March 13, 2025 • 39 mins
Last week, Nate and Maria talked about the game theory of American diplomacy right now. This week, they look at it from the perspective of America’s biggest rival: China. How should China respond as the US turns away from the global stage? What new opportunities do they have?
Plus, both hosts weigh in on the poker controversy surrounding a recent big win… that was actually a loss.
For more from Nate and Maria, subscribe to their newsletters:
The Leap from Maria Konnikova
Silver Bulletin from Nate Silver
Get ad-free episodes, and get your questions answered in an exclusive weekly bonus episode, of Risky Business by subscribing to Pushkin+ on Apple Podcasts or Pushkin.fm. Pushkin+ subscribers can access ad-free episodes, full audiobooks, exclusive binges, and bonus content for all Pushkin shows.
Subscribe on Apple: apple.co/pushkin
Subscribe on Pushkin: pushkin.fm/plus
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, a show about making
better decisions. I'm Maria Kanakova.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
And I'm Nate Selver. Today on the show, we'll be
talking a little bit of China. China, China, how should
the second biggest economy in the world respond as the
US becomes increasingly geopolitically unstable?
Speaker 1 (00:43):
And after that we will be pivoting to poker and
a controversy that happened last week about an incorrect hand
winning a pot in a very, very big spot. What
should players and others responsibility be in a situation like that?
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Speak up players if the dealer focus up anyway. We'll
get into that in the second second.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Somebody has opinions. Yeah, let's talk about China. We are
taping this on Monday, March tenth. China has just announced
retaliatory tariffs on the United States taking effect immediately, but
(01:25):
they will not be affecting goods that arrive in the
country before April twelfth, Nate, Every single time we tape,
there seems to be more and more news coming out,
but all of it points to one reality, which is
that the US is just trying to take a step
back from its role in global politics, or rather in
(01:46):
its role in building alliances and trying to be a
diplomatic force for the good, creating somewhat of a power vacuum.
And China as the world's second largest economy, there are
some opportunities here. There's a lot going on between the
US and China. I think it would be really interesting
to try to, you know, flip the game theory. Last
week I talked about game theory from the US perspective.
(02:09):
Let's talk about it from the Chinese perspective and see
what this moment in time means for how China should
be thinking about its future and constructing its economic and
foreign policies. What do we think about this?
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Uh, China's a real country either not this cute little
puppy like Canada or something like that. They are the
second largest economy in the world, the second largest you know,
effectively military power in the world. They can do a
lot of things to contradict the United States interest if
we're in a zero some game when AI and other stuff,
(02:44):
and like, it's a moment for she to think big
and to think long term. And you know, because these
things that Trump is doing, we'll take a long time
to undo right, if Trump quit tomorrow and went back
to Marrow Lago and Jade Vance takes over, then a
Democrat wins I don't know, fucking Gavin Newsom or some
shit like that, Right, a Democrat wins in four years.
(03:08):
Even this six weeks, right, these two months now almost
still would damage America's credibility, I.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Think absolutely absolutely, And I think that's really important to remember.
It's much faster to break things than it is to
build them back up. They're also doing more. China has
a lot of levers that it can push that it's
not just tariffs. They're also blocking fifteen US companies from
buying Chinese products, and they're just saying, you know, you
want to play with us, we'll play with you. And
(03:35):
what you have to understand about China is it can actually,
like very strategically, can do like you know, it can
do whatever the fuck it wants basically. So what they're
doing is they're trying to mitigate the effects of some
tariffs by saying, oh, okay, fine, the US post tariffs
on you. Great, We're going to reduce your taxes.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
It can like just very surgically say okay, this company
that's now being you know, subject to tariffs in the
US has to pay fewer taxes than it did before,
so that they can keep their prices the same. Right,
it can push all of these buttons because it really
can have this very directed approach to the economy that
even with the executive orders and even with Trump trying
to act more autocratically and bypassed Congress, we can't do
(04:17):
that in the US, right, we don't have that sort
of centralized power, and so that is actually something that
when you're talking about game theory, who has you know,
who has more muscle, who can push whom around. China
can really do things that we cannot do in the
United States.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Yeah, and again, in terms of a share of the economy,
we went over this last time with Canada and Mexico.
No one country is that large a share of the
US economy because we make a lot of our own
stuff and our imports are diversified. So basically, China, Mexico, Canada,
and the EU are between the EU as one country
(04:53):
are the four largest exporters to the US and they're
all about equal about five hundred billion dollars per year.
But China has a lot of geopolitical influence, you know,
the kind of smart form policy types to have perpetually
been worried about China potentially invading Taiwan. They also have
a lot of influence over over Ai policy. The US
(05:16):
is concerned about a potential race with China on Ai.
But yeah, one thing we're trying to do is prevent China,
in various ways from getting access to the most powerful
semiconductor chips right a lot of which are produced ironically
in Taiwan, And so there are profound geopolitical implications, and
(05:39):
China can create a lot more problems to the United
States in terms of global alliances and things like that too,
especially if, like if Europe is now like like, who
are friends now? Maria? Who still likes us?
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Who likes Russia? Russia? Russia likes US.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
I don't want Russia to like US. I don't want it.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
There's a difference between what you want and what's happening.
