Originally Posted by duggs
no, thats a really flimsy argument. poker forums/strategy are unfair since lots of people don't bother learning it, playing sober is an unfair advantage since people turn up drunk. having more money than someone else is an unfair advantage etc etc etc. fwiw in live play i could write down each hand manually pretty easily and still have time to chat and play poker, so its not as if its something that can't be done.
do you also want to ban playing more than 1 table? since you can only play 1 live.
All right, I think you've reconciled the concept now, thank you. I've gotten rather accustomed to games where pains are taken to make said game as 100% utterly equal fair as conceivably possible--I remember just a few months ago I made a tirade post on a video game forum rabble-rousing about how I'd just learned video-game fighting game tournaments, at high professional levels, go what I felt was neurotically far in eliminating every possible variable between tournament participants. The particular example I'd noted was how that in those high level tournaments, the tournament host organization actually provides fresh, new controllers for players to use to eliminate variances in controller wear that would be present if players brought their own controllers. I was under the mistaken impression that poker was at all trying to reach that level of equitability, and clearly from your examples about alcohol during play and money advantages, this is not only impossible, it is impractical in the view of virtually any poker room in America.
No wonder I've gravitated toward poker--I've a soft spot for underdog stories, and poker produces considerably more of them than any "fair" contest with mainstream appeal. Thank you for clearing things up for me--I really should have seen this myself, to be honest.