political campaign, you know,
Speaker 1: and you had to follow the money, et cetera, et cetera,
Speaker 1: you'd report out the story. But if you actually observed
Speaker 1: something illegal happening that you could change in the moment,
Speaker 1: I think you would. That's a very difficult.
Speaker 2: Let's say we are at the World Series of Summer
Speaker 2: only a couple months away now, and we have may
Speaker 2: plans to get dinner together. You say, I'm a table
Speaker 2: six hundred and twelve or whatever. Your table's taking a
Speaker 2: long time to finish a tend. I come over. I
Speaker 2: notice you, full right. I noticed that. Then the two
Speaker 2: remaining players, the pot is pushed to the wrong player,
Speaker 2: and I say, nothing at your table. Wait, that dude
Speaker 2: just made a flush. Yeah, Like that's okay, Right, so
Speaker 2: it's an immediate thing.
Speaker 1: You're like, it's absolutely okay. And I also want I
Speaker 1: hate when people start immediately going out to the grander arguments. Well,
Speaker 1: the media's job is to report, it's not to kind
Speaker 1: of police the hand. Yeah, absolutely, that's exactly right. The
Speaker 1: media's job is to report. I'm not saying it's their
Speaker 1: responsibility to be paying attention to who's awarded the pot
Speaker 1: in every single hand. That's not their responsibility, right, Just
Speaker 1: like it's not my responsibility to walk around Central Park
Speaker 1: looking to see if there are crimes being committed that
Speaker 1: I can help. We have police, we have people who
Speaker 1: do that. But if you happen to see in the moment,
Speaker 1: and if you happen to know that, then you should absolutely.
Speaker 1: I think it's your ethical obligation to speak up.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and as part of the poker again, I go
Speaker 2: back to these events. You know, the ethic of the
Speaker 2: community is that, like we speak up, to speak up
Speaker 2: to dealer errors or errors in terms of how the
Speaker 2: tournament is run, but especially dealer errors. Right, it's a
Speaker 2: community's responsibility to speak up. But by the way, if
Speaker 2: you want to talk about like the equilibrium, right, like
Speaker 2: if you didn't have people willing to help out a
Speaker 2: confused dealer, then you'd have to like you would have
Speaker 2: longer lines because you wouldn't have enough qualified dealers, or
Speaker 2: maybe they pay dealers more, but then the rake is
Speaker 2: higher and things like that, right, and so like I
Speaker 2: think it's kind of like explicitly ethical for if a
Speaker 2: player to speak up when when dealers make mistakes. I mean,
Speaker 2: the thing is too that's weird about it though, like
Speaker 2: like didn't Maurice Hawkins, No, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1: Or I'm assuming, like we don't know, but I'm assuming
Speaker 1: he did given how he behaved, because he is someone
Speaker 1: who always celebrates and is very in your face when
Speaker 1: he wins and you see him on the term, on
Speaker 1: the turn like being like you know, straight, like blah
Speaker 1: blah blah, like I got this, and then on the
Speaker 1: river as opposed to celebrating, he just goes quiet. He
Speaker 1: goes silent, and that is we don't know, We don't
Speaker 1: know this, but I think that you know, we have
Speaker 1: a duty to any kind of community that we are
Speaker 1: part of that we love to kind of keep to
Speaker 1: keep things above board, right, to keep things to keep
Speaker 1: the community good, and to actually like ensure that good
Speaker 1: behavior is rewarded and bad behavior is punished. And let's
Speaker 1: just like if you zoom out even further to journalism,
Speaker 1: like some of the best journalisms, journalists have sometimes fucked
Speaker 1: up right and not intervened when they should have, and
Speaker 1: they were punished for it. Because I think that just ethically,
Speaker 1: we do have kind of this duty to speak up.
Speaker 2: We'll be right back after this message.
Speaker 1: The bigger, the bigger point here is that like we
Speaker 1: all make poor decisions when we're tired, when emotions are
Speaker 1: running high, when you know, when you're in hot situations
Speaker 1: and everyone you know, you can just not see things
Speaker 1: that are right in front of your face. You know.
Speaker 1: An attentional blindness is a real thing. When you're not
Speaker 1: looking for certain cards, you're not looking for certain things,
Speaker 1: and you just completely miss It can happen to anyone.
Speaker 1: Just back in December, by the way, I missed a
Speaker 1: flush yet had and this was and this was the
Speaker 1: ten k when main event. This was day three or four,
Speaker 1: I think it was day four. It was very deep
Speaker 1: and you know, I had gone all in with a
Speaker 1: pair of queens against a pair of kings. The kings
Speaker 1: hit a set on the flop, so I was like,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm dead right, And then on the turn
Speaker 1: I was drawing to a straight. But I also did
Speaker 1: not realize that it was another club and I had
Speaker 1: the Queen of clubs and he did not have the
Speaker 1: King of clubs. So when the strait didn't hit on
Speaker 1: the river, I left because I thought I busted. And
Speaker 1: the player who lost the hand who had the kings
Speaker 1: was like, wait, you have a flush, and the dealer
Speaker 1: was like and called me back. Right, That's that's what
Speaker 1: you do. That's the only ethical way of handling that situation.