So who are friends right now? Russia likes US? I
think North Korea is probably pretty happy with the way
things are going.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Japan. We've left Japan alone, haven't we? I mean India, India,
we seem.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
To leave for now, for now, for now, But we'll
see what happens. Right Seriously, though we don't have many
allies left. Europe is really up in arms, literally trying
to be up in arms and rearm and you know,
trying to figure that out. China is very not happy
and is trying to show that you know what, fuck
(06:31):
you, you cannot push us around, and we really can't push
China around, by the way, Like this is an incredibly
powerful economy, it's an incredibly powerful diplomatic force, you know,
if you're thinking about not just the economic stuff, right,
but the type of precedent that the US is setting
by cozying enough to Putin and saying, oh, potentially, like
(06:51):
let's allow Putin to take parts of Ukraine. Like we
don't know what's going to happen with that right now,
but that sort of precedent may actually embolden China to
try something with Taiwan in a way that it hasn't
in the past because it's been i think restrained by
some international norms. Those norms might be eroding, so we
can potentially see kind of more aggression there, and that
(07:15):
that's also not a happy place for us to be in.
Right when when we see that potential I don't know, right,
I don't There's a lot of uncertainty around this, but
I think that if international norms of behavior are being eroded,
then that can be frightening for a lot of countries
in Asia. Right. If you think that, oh, okay, this
(07:35):
balance of power is no longer going to be held
in check, then if I you know, if I were
living anywhere there, I'd be a little nervous.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Yeah, I mean, you know, foreign policy did not change
that much from Bush to Obama to Trump one to Biden. Right,
And so the United States has lots of problems. That
starts stupid borers, right, it has someone economic crises that
it then spreads the rest of the world. But like
(08:05):
you know, there is more of a consensus on foreign
policy then on economic policy or social policy or whatever else. Right,
And like you know, it's not even like Trump necessarily
has like a coherent foreign policy vision exactly. It's kind
of very zero sum mentality. We talked about that before, Right,
It's it leans toward isolationism. And look, you'll hear plenty
(08:28):
of critiques of Trump on this show. I would rather
have Trump err on the side of isolations and than
war mongering. If those are the two choices. But like,
but you know, when states don't play an active role
in the world, then you know there are power vacuums
that potentially can can get filled. Right And by the way,
I don't think Biden was particularly effective on China or
(08:49):
really anything in foreign policy either. Frankly, you know, Trump
at least at least has a little bit of the
kind of rogue state factor where you don't know what
the United States would do necessarily. But but yeah, I mean, look,
the stereotype of China is that they're pretty good I
don't know, tacticians, like maybe the global strategy, but like,
(09:13):
but you know they are going to understand if both
to secure their own future, you know, or to kind
of you know, punch at the United States in a
way to slow us down in the AI race too, right,
I mean that's you know, maybe the most high stakes
question right now in the world.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Oh. Absolutely, I mean I think that they're very tactically savvy.
And it was interesting. I was having a conversation the
other week kind of about some of the downstream effects
of the Trump policies, and right now, you know, we're
seeing absolute chaos, you know, with the NIH and the
science funding. A lot of institutions, including places like you Penn,
(09:53):
are resending offers to grad students in the sciences because
they're like, oh, we can't, we can't afford you anymore.
It's really bad, right, And if you think about what
that means for the future of kind of science, technology,
scientific development in the US, there's a potential for brain drain,
and people like, well, where are people going to go?
Who's funding it? Like, well, this is pretty funny, because
(10:13):
I think this is a great strategic opportunity for China
to be like me, right, we'll fund it. You come
here and you can have a lot of money and
you can do your research here. And I actually think
that some people might take them up on it. And
that would be pretty terrifying, right if we have a
brain drain from the US to China, And that might
happen if you cannot get your research funded, if you
(10:35):
cannot do work here and someone else And I say
that they might take them up on it, because I
know people who have gone, you know, to work in
the UAE, who have gone to work in a lot
of places that, like you would think they would not
want to work in because of their ideas about freedom,
et cetera, et cetera. But they do it because they're
offered a lot of money, right, and money speaks and
(10:56):
incentive speak. And I think that China is very tactically
good on all levels of figuring out where the opportunities are,
where the potential kind of where the potential to get
ahead is, and so that you know, I would not
be surprised to see some people, you know, some some
brain drain potentially happening that way. And that's an interesting
(11:20):
thing to consider when we look at you know, ten
years out, twenty years out, technology and science.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
If I were she, I would make Hong Kong, which
is controlled because Hong Kong is one city, right, I
would make that the most welcoming front imaginable to the west. Right, yep,
Like it's an image play that's very smart, yeah, for
like for right now, China doesn't have the image of
(11:48):
luxury that other Asian cultures sometimes do. But this can change,
you know, yeah, and it can change quickly. Korean goods
have become prestigious, right, Obviously, Japanese is a very high
prestige country. But you know, but those are countries that
are democracy used and that have been nocratus for a
long time and like you know, have like a flurish
(12:09):
wishing artistic center, right, Like I don't you know people
thought that China would democratize as it became richer, and
like it kind of is that exactly?
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Yeah, I think that's a really interesting thing to think about.
