The danger of the Inspirational word : A momentary orgasm of the mind

In the internet age, phrases/stories of inspiration are cheaper than a dime a dozen and nowadays anyone with any form of formal education tend to have the linguistic ability to even form their own. This situation allows the normal person to achieve what most normal person could not do before, gain constant acceptance/praise for doing nothing. The danger of craving this short burst of pleasure with little real world result is the topic of today's dicussion. 

The truly inspired or inspiring are simple to spot as when they say or tell the inspirational phrase/story, you can truly see them representing the virtue told. One can also feel that in time they will achieve the desired result they aim for or importantly, even if they don't, you know they have tried their best. For example, the Dalai Lama, who has been trying to achieve the freedom of Tibet for decades and failed but still gives inspiration to countless many. 

The opposite of the truly inspired or inspiring are those who have a tendency to need constant positive attention from others. They read or tell a inspirational phrase/story and instantly places the good aspects of the tale upon themselves and in fact, have a amazing ability to feel they are educating others with their own perceived inspirational qualities. For example, in a documentary the author saw about the poorest in India*, the daughter of a multi millionaire was interviewed at a socialite party to raise money for the poor. She admitted to never being close to a slum in India but continued to say how she understood the pain and suffering of the poor. When one watched that scene, one can only feel disbelief at her comment and truthfully disdain at the fact that off camera, she probably would rather spend her large monthly allowance on herself than give it to the poor she so truly 'understood'.

Now that the examples have been defined above, the dangers of being falsely inspired will be explained. Firstly, the vast optimism that can comes from these inspiring phrases/stories. They can set one's mind to see situations they might encounter with a skewed  sense of reality which can end up with disastrous results. Such as a person wrongly betting on his perceived ability versus his real ability to win over better opponents in a boxing match. All because he was inspired to work out once per week due to watching a documentary on Muhammad Ali.

Another problem arises for the falsely inspired in the form of the glaring inability to see one's own flaws and instead paint them as one's own talents due to mental gymnastics. Such as seeing one's arrogance as confidence and perceiving any advice to improve as sabotage due to jealously. This will result in the person not being able to improve and instead lead one to decrease in ability rather than increase due to narrow mindedness.

In conclusion, the author has nothing against being inspired or inspirational phrases/stories but rather takes exception to the way they are used. One feels that in the end the result is what matters and one good action is worth more than a whole internet of false inspiration. 

Till next word...

(*The author gives a sincere apology for not being able to give a clip on the documentary due to the lack of one's memory. All one can remember is it is from the BBC and it's premise was about the host living with a poor family in a slum in New Delhi.)

Vengeance, a everyday tool

Talk about vengeance and one instantly thinks negatively on the subject matter but think about the common world's justice system and one can logically say that the basis for any justice is vengeance. That one has committed a wrong against another and vengeance/justice should be cast upon the guilty party. That if one wants to commit a crime, beware, as vengeance will be waiting. Applying vengeance as a way to help improve oneself will the topic of today's discussion. 

Vengeance to be used in everyday life is simply a way of treating another based on a negative feeling accorded to the person displaying the bad behaviour (This treatment does not have to be at the moment of the bad behaviour). A example, in the author's University life, he had met two people, who he at first thought were sincere friends but having dealt with said persons over the length of years in Australia, he found that these two people were selfish, morally degrading and on more than one occasion, openly using others to further only their own personal gains or pleasure. Upon returning to one's own country, the author thus devised that, the right way to treat such people was like a mirror, to apply their own said policy to them, This being, unless singularly to the author or mutually beneficial, one will never help them freely. One believing that forgiveness and trying to interact with said individuals with a 'open mind/heart' will only result in a bad situation for the author as before. And sometimes, there is simply no changing 'bad' people. 

This being said this application of vengeance to others in one's life also means one should expect the same for oneself and this has great implications. For the fear of expecting retribution for one's bad behaviour is just as believable as passing it out to one who displays it. Thus, a self policing code of conduct is always omnipresent in oneself. Adding to such a policy, once a person who believes in such a application of vengeance has done a deed worthy of vengeance, he should not expect forgiveness. If it is given, he/she should be grateful and work towards repaying such a debt but if not, one can only try to gain it as it is said person who opened the door for the vengeance and should logically accept it's consequences even if unintentional.

In conclusion, vengeance is a strong emotion and nowadays negative emotions are usually told to be cast out and ignored. It is one's view though that if the negative feeling is present from the development of evolution, it must be there to help one survive and to ignore it would be to ignore a tool that has been given to improve oneself. One is not telling others to give in to feelings of vengeance excessively but merely to temper it with good reason and use it to come to a good strong stand or result. For vengeance produces motivations just as strong as those from inspiration.

Till next word...

