4 ms·

For most people, poker will probably more likely lead into a gambling addiction (or at least a habit of regularly flushing money down the train at the tables) t

For most people, poker will probably more likely lead into a gambling addiction (or at least a habit of regularly flushing money down the train at the tables) than an inquiry into probability and statistics. Most people are probably just not inquisitive enough to dig into the maths behind poker.

Wowfunhappy 6y ago
I think you need a teacher to put the game in context. Let's put aside for a moment the optics of a school teacher having their class play Poker (even though obviously they wouldn't be using money). I can imagine a lesson plan going something like: 1. Have kids play some individual games with each other. 2. Stop the games, and go over some of the actual math concepts behind Poker. At this point, the kids are engaged and will want to learn better strategies. 3. Run through a game as a group, with the teacher asking the class what they should do each turn. Ask students to explain why they think one move is better than another, get brief discussions going where applicable, and write probabilities on the board. 4. Let the students play another round of individual games to apply what they've learned.
- tekkk 6y ago
  While I think the intention and idea is good, you should not teach kids how to play poker. Rather, use a board game with cards and simulate somewhat similar environment but with no inclination towards real gambling whatsoever. Sure, if the "kids" at hand are university students, you could use poker. But I find it extremely dangerous to teach kids poker theory, who as theorized by the Dunning-Kruger effect might start believing themselves to be really good at it, and then proceed to spend a lot of time and money on a pursuit that might not lead them to happiness. You can teach statistics without making any new gambling addicts in this world. I know the majority of the students wouldn't be affected and the effect could be even positive, but for some the drive to gamble is so strong that they really go off if that predisposition is nurtured. Although perhaps they are ticking time bombs either way, so no amount of protection will save them. But yeah, you got to be careful teaching kids positive feedback loops on things that might have serious drawbacks.
  - eru 6y ago
    That study by Dunning and Kruger did not find that 'Dunning-Kruger effect' that you are citing here. (What they found is that both more and less competent individuals err in their assessment of their own skills towards average competence. The less competent don't give themselves higher marks than the more competent give themselves.) Btw, the kids who are worse at it would probably get their ass handed to them in the class games already anyway. Even after some training. So that's a good corrective and immediate feedback.
- _jjkk 6y ago
  Learning via video games is so powerful for many kids because of the agency they're provided. Also they are intrinsically motivated to play the game and they can't help but learn. "Stop the games", "put the game in context", etc. mostly kills this feeling for many kids. Only the most skilled teachers are able to do this without making the whole thing unfun.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    In this case though, you're stopping the game to teach strategies on how to win the game.
    - _jjkk 6y ago
      But for some kids, the mere act of stopping the game and stepping in as the authority to "teach" is enough to shut them down. Video games are good at getting through to those who don't respond well to adults stepping in and contextualizing things all the time.
      - eru 6y ago
        Yes, the computer stopping things is often easier for kids (and people in general) to accept than another human ordering them around. I guess it feels more like a force of nature than an agent to be argued with. Folklore has it, that Haskell's linter hlint was created so that the author could help his wife's coding without jeopardizing their marriage. The extra indirection step helped.
georgespencer 6y ago
I know it's not your point, but do you really think that _most people_ who play poker casually slide into being degens?
contravariant 6y ago
Poker is a terrible way to learn mathematics but a very useful one to learn about sunk costs.
- eru 6y ago
  Why is it terrible?
  - contravariant 6y ago
    Of all the things that matter in poker knowing the exact probabilities is not all that important.
chaosharmonic 6y ago
I personally learned from the Team Rocket Casino that I should probably never gamble haha

Wowfunhappy 6y ago

I think you need a teacher to put the game in context. Let's put aside for a moment the optics of a school teacher having their class play Poker (even though obviously they wouldn't be using money). I can imagine a lesson plan going something like: 1. Have kids play some individual games with each other. 2. Stop the games, and go over some of the actual math concepts behind Poker. At this point, the kids are engaged and will want to learn better strategies. 3. Run through a game as a group, with the teacher asking the class what they should do each turn. Ask students to explain why they think one move is better than another, get brief discussions going where applicable, and write probabilities on the board. 4. Let the students play another round of individual games to apply what they've learned.

tekkk 6y ago
While I think the intention and idea is good, you should not teach kids how to play poker. Rather, use a board game with cards and simulate somewhat similar environment but with no inclination towards real gambling whatsoever. Sure, if the "kids" at hand are university students, you could use poker. But I find it extremely dangerous to teach kids poker theory, who as theorized by the Dunning-Kruger effect might start believing themselves to be really good at it, and then proceed to spend a lot of time and money on a pursuit that might not lead them to happiness. You can teach statistics without making any new gambling addicts in this world. I know the majority of the students wouldn't be affected and the effect could be even positive, but for some the drive to gamble is so strong that they really go off if that predisposition is nurtured. Although perhaps they are ticking time bombs either way, so no amount of protection will save them. But yeah, you got to be careful teaching kids positive feedback loops on things that might have serious drawbacks.
- eru 6y ago
  That study by Dunning and Kruger did not find that 'Dunning-Kruger effect' that you are citing here. (What they found is that both more and less competent individuals err in their assessment of their own skills towards average competence. The less competent don't give themselves higher marks than the more competent give themselves.) Btw, the kids who are worse at it would probably get their ass handed to them in the class games already anyway. Even after some training. So that's a good corrective and immediate feedback.
_jjkk 6y ago
Learning via video games is so powerful for many kids because of the agency they're provided. Also they are intrinsically motivated to play the game and they can't help but learn. "Stop the games", "put the game in context", etc. mostly kills this feeling for many kids. Only the most skilled teachers are able to do this without making the whole thing unfun.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  In this case though, you're stopping the game to teach strategies on how to win the game.
  - _jjkk 6y ago
    But for some kids, the mere act of stopping the game and stepping in as the authority to "teach" is enough to shut them down. Video games are good at getting through to those who don't respond well to adults stepping in and contextualizing things all the time.
    - eru 6y ago
      Yes, the computer stopping things is often easier for kids (and people in general) to accept than another human ordering them around. I guess it feels more like a force of nature than an agent to be argued with. Folklore has it, that Haskell's linter hlint was created so that the author could help his wife's coding without jeopardizing their marriage. The extra indirection step helped.

georgespencer 6y ago

I know it's not your point, but do you really think that _most people_ who play poker casually slide into being degens?

contravariant 6y ago

Poker is a terrible way to learn mathematics but a very useful one to learn about sunk costs.

eru 6y ago
Why is it terrible?
- contravariant 6y ago
  Of all the things that matter in poker knowing the exact probabilities is not all that important.

chaosharmonic 6y ago

I personally learned from the Team Rocket Casino that I should probably never gamble haha