What can what can China do to make itself look
more appealing to Americans right to people who want to
flee And I think that that is something that they
are potentially not thinking through as deeply as they should,
because to me, like great game theoretic move right would
(12:41):
be okay, yes, you know, we're sorry. Like free speech,
all this great stuff, like we will embrace it. You know,
Donald Trump says, you can't say these words. You can
say anything here right, Come to Hong Kong. We will
give you money, We will give you pretty things. It
will be nice. And Hong Kong used to be a place,
you know that was incredibly welcoming before all of the
(13:03):
you know, before there were the crackdowns on free speech
and everything that has happened. And in the last five
or so years, Hong Kong was kind of a mecca
for a lot of Western a lot of Westerners, right
they they went there and they're like, oh, this isn't China,
this is different. I think that doubling down on that
would actually be huge and would potentially give China an
(13:25):
edge in a lot of different things because you see
that they actually can like Australia right imports. I don't
know how many Chinese evs right like, there are there
are markets where China is actually kind of flourishing in
different countries because they have technology that they're able to
kind of develop. And I think that if they double
(13:46):
down on a lot of these things, we can we
can see kind of a big change in their geopolitical
standing and in the way they're perceived in the world,
which which I think could be a very tactically sound
play for them. And we see and kind of the
ev The reason I mentioned the evs is because with
(14:06):
you know, tariffs et cetera, et cetera, Like that's actually
something that along with AI is a place where they
can start developing a strategic edge right now because there
is kind of this opening that hasn't existed in the past.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
Yeah, but of course, you know, every auto manufacturer, Eleast
American ones have like global supply chains, right, So, but yeah,
I mean, look, I have friends who are like literally
trying to figure out how to make bets on Chinese
made evs gaining market share relative to Tesla. You know,
(14:40):
that's you know, the stakes are pretty obvious with China.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Absolutely, yeah, you know, there's a way forward there where
they can actually make their image much more positive for
the Western mind than it is right now. And I
think that they should really try to be exploring that
strategically because there is a vacuum and the US right
now is not looking good, right the strong man politics
are not looking good. That's a great moment for she
to be like, hey, we're not the strong man, We're
(15:06):
not the bad guys. Look at us, like we can
actually be much nicer than what's happening in the United
States and we will not betray our allies or whatever
it is. So I think that there's a lot of
moves that can happen right now that will not end
well for the US now.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
The contrast to the Middle East is interesting, is like
the marketing strategy right in the sense that like, you know,
the Middle East turned countries will like sponsor huge soccer
teams and things like that, right, and they'll and they'll
have this marketing campaign more, Hey, come to Saudi Arabia
(15:41):
and in the pictures we show you in the ads, right,
it looks very progressive, and you know, and they'll bribe allegedly,
bribe FIFA to host World Cups allegedly and things like that. Right.
But it's a marketing strategy to paint a friendlier phase, right,
and it probably is probably has worked on some level.
(16:04):
I'm not looking at like what American perceptions are of
the wealthier you know, Gulf state, Saudi Arabia, cutar, et cetera.
I said kutar in one of the ways that you're
not supposed to say it. There's like five ways you
can say and I just kind of made up my
own pronunciation there, cut the guitar anyway.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Yeah, that's I Actually, I think that that's a really
that's a good analogy in the sense that foreign image
laundering is something that countries have done many times over
the years and sometimes successfully. And I think that and
it's always a huge, huge part of any diplomatic policy.
(16:43):
It's a huge part of you know, what the CIA does,
right to try to massage perceptions of the United States
and different countries. I think it happens all the time,
and yet when you see an opportunity like that, you
should take it. So I think the US should be worried.
It should try to be figuring out how to make
it so that you know so that these moves are
(17:05):
not going to happen. Right, how do you like, how
do you look ahead at the game theoretic board so
that you can actually counter these moves before they happen.
And that's not something that's happening right now, Nate. Let's
do a quick recap. So what are our key takeaways
from the current situation between the US and China and
kind of where the strategic choices lie.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
Yeah, I guess a little bit. What we talked about
before is like the US is abdicating its position in
some ways as a global hedgemon. I'm using all these
terms I learned in debate team years ago. The term
that we'd use is soft power, right, where like the
United States is seeing as being the most stable economy
(17:48):
in the world, a force for stability and international order generally.
Of course it fucks up and makes some mistakes, right,
but an anchor of safety. And if the US no
longer that then, you know, can China play that role?
And I think that might actually entail having a friendlier face,
and China has sometimes a friendlier face to the West
(18:09):
in particular. I mean, Europe is looking around for hey,
who can we trust here anymore? Looking for trade partners potentially,
and so it's an interesting moment, right, I think their
response is not necessarily to like go not to get
drawn into Trump's zero some game, which isn't really a
zero some game. I mean, we want global cooperation on
all these things ultimately, right, you know, both China and
(18:31):
the US weirdly have like an interest in like making
sure that we're the only two AI superpowers, right, and
that somebody else, I mean, at least whatever else doesn't
kind of catch up. But yeah, it's it's a moment
for she to think big, you know, the US maybe
abdicating its role as kind of the leader of the
free world. Whether trying to count as a free world
or not is kind of an open question obviously, But like,
(18:53):
you know, you counter sometimes the player who is being
playing zero s in the non zero S game by
being the bigger, better, more mature player yourself, right, And
so maybe, you know, maybe we open up Hong Kong
more and don't invade Taiwan until you consolidate kind of
(19:14):
more power and more authority. I think. I think playing
a long game is always, always, almost always beneficial when
others are short sighted.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
All right, let's uh, let's take a break night and
then talk some poker.
Speaker 2 (19:40):
Nate.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Have you been on poker Twitter this past week where
there has been a lot of controversy, shall we say,
around one particular hand that happened at a circuit event.
Have you been privy to this or have you been
too busy at Sloan conference?
Speaker 2 (19:57):
You know Twitter follows me. Oh, the Twitter was down
actually for parts of the day. Yeah, why don't you
introduce I have seen the hand in question. Do you
want to introduce this one though, Maria?
Speaker 1 (20:05):
Yeah? Sure, Okay. So we are at a World Series
of PO circuit event, which is not the main World series,
but this is kind of the circuit gives out rings.
It's a big deal and it's down to the final table.
It's down to the final three players. One of those
players is Maurice Hawkins, who has at that point seventeen rings.