You can't blame a person for belief, only opinion

Many a year ago, the author sat in a Philosophy Professor's room and heard one of the most profound sentences he had ever heard in his short ignorant life. It went: "You can't blame a person for belief, only opinion." Strangely that line led to more self contemplation than even the initial topic that had led one into the Professor's room. The discussion of belief versus opinion will be the topic of today's discussion. 

A simple foundation of belief for this post is that it is something that comes naturally and more importantly instantly to one's thoughts in a given situation, the person might find themselves in. The belief being a thought process that comes from the amalgamation of the person's life, formed by both his genes and living experiences. A good example of the above topic comes in the act of stereotyping (The author does not condone stereotyping but is merely using it to explain the discussion topic). The initial thought one has of a person due to whatever features they posses is belief. These beliefs being the first natural thought from a collection of data that forms due to the natural survival instinct every person has to deal with every situation. Stereotyping existing to a certain extent because the stereotype existing more often than not on that group even if it does not represent every person of that group accurately.

Opinion on the other hand is a natural thought that has had time to settle in reason and evidence based on the person's reasoning. To continue with the stereotyping example, opinion is how one acts towards the person of certain feature, be it race or otherwise. It is on this point a person can be blamed for opinion over belief. The author himself does admit to having what many would consider racist thoughts at times but it is because one can differentiate that the instant natural belief is not grounded in reason that one can act counter to it based on good reason in action that prevents his person from doing what would be considered a racist act. Opposite to this was a post one saw on Facebook whereby the person did not differentiate between belief and opinion and merged the two. The person happen to have coffee at two places and had decided that the second coffee house being inferior but went on to comment it was due to the one staff that had made the coffee's ethnicity, being from a poor country and the person not possibly having a good education. The initial argument on which serves the best coffee being lost as one staff member does not constitute the coffee house and a race of the coffeehouse staff, a good coffee is not based on.

To put it into perspective, just as one will not blame a person for being mentally unstable and pushing you to the ground, one cant blame a person for literally having a thought. On the other hand, one can blame a stable person of sound mind who pushes one to the ground because he perceives your race deserves it even after time to reason and 'justify' that thought.

In conclusion, belief is the instant reaction of defense to being attacked, there is no foresight to it. While opinion being the boxing match a person chooses to fight with forewarning to its consequences. As many a good man or woman has said in many a way. You make your own choices and have to live with them the rest of your days.

Till next word...

Never forget what you are, the whole world will not : A position rooted in reality

The great Chinese sage Mencius* had a lesson amid his myriad of knowledge, that in the course of one's life, one will meet many teachers but not many students. The point being that many people tend to tell others what is right but hypocritically lacking the ability to listen and improve themselves when good advice is given to them. The implications of such an inability to see one's self as nothing more than a personal ideal, being that it will delay or even stop one's ability towards becoming a more 'enlightened' person morally or materially. This being today's topic of discussion.

To begin, the author is relatively sure that all who read this have met a person who spouts inspirational quotes and how he/she was inspired by it. Yet to you and the rest of the world, the person is not only lacking the quote's inspirational quality but rather is the product of what would happen if one does not apply the lesson of the quote in one's own life. Defined is the fact that all of us does not want to be the person just described. The solution being simply to understand and admit truthfully who or what one is to the the world around, including importantly flaws. For if one is able to see oneself as the world sees him/herself, one can then take the steps necessary to either improving on a flaw or use it to one's advantage. Which is impossible if one is only ever able to see one's own strengths (real or perceived) and nothing else.

To use his own person as a example, the author admits that he is not the most inspirational person when looked upon financially and career wise. This is important as by accepting this fact and through good criticism from trusted friends, the author is able to improve his financial situation in a more effective way than if he was deluded in his own fantasy, such as investing in super risky investment plans or putting down all his money into Poker.    

To further the point, the author's own most glaring flaw is an inability to not comment on a situation which one sees as a issue that needs improving on. Unlike most that tend to wait for the 'right' moment to act, this understood 'impatience' leads the author to find support almost straightaway from others to try to force a situation where the problem can be brought up or solved in the shortest time possible. Such as in one's personal experience, bringing up the hard question of having a person removed from a group of a hobby of the author's. Whose presence one found out, no one particularly appreciated. Basically one's acceptance that he has this inability to keep quiet on a situation leads him to plan a solution (Not always successful), that tries to solve the problem quickly rather than bear the alternative of a disastrous solution that will come out in a confrontational sudden burst of awkwardness if left unchecked.

One uses himself as the above examples as it would be unfair and hypocritical to this post to comment on another's flaws without commenting on his own. The simple fact is, if a person is able to accept the fact that a majority of people see said person as a fool then he is probably a fool and the sooner he realises that, the better. One is not calling anyone reading this blog a fool but the hardest application of the solution posted in this blog is the admittance of the flaws that one finds hardest to admit the world sees in one's own person.

Till next world...

*The link is to a animated list of Mencius core works (those with Book 1A, etc) told with English subtitles.

The Macau Myth: The 'Correct' path for a Poker player?

