Luckily Skillful

Luck is not an element of poker. It is an integral part of the game. Saying luck is an element of poker is akin to saying passing is an element of pro football (no, not soccer). Almost as much as when athletes thank "the Lord" for their performance, I am disturbed that no winning poker player these days admits to luck playing a part. I prefer the term chance myself, but, nonetheless it plays a significant role in the game. It seems the preferred terms are age, experience, a good read, etc. Rarely will the winning poker player own up to hitting the two-outer that propels him to the chip lead and eventually the win as anything but timeliness, or position, or being priced-in, pot-committed, as an explanation. It is not that those explanations are not valid, they most certainly are, but how tough is it to admit that luck was involved?
What also irks me is that I think I know the reason why they do it. With the growth of the poker industry, and so much money and exposure at stake, it seems an unspoken rule not to use the word "luck" or any variant thereof. It would not promote the game and it would somehow damage the image if the general public were exposed to seasoned pros admitting that luck regularly played a significant role in their games. For me, personally, it would certainly not alter my outlook on the game if occassionally the term were mentioned. Everyday low-limit grinders, such as myself, see it play out online all the time. It does not diminish the skills that the pros clearly possess, as well as the guts, I might add. It just feels like Clinton telling us he didn't have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky all over again. Ah well, that's poker. Everyone, at least, seems comfortable with saying that.

bntwn