(20:28):
I want to say, if he wins this ring, he
will tie Ari Engele for the most rings in history
in the circuit at eighteen rings. By the way, Ari
just won another ring. Congratulations Ari, so Ari's now at nineteen,
but last week he didn't have that ring. And there's
a big hand where Maurice and another player are all
(20:51):
in and the dealer fans out the board and MUCKs
the other player's hand and says that Maurice has won
with a straight. Maurice has awarded the pot. The other
player is eliminated, and Maurice goes on to win his ring,
ring number eighteen. It turns out that the pot was
(21:14):
awarded incorrectly. The player who was eliminated had actually had
a flush and was supposed to win the hand. This
was all captured on camera in the moment, and so
there's a lot of controversy around what went wrong and
also kind of what is the role of the media,
right because someone was filming this hand, what is the
(21:36):
role of onlookers? What role do people have to actually
make sure that the pot is awarded to the correct hand.
Both hands were on their backs, we can see all cards,
you can see what the winning hand is. Somehow the dealer,
the other two players, the media, everyone on the rail,
nobody speaks up and this poor kid is eliminated instead
(21:58):
of doubling up, potentially changing the outcome. And this is
this is a lot of money, right, we're talking. Oh,
this is a difference in payout of over one hundred
thousand dollars. This is life changing money. This does not
happen often. But you know, how do we think about
this and what you know, what should be done? And
people are incredibly incredibly split on this, which actually shocked me.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Yeah, I mean, has the World series done anything for him?
Like I would give him?
Speaker 1 (22:26):
No? Okay, yeah, nothing has been done. It was it
was basically a tough shit, dude. It's your responsibility to
protect your hand and you're done well.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
First of all, the dealer it's an all in pot, right,
so both hands are face up for the entire table,
and he MUCKs the sensible loser's hand really fast, right,
which was just strange. Right, there's no reason to rush it.
He dealt the whole so it's one thing. Also, the
guy said, oh I thought I won, right.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
Yeah, so this is this is crucial. Yet on the video,
the person who loses actually says, oh I thought I won,
and instead of a knowledging that the dealer takes his
hand which is still perfectly identifiable, and pushes it into
the muck, which is the big pile of cards, which
is something that you should absolutely never do.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
You know, they have cameras because he knows, so you
can always and you know, there are sometimes circumstances where
if if one player thinks a few chips are missing,
they can pause the entire table, if not the entire
tournament for you know, for a long periods of time sometimes,
I mean, so, it was just it was very weird,
and also, like my experience has been that, like, especially
in the four Card games, that players like actually go
(23:43):
out of their way to point out errors when it's
not in their best interests to do so, right, especially
when the thing I'm thinking about is like kind of
like you know, early in the World series, where the
dealers are very new and not used to dealing. This
is to hold them, so I don't know what the
dealer's problem is, right, used to deal, they're doing all
these types of different games, Like players are acting as
(24:04):
like the eyes of the house, right and are go
out of their way to like point stuff out. I
actually had something work in my favor one time right
where like I was playing Omaha uh eight, which is
a high low game. It's a limit game. It's not
all in game, not a pot limit game, I should say.
(24:26):
And like I called with with hoping to win the
low half of the pot. I had a bad call.
I could badhand good pot odds just lo across country, tired,
don't play am that much, right, and I don't have
the best low and I'm about to muck my hand, right,
(24:47):
but someone says, oh, you can't beat you can't win
the high, right, you have any pair at all? And
I did an a pair of asses and a bad kicker.
The other guy busted out in the high had only
a low hand right because my hand had not was
not reprievable in the muck yet I was able to
turn it over the dealer had not mucked quickly enough. Right.
But the point is even then people are saying, okay,
(25:08):
just make sure you didn't do something stupid and give
away like half the pot, right. And so it's very
odd that like nobody else at the table said anything.
I have that one or two times where it's like
did you miss that straight on the board, right, And
no one else will say anything. Anyone kind of like
picks themselves into saying, okay, well if it sure looks
like there's a straight on the board, right, but no
(25:29):
one else is saying anything, so I won't say anything.
But it's it's it's very bizarre that, like a bunch
of things that don't usually happen, the dealer has to
make this mistake. The player has to be like, how
are you not like sweating this hand? Right? I mean,
they're a weird way. We need to get more detail about,
like under what circumstances you might be mentally checked out?
Speaker 1 (25:49):
But like, yeah, so I think kind of from a
broader perspective, I think there are a few things going
on here. So first, like in terms of decision making, right,
this is I think we should point out that this
is a much higher emotion, kind of and hotter situation
than normal.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
Right.
Speaker 1 (26:04):
This isn't a normal poker hand. This is the final
three players in a huge turn for a ring. Right,
So emotions are running high and people are kind of
people are much more kind of in the moment. This
is much more consequential, right than if this had been
an all in the day before. Right, with thirty players left,
three hundred players left, however, a enemy. So that means
(26:28):
two things for decision making. First, your decision making does
get worse in those moments. But secondly, because the kind
of the risk reward is so much higher and the
consequences are so much higher and the payoffs matter so
much more, you should be it's in those moments where
you need to kind of be paying the most attention
and so and so I think that we have kind
(26:49):
of that sort of dynamic here where I think that
the player who busted he did say I think I won,
but then he didn't insist on it because I think
that he's flustered, right, he just busted this tournament in
this big spot, and he doesn't want to look dumb.
He doesn't want to be like, no, I think I
won and then realize that he didn't actually win, and
he you know, I think that all of these things,
(27:10):
all of these emotional things, are clouding the moment. But
I think that the other part of this, and the
reason that I was really interested in this, because as
you know, I'm writing a book about cheating, is kind
of what is the responsibility of different people in this hand?