Speaker 2: I had a spot where a lot of at one
Speaker 2: point I had a lot of chips in one of
Speaker 2: these poker goat tournaments and then lost a big flip
Speaker 2: and they didn't have many chips, and then like, you know,
Speaker 2: another hand shoved like fifteen big linds from the small
Speaker 2: blind open shove with like a decent queen, you know,
Speaker 2: Queen seven, Queen six, suited, Queen ate off something in
Speaker 2: that missiny middling strength hand right and made trips, I mean,
Speaker 2: three of a kind queens. But the guy backed into
Speaker 2: like Broadway straight. So it was kind of pissed and
Speaker 2: like I just lost this flip and then lost this
Speaker 2: other thing that wasn't technically a flip, but whatever, right,
Speaker 2: and you know, I get up to leave and he's like, no, dude,
Speaker 2: that guy only had two bling buds left, right, He
Speaker 2: had almost busted in the previous hand and kind of
Speaker 2: being like tired and like, you know, a little mine
Speaker 2: off has tilted. But like but yeah, your your attention
Speaker 2: span can, yeah, can wane in situations like this. This
Speaker 2: is why it's bad idea to play four card games
Speaker 2: and you just flew across the country by the.
Speaker 1: Way, Yeah, I mean, I think that's one of the
Speaker 1: bigger issues here. Like we all make mistakes in emotional situations,
Speaker 1: and so everyone else should like people should try to
Speaker 1: rectify those mistakes. You should try to be helpful, and
Speaker 1: that is I think something of a of an ethical
Speaker 1: obligation there.
Speaker 2: And also if you you know, don't be afraid to
Speaker 2: do things that are mildly embarrassing, but that like yeah,
Speaker 2: or you know, so for example, let's say that I
Speaker 2: didn't eat breakfast and wait for the dinner break and
Speaker 2: it's a little shaky or something, right, like I'll just
Speaker 2: verbally start declaring my bets, you know, five thousand or something, right,
Speaker 2: because I don't want any tales having to do with
Speaker 2: like my handshaking or things like that. Or like, you know,
Speaker 2: sometimes you'll see you where a player is confused about
Speaker 2: how to read the board, right, usually not and hold them,
Speaker 2: but sometimes and hold them too, and they'll look at
Speaker 2: their hand and stare at their hand and try to
Speaker 2: figure out whether they made something, especially in Omaha games. Right,
Speaker 2: Just table your hand, right. Everybody misreads boards in Omaha, right.
Speaker 2: You never know when you are missing, like especially like
Speaker 2: some bomb pot or something right, or a split pot game,
Speaker 2: like you probably made some two pair that you forgot about,
Speaker 2: you know, if you're playing big oh five cards, right,
Speaker 2: So just table your fucking hand. It's not that embarrassing.
Speaker 2: Everyone plays all kind of crap and the big old
Speaker 2: games anyway, rights, you know, because you're gonna feel a
Speaker 2: lot worse if you go to bed like, oh shit,
Speaker 2: I think I actually rivered a back door straight kind
Speaker 2: of thing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, now, of course. So I think the big takeaway
Speaker 1: from this is everyone makes mistakes. It's hard to make
Speaker 1: decisions when you're tired. Give yourself some slack, give other
Speaker 1: people some slack, don't be afraid of looking dumb, and
Speaker 1: do speak up, right, because as you get more and
Speaker 1: more people who say nothing. I think that's the other
Speaker 1: part of this. There is this tendency to say, oh
Speaker 1: I must be wrong. Don't succumb to that and be
Speaker 1: the one person who says, wait, can we just look
Speaker 1: at this one more time? And I think that everyone
Speaker 1: will be better off, whether you're playing poker or in
Speaker 1: some other situation.
Speaker 2: And by the way, this helps the less experienced players
Speaker 2: that we all want in our game. Right, I make
Speaker 2: far fewer misclicks, meaning when you actually bet the wrong
Speaker 2: amount right or mystery people's stacks despite the previous example,
Speaker 2: you know, you just do a lot less of that,
Speaker 2: whereas those things are like super fucking stressful to players
Speaker 2: if they only play live poker like once every now
Speaker 2: and then, right, and so like being again, don't give
Speaker 2: players strange but at least protect errors that the dealer
Speaker 2: makes some things too, like if dealers are are pitching
Speaker 2: cards too high right so you can see maybe the
Speaker 2: color of the card, right, like, you should say something
Speaker 2: about them, like don't be like, oh, I'm being rude
Speaker 2: to this dealer. You know it's like no, that's going
Speaker 2: to create an advantage for players in certain seats and
Speaker 2: maybe including you, right, and like, so you should you
Speaker 2: should say something.
Speaker 1: You should Yep, you should always speak up if you
Speaker 1: see something, say something. Brought to you by the New
Speaker 1: York City Subway.
Speaker 2: And if you're not subscribing yet, consider signing up for
Speaker 2: just six ninety nine a month. What a nice price.
Speaker 2: You get access to all that premium content and ad
Speaker 2: for listening across Pushkin's entire network of shows.
Speaker 1: Risky Business is hosted by me Maria Kanakova.
Speaker 2: And by me Nate Silver. The show is a co
Speaker 2: production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia. This episode was produced
Speaker 2: by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer is Gabriel Hunter Chang.
Speaker 2: Sally Helm is our editor, and our executive producer is
Speaker 2: Jacob Goldstein. Mixing by Sarah Bruder.
Speaker 1: If you like this show, please rate and review us
Speaker 1: so other people can find us too. Thanks so much
Speaker 1: for tuning in.