Preface, this post is aimed at Poker players who are intending to go to Macau purely to make a living in Poker. Thus to begin, It would seem in Poker as strong as the sense of Logic and reasoning is essential to playing the game. Usually the other end of passion and emotion creeps into the reasoning of a player who for whatever reasons wants to take the path more seriously. In all the players the author knows (The author hails from Singapore, thus Macau is preferable to Las Vegas as a destination for Poker), almost all have gone to 'take a chance' in Macau. Most of them also refer to the fact that if one wants to play Poker seriously, one HAS to go to Macau. In all respects, to supporters of this point, one has to strongly disagree with this line of Logic and thus it will be today's topic of discussion.

To start off, one will first state the reasons why anybody would go to Macau or a casino as a Poker player. The first being security. In a casino, you pay a fee or 'rake' in Poker to assure you, the player, that it will enforce the rules of the game and that there is legal recourse were anything to happen otherwise. Second, there is a gathering of a large number of players in Macau to play the game, meaning you will probably be able to get more uninterrupted hours in a game and always have 'new money' in the game to cover current losses. Thirdly, the games or tournaments you wish to play are not to be found in your native country or are played such large stakes that security and players are lacking due to the large cash amount or prize pool.

With the above reasoning, now the author can discuss the reasons why one used the Title, Macau Myth, narrowed to the group of players one is going to describe. Predominantly, those that want to take Poker as a job in recent years tend to be younger (below 35), only plays low limit Texas Hold'em (10/20* and below) and have a very limited Bankroll of below $20,000. So for such a person lets contrast with the above reasons if it will make sense to go to  Macau:

• Security: There is a good argument for this if Poker is illegal in one's country but the truth is unless the person is ready to commit to living in Macau long term along with the added expenses. This point is a redundant one. As in all countries, with a bit of research with the local Poker community, there should always be trusted hosts with a good reputations that can provide a game that almost all attending can say is fair and secure. This research in itself usually costing one much less than flying to Macau and back once.

• Gathering: This point is also largely down to research with the local community. If one's research has found a good trusted game, the author's own personal experience has shown that games are usually easy to fill and for many a late night. For if Poker is illegal in one's country, all the people have to play somewhere and trusted hosts is the best form of brand loyalty in a Poker game in such a situation.

• Large Stakes: As stated above, most of the people that ask the author this question to go to Macau tend to play small stakes and thus the stakes they play at are easily found in one's country and usually for a lower or similar rake than the casinos. Thus it is more cost effective to play in one's country than Macau at these lower stakes due to the extra costs of going to Macau.

• Weak Players: This is not in the above reasoning as it is not a reason but rather a misconception or even a delusion by most that would argue that the Poker field in Macau is weak. In fact, one always asks the question back when another refers to weak players in Macau as a reason to go there: "How do you feel you measure up to the current field in your country?" 

1. If they say they are stronger (which is often considering the author's personal experience), then should that person not stay in his/her country and play there as a 'better' player, paying no extra cost of flight, lodging or food. One example, the low average total per weekend in Macau with a budget airline and lodging is at minimum about $550 Singapore dollars. If one was to play a $2/5 Blinds game, before one even steps into a casino, one is already down over one full Buy-In or normal stack to play ($500) at those Blinds.
2. If the answer is they are not stronger and that the Macau field is easier. One always begs the question back, if you are thinking in such a way, what makes you think the people with your skill level in your country and others are not thinking similarly. An important factor here being the stakes, at today's low limits (minus the micro stakes), it is rare to find the extremely weak players as in the early 2000s. Where one's edge is so high that one can easily make 200% or more profit from consistent horrendous plays from others per session. At the same time, the person in question probably does not have the money to play the weak skilled rich players that he/she was looking for in Macau in the first place, who are just there to truly gamble in Poker and only play the high stake games.
3. For both, the most common end result especially for those who have been to Macau is the best evidence. For if it was truly that much of a Mecca to make money, then why would anyone come back to their native country. Logically, if it was that easy, one would continue to stay there for as long as one's visa would allows and save on the many flight cost and make a consistent regular living there. Reasons of job, family and friends being the most consistent and weak, as most of the people we speak of in this post would leave the family for a high paying job for a while and their job probably paying more consistently than the money that person can make with his skill as a Poker player.

In conclusion, it is usually cheaper in rake, transport and lodging to play in one's own country than in Macau. The only role Macau fills in the author's personal view is the ego factor to impress upon others, that one has been to one of the capitals of the gambling world. Going to Macau for those described above is illogical and using the frog in the well story as a loose reference. If one cant even defeat the other frogs in just your well, how good does one think he/she will fare against the frogs in the sea that is the earth or even just Asia.

Till next word...

*Refer to the last few minutes discussion in the clip with Peter Bao (WSOP Main Event final table 1997), where Peter is referred to as a low limits player, playing at 10/20 or 20/40 by Gabe Kaplan.