And obviously, like ultimately the mistake is absolutely the dealers, right,
and the players, but the dealers, the speed of mucking
(27:33):
was huge, But is it you know, people were very
were incredibly torn. And to me, this is the interesting
part on whether the media should have spoken up, right,
And I was shocked at how many people are like, no,
they should absolutely not speak up. They should not insert
themselves into the story. I'm like, are you kidding me? Right,
As someone who is a member of the media, who's
(27:55):
been trained, you know, to not be part of the story,
that completely goes out the window when it becomes an
ethical issue. Right, So we are trained you do not
become part of the story. But if you see that
someone got stabbed, you call nine one one. You don't say, oh,
I'm just observing.
Speaker 2 (28:11):
Yeah, it's a prime directive of Star Trek. Like, it's
not a rule, the prime directive. I don't know, I'm
not as much of us, but like, you're not allowed
to interfere in a primitive alien culture, right, there's no
rule like that in the poker book. In fact, the
rule is that cards is that cards speak.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
Right, cards speak, Yes.
Speaker 2 (28:27):
Cards are face up in the sand. It's not a
case where somebody incorrectly mucked, then you can't do anything
about it, right.
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Yeah, this is this is a case where both hands
are tabled, and so I think it's absolutely the ethical
responsibility of someone who notices it to speak up. Let
me give a less extreme example, like imagine, Nate, I'm
set on a beat to cover life in Central Park
right in New York. So I'm there kind of observing
and I'm writing about this, right, I'm not going to
interfere because I'm just watching people. And then I see
(28:55):
someone's wallet get swiped. Do I not say anything because
they because a person didn't notice and they're just standing
having a conversation, Or do I say, hey, thief, right
and actually point out that something that your wallet just
got stolen. Of course I'm going to say something. I'm
not gonna even if you're not dying, I'm going to say, hey,
someone just stole your wallet, right, like we need to,
(29:17):
I'm sure, I think.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
I mean, you know, if I were covering a political
campaign and I detected illegal activity, right, I wouldn't tell
the police about that. I'd write about it, or I'd
choose not to. I don't know. I mean, it's like
the analogy. But like, look, I don't.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
But that's different. So we're talking about something where you
can immediately right where you see a crime being committed
in the moment, and you can immediately do something. If
you detected a legal activity in a political campaign, you know,
and you had to follow the money, et cetera, et cetera,
you'd report out the story. But if you actually observed
something illegal happening that you could change in the moment,
(29:51):
I think you would. That's a very difficult.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Let's say we are at the World Series of Summer
only a couple months away now, and we have may
plans to get dinner together. You say, I'm a table
six hundred and twelve or whatever. Your table's taking a
long time to finish a tend. I come over. I
notice you, full right. I noticed that. Then the two
remaining players, the pot is pushed to the wrong player,
and I say, nothing at your table. Wait, that dude
(30:16):
just made a flush. Yeah, Like that's okay, Right, so
it's an immediate thing.
Speaker 1 (30:20):
You're like, it's absolutely okay. And I also want I
hate when people start immediately going out to the grander arguments. Well,
the media's job is to report, it's not to kind
of police the hand. Yeah, absolutely, that's exactly right. The
media's job is to report. I'm not saying it's their
responsibility to be paying attention to who's awarded the pot
in every single hand. That's not their responsibility, right, Just
(30:43):
like it's not my responsibility to walk around Central Park
looking to see if there are crimes being committed that
I can help. We have police, we have people who
do that. But if you happen to see in the moment,
and if you happen to know that, then you should absolutely.
I think it's your ethical obligation to speak up.
Speaker 2 (30:59):
Yeah, and as part of the poker again, I go
back to these events. You know, the ethic of the
community is that, like we speak up, to speak up
to dealer errors or errors in terms of how the
tournament is run, but especially dealer errors. Right, it's a
community's responsibility to speak up. But by the way, if
(31:19):
you want to talk about like the equilibrium, right, like
if you didn't have people willing to help out a
confused dealer, then you'd have to like you would have
longer lines because you wouldn't have enough qualified dealers, or
maybe they pay dealers more, but then the rake is
higher and things like that, right, and so like I
think it's kind of like explicitly ethical for if a
(31:40):
player to speak up when when dealers make mistakes. I mean,
the thing is too that's weird about it though, like
like didn't Maurice Hawkins, No, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Or I'm assuming, like we don't know, but I'm assuming
he did given how he behaved, because he is someone
who always celebrates and is very in your face when
he wins and you see him on the term, on
the turn like being like you know, straight, like blah
blah blah, like I got this, and then on the
river as opposed to celebrating, he just goes quiet. He
(32:12):
goes silent, and that is we don't know, We don't
know this, but I think that you know, we have
a duty to any kind of community that we are
part of that we love to kind of keep to
keep things above board, right, to keep things to keep
the community good, and to actually like ensure that good
(32:34):
behavior is rewarded and bad behavior is punished. And let's
just like if you zoom out even further to journalism,
like some of the best journalisms, journalists have sometimes fucked
up right and not intervened when they should have, and
they were punished for it. Because I think that just ethically,
we do have kind of this duty to speak up.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
We'll be right back after this message.
Speaker 1 (33:16):
The bigger, the bigger point here is that like we
all make poor decisions when we're tired, when emotions are
running high, when you know, when you're in hot situations
and everyone you know, you can just not see things
that are right in front of your face. You know.
An attentional blindness is a real thing. When you're not
looking for certain cards, you're not looking for certain things,
(33:37):
and you just completely miss It can happen to anyone.
