Once upon a time, a Soviet satirist of renown wrote a book satirizing a con man who set out to make some quick rubles. He was able to convince a small town chess club that he was a traveling chess professional wanting to organize a tournament. This went over big in the township and our man charged entry fees to those gathered about in eager anticipation to let the games begin. He structured the tournament with “twelve identical matches” and began the play knowing very little to absolutely nothing about the game of chess, this being only his second attempt at it. He managed to move the pieces around in a somewhat normal and convincing manner, greatly impressing the gathering who were awestruck by such a “professional” in their midst, reading glory into every play. Alas, the maestro lost all twelve games, but maintained his good humor. By the end, enough time had elapsed for him to run off with the fees he collected at the onset of the games. So, while he didn’t know squat about chess, he came out a winner.

The novel is The Twelve Chairs of which there are both English translations and film adaptation DVDs actually available from Amazon.com. The first film adaptation of the book was actually a Mel Brooks comedy, which is a loose adaptation, recommended only for Brooks fans. The best Russian adaptation is the 1976 mini-series by Mark Zaharov, one of the greatest Russian directors of all time, though he may not sound as familiar as Tarkovsky.

The point is that the definition of a good player, in poker or otherwise, depends on what that player’s purpose is. As far the fictional con artist was concerned, he was an effective player since his strategy precisely achieved his goals – quick money. It is a subtler point, however, that he was a good player also because he knew he couldn’t play solid chess for more than the first five or so moves and because he prepared an escape route.

A large group of poker players in this world are in denial as to their true poker prowess. Egos can be very large in this game of bullying and risk taking. They have never understood the delightful complexity of the game and spend no time in educating themselves as to its nuances and the skill required to play it successfully. The fun of the game is its very complexity, and that it takes a lifetime to really learn it well, and even then new insights remain to be discovered. The player that understands this will have a profitable career at the poker table.

There are also the players who have simply learned a set of rules they strictly follow without applying much thought or trying to improve radically. They conceal their inferiority carefully enough to convey the impression of competence and mostly win in terms of overall profits. If that is their sole purpose for playing, than they may be called good players.

For those players to whom poker is an art, the above types are not true poker players, not really bad, just not real. They are in the clubs but are not the stars. The good player is looking for growth and more and more insight to improve his already good game. He or she understands that the game is a complicated mix of skill, theater, and perception. They know their weaknesses and work hard on improving their good points while lessening their bad ones.

The author is a successful limit cash game player. He plays poker online and receives Rakeback at Ultimate Bet and Rakeback at Absolute Poker.