Just back in December, by the way, I missed a
flush yet had and this was and this was the
ten k when main event. This was day three or four,
I think it was day four. It was very deep
and you know, I had gone all in with a
pair of queens against a pair of kings. The kings
(33:58):
hit a set on the flop, so I was like,
you know, I'm dead right, And then on the turn
I was drawing to a straight. But I also did
not realize that it was another club and I had
the Queen of clubs and he did not have the
King of clubs. So when the strait didn't hit on
the river, I left because I thought I busted. And
the player who lost the hand who had the kings
was like, wait, you have a flush, and the dealer
(34:21):
was like and called me back. Right, That's that's what
you do. That's the only ethical way of handling that situation.
Speaker 2 (34:29):
I had a spot where a lot of at one
point I had a lot of chips in one of
these poker goat tournaments and then lost a big flip
and they didn't have many chips, and then like, you know,
another hand shoved like fifteen big linds from the small
blind open shove with like a decent queen, you know,
Queen seven, Queen six, suited, Queen ate off something in
(34:52):
that missiny middling strength hand right and made trips, I mean,
three of a kind queens. But the guy backed into
like Broadway straight. So it was kind of pissed and
like I just lost this flip and then lost this
other thing that wasn't technically a flip, but whatever, right,
and you know, I get up to leave and he's like, no, dude,
that guy only had two bling buds left, right, He
(35:15):
had almost busted in the previous hand and kind of
being like tired and like, you know, a little mine
off has tilted. But like but yeah, your your attention
span can, yeah, can wane in situations like this. This
is why it's bad idea to play four card games
and you just flew across the country by the.
Speaker 1 (35:32):
Way, Yeah, I mean, I think that's one of the
bigger issues here. Like we all make mistakes in emotional situations,
and so everyone else should like people should try to
rectify those mistakes. You should try to be helpful, and
that is I think something of a of an ethical
obligation there.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
And also if you you know, don't be afraid to
do things that are mildly embarrassing, but that like yeah,
or you know, so for example, let's say that I
didn't eat breakfast and wait for the dinner break and
it's a little shaky or something, right, like I'll just
verbally start declaring my bets, you know, five thousand or something, right,
because I don't want any tales having to do with
(36:12):
like my handshaking or things like that. Or like, you know,
sometimes you'll see you where a player is confused about
how to read the board, right, usually not and hold them,
but sometimes and hold them too, and they'll look at
their hand and stare at their hand and try to
figure out whether they made something, especially in Omaha games. Right,
Just table your hand, right. Everybody misreads boards in Omaha, right.
You never know when you are missing, like especially like
(36:35):
some bomb pot or something right, or a split pot game,
like you probably made some two pair that you forgot about,
you know, if you're playing big oh five cards, right,
So just table your fucking hand. It's not that embarrassing.
Everyone plays all kind of crap and the big old
games anyway, rights, you know, because you're gonna feel a
lot worse if you go to bed like, oh shit,
I think I actually rivered a back door straight kind
(36:56):
of thing.
Speaker 1 (36:57):
Yeah, now, of course. So I think the big takeaway
from this is everyone makes mistakes. It's hard to make
decisions when you're tired. Give yourself some slack, give other
people some slack, don't be afraid of looking dumb, and
do speak up, right, because as you get more and
more people who say nothing. I think that's the other
part of this. There is this tendency to say, oh
(37:20):
I must be wrong. Don't succumb to that and be
the one person who says, wait, can we just look
at this one more time? And I think that everyone
will be better off, whether you're playing poker or in
some other situation.
Speaker 2 (37:33):
And by the way, this helps the less experienced players
that we all want in our game. Right, I make
far fewer misclicks, meaning when you actually bet the wrong
amount right or mystery people's stacks despite the previous example,
you know, you just do a lot less of that,
whereas those things are like super fucking stressful to players
if they only play live poker like once every now
and then, right, and so like being again, don't give
(37:54):
players strange but at least protect errors that the dealer
makes some things too, like if dealers are are pitching
cards too high right so you can see maybe the
color of the card, right, like, you should say something
about them, like don't be like, oh, I'm being rude
to this dealer. You know it's like no, that's going
(38:15):
to create an advantage for players in certain seats and
maybe including you, right, and like, so you should you
should say something.
Speaker 1 (38:20):
You should Yep, you should always speak up if you
see something, say something. Brought to you by the New
York City Subway.
Speaker 2 (38:38):
And if you're not subscribing yet, consider signing up for
just six ninety nine a month. What a nice price.
You get access to all that premium content and ad
for listening across Pushkin's entire network of shows.
Speaker 1 (38:50):
Risky Business is hosted by me Maria Kanakova.
Speaker 2 (38:52):
And by me Nate Silver. The show is a co
production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia. This episode was produced
by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer is Gabriel Hunter Chang.
Sally Helm is our editor, and our executive producer is
Jacob Goldstein. Mixing by Sarah Bruder.
Speaker 1 (39:09):
If you like this show, please rate and review us
so other people can find us too. Thanks so much
for tuning in.
Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, a show about making
better decisions. I'm Maria Kanakova.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
And I'm Nate Selver. Today on the show, we'll be
talking a little bit of China. China, China, how should
the second biggest economy in the world respond as the
US becomes increasingly geopolitically unstable?
Speaker 1 (00:43):
And after that we will be pivoting to poker and
a controversy that happened last week about an incorrect hand
winning a pot in a very, very big spot. What
should players and others responsibility be in a situation like that?
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Speak up players if the dealer focus up anyway. We'll
get into that in the second second.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Somebody has opinions. Yeah, let's talk about China. We are
taping this on Monday, March tenth. China has just announced
retaliatory tariffs on the United States taking effect immediately, but
(01:25):
they will not be affecting goods that arrive in the
country before April twelfth, Nate, Every single time we tape,
there seems to be more and more news coming out,
but all of it points to one reality, which is
that the US is just trying to take a step
back from its role in global politics, or rather in
(01:46):
its role in building alliances and trying to be a
diplomatic force for the good, creating somewhat of a power vacuum.
And China as the world's second largest economy, there are
some opportunities here. There's a lot going on between the
US and China. I think it would be really interesting
to try to, you know, flip the game theory. Last
week I talked about game theory from the US perspective.
(02:09):
Let's talk about it from the Chinese perspective and see
what this moment in time means for how China should
be thinking about its future and constructing its economic and
foreign policies. What do we think about this?
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Uh, China's a real country either not this cute little
puppy like Canada or something like that. They are the
second largest economy in the world, the second largest you know,
effectively military power in the world. They can do a
lot of things to contradict the United States interest if
we're in a zero some game when AI and other stuff,
(02:44):
and like, it's a moment for she to think big
and to think long term. And you know, because these
things that Trump is doing, we'll take a long time
to undo right, if Trump quit tomorrow and went back
to Marrow Lago and Jade Vance takes over, then a
Democrat wins I don't know, fucking Gavin Newsom or some
shit like that, Right, a Democrat wins in four years.
(03:08):
Even this six weeks, right, these two months now almost
still would damage America's credibility, I.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Think absolutely absolutely, And I think that's really important to remember.
It's much faster to break things than it is to
build them back up. They're also doing more. China has
a lot of levers that it can push that it's
not just tariffs. They're also blocking fifteen US companies from
buying Chinese products, and they're just saying, you know, you
want to play with us, we'll play with you. And
(03:35):
what you have to understand about China is it can actually,
like very strategically, can do like you know, it can
do whatever the fuck it wants basically. So what they're
doing is they're trying to mitigate the effects of some
tariffs by saying, oh, okay, fine, the US post tariffs
on you. Great, We're going to reduce your taxes.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
It can like just very surgically say okay, this company
that's now being you know, subject to tariffs in the
US has to pay fewer taxes than it did before,
so that they can keep their prices the same. Right,
it can push all of these buttons because it really
can have this very directed approach to the economy that
even with the executive orders and even with Trump trying
to act more autocratically and bypassed Congress, we can't do
(04:17):
that in the US, right, we don't have that sort
of centralized power, and so that is actually something that
when you're talking about game theory, who has you know,
who has more muscle, who can push whom around. China
can really do things that we cannot do in the
United States.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Yeah, and again, in terms of a share of the economy,
we went over this last time with Canada and Mexico.
No one country is that large a share of the
US economy because we make a lot of our own
stuff and our imports are diversified. So basically, China, Mexico, Canada,
and the EU are between the EU as one country
(04:53):
are the four largest exporters to the US and they're
all about equal about five hundred billion dollars per year.
But China has a lot of geopolitical influence, you know,
the kind of smart form policy types to have perpetually
been worried about China potentially invading Taiwan. They also have
a lot of influence over over Ai policy. The US
(05:16):
is concerned about a potential race with China on Ai.
But yeah, one thing we're trying to do is prevent China,
in various ways from getting access to the most powerful
semiconductor chips right a lot of which are produced ironically
in Taiwan, And so there are profound geopolitical implications, and
(05:39):
China can create a lot more problems to the United
States in terms of global alliances and things like that too,
especially if, like if Europe is now like like, who
are friends now? Maria? Who still likes us?
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Who likes Russia? Russia? Russia likes US.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
I don't want Russia to like US. I don't want it.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
There's a difference between what you want and what's happening.
So who are friends right now? Russia likes US? I
think North Korea is probably pretty happy with the way
things are going.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Japan. We've left Japan alone, haven't we? I mean India, India,
we seem.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
To leave for now, for now, for now, But we'll
see what happens. Right Seriously, though we don't have many
allies left. Europe is really up in arms, literally trying
to be up in arms and rearm and you know,
trying to figure that out. China is very not happy
and is trying to show that you know what, fuck
(06:31):
you, you cannot push us around, and we really can't push
China around, by the way, Like this is an incredibly
powerful economy, it's an incredibly powerful diplomatic force, you know,
if you're thinking about not just the economic stuff, right,
but the type of precedent that the US is setting
by cozying enough to Putin and saying, oh, potentially, like
(06:51):
let's allow Putin to take parts of Ukraine. Like we
don't know what's going to happen with that right now,
but that sort of precedent may actually embolden China to
try something with Taiwan in a way that it hasn't
in the past because it's been i think restrained by
some international norms. Those norms might be eroding, so we
can potentially see kind of more aggression there, and that
(07:15):
that's also not a happy place for us to be in.
Right when when we see that potential I don't know, right,
I don't There's a lot of uncertainty around this, but
I think that if international norms of behavior are being eroded,
then that can be frightening for a lot of countries
in Asia. Right. If you think that, oh, okay, this
(07:35):
balance of power is no longer going to be held
in check, then if I you know, if I were
living anywhere there, I'd be a little nervous.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Yeah, I mean, you know, foreign policy did not change
that much from Bush to Obama to Trump one to Biden. Right,
And so the United States has lots of problems. That
starts stupid borers, right, it has someone economic crises that
it then spreads the rest of the world. But like
(08:05):
you know, there is more of a consensus on foreign
policy then on economic policy or social policy or whatever else. Right,
And like you know, it's not even like Trump necessarily
has like a coherent foreign policy vision exactly. It's kind
of very zero sum mentality. We talked about that before, Right,
It's it leans toward isolationism. And look, you'll hear plenty
(08:28):
of critiques of Trump on this show. I would rather
have Trump err on the side of isolations and than
war mongering. If those are the two choices. But like,
but you know, when states don't play an active role
in the world, then you know there are power vacuums
that potentially can can get filled. Right And by the way,
I don't think Biden was particularly effective on China or
(08:49):
really anything in foreign policy either. Frankly, you know, Trump
at least at least has a little bit of the
kind of rogue state factor where you don't know what
the United States would do necessarily. But but yeah, I mean, look,
the stereotype of China is that they're pretty good I
don't know, tacticians, like maybe the global strategy, but like,
(09:13):
but you know they are going to understand if both
to secure their own future, you know, or to kind
of you know, punch at the United States in a
way to slow us down in the AI race too, right,
I mean that's you know, maybe the most high stakes
question right now in the world.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Oh. Absolutely, I mean I think that they're very tactically savvy.
And it was interesting. I was having a conversation the
other week kind of about some of the downstream effects
of the Trump policies, and right now, you know, we're
seeing absolute chaos, you know, with the NIH and the
science funding. A lot of institutions, including places like you Penn,
(09:53):
are resending offers to grad students in the sciences because
they're like, oh, we can't, we can't afford you anymore.
It's really bad, right, And if you think about what
that means for the future of kind of science, technology,
scientific development in the US, there's a potential for brain drain,
and people like, well, where are people going to go?
Who's funding it? Like, well, this is pretty funny, because
(10:13):
I think this is a great strategic opportunity for China
to be like me, right, we'll fund it. You come
here and you can have a lot of money and
you can do your research here. And I actually think
that some people might take them up on it. And
that would be pretty terrifying, right if we have a
brain drain from the US to China, And that might
happen if you cannot get your research funded, if you
(10:35):
cannot do work here and someone else And I say
that they might take them up on it, because I
know people who have gone, you know, to work in
the UAE, who have gone to work in a lot
of places that, like you would think they would not
want to work in because of their ideas about freedom,
et cetera, et cetera. But they do it because they're
offered a lot of money, right, and money speaks and
(10:56):
incentive speak. And I think that China is very tactically
good on all levels of figuring out where the opportunities are,
where the potential kind of where the potential to get
ahead is, and so that you know, I would not
be surprised to see some people, you know, some some
brain drain potentially happening that way. And that's an interesting
(11:20):
thing to consider when we look at you know, ten
years out, twenty years out, technology and science.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
If I were she, I would make Hong Kong, which
is controlled because Hong Kong is one city, right, I
would make that the most welcoming front imaginable to the west. Right, yep,
Like it's an image play that's very smart, yeah, for
like for right now, China doesn't have the image of
(11:48):
luxury that other Asian cultures sometimes do. But this can change,
you know, yeah, and it can change quickly. Korean goods
have become prestigious, right, Obviously, Japanese is a very high
prestige country. But you know, but those are countries that
are democracy used and that have been nocratus for a
long time and like you know, have like a flurish
(12:09):
wishing artistic center, right, Like I don't you know people
thought that China would democratize as it became richer, and
like it kind of is that exactly?
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Yeah, I think that's a really interesting thing to think about.
What can what can China do to make itself look
more appealing to Americans right to people who want to
flee And I think that that is something that they
are potentially not thinking through as deeply as they should,
because to me, like great game theoretic move right would
(12:41):
be okay, yes, you know, we're sorry. Like free speech,
all this great stuff, like we will embrace it. You know,
Donald Trump says, you can't say these words. You can
say anything here right, Come to Hong Kong. We will
give you money, We will give you pretty things. It
will be nice. And Hong Kong used to be a place,
you know that was incredibly welcoming before all of the
(13:03):
you know, before there were the crackdowns on free speech
and everything that has happened. And in the last five
or so years, Hong Kong was kind of a mecca
for a lot of Western a lot of Westerners, right
they they went there and they're like, oh, this isn't China,
this is different. I think that doubling down on that
would actually be huge and would potentially give China an
(13:25):
edge in a lot of different things because you see
that they actually can like Australia right imports. I don't
know how many Chinese evs right like, there are there
are markets where China is actually kind of flourishing in
different countries because they have technology that they're able to
kind of develop. And I think that if they double
(13:46):
down on a lot of these things, we can we
can see kind of a big change in their geopolitical
standing and in the way they're perceived in the world,
which which I think could be a very tactically sound
play for them. And we see and kind of the
ev The reason I mentioned the evs is because with
(14:06):
you know, tariffs et cetera, et cetera, Like that's actually
something that along with AI is a place where they
can start developing a strategic edge right now because there
is kind of this opening that hasn't existed in the past.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
Yeah, but of course, you know, every auto manufacturer, Eleast
American ones have like global supply chains, right, So, but yeah,
I mean, look, I have friends who are like literally
trying to figure out how to make bets on Chinese
made evs gaining market share relative to Tesla. You know,
(14:40):
that's you know, the stakes are pretty obvious with China.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Absolutely, yeah, you know, there's a way forward there where
they can actually make their image much more positive for
the Western mind than it is right now. And I
think that they should really try to be exploring that
strategically because there is a vacuum and the US right
now is not looking good, right the strong man politics
are not looking good. That's a great moment for she
to be like, hey, we're not the strong man, We're
(15:06):
not the bad guys. Look at us, like we can
actually be much nicer than what's happening in the United
States and we will not betray our allies or whatever
it is. So I think that there's a lot of
moves that can happen right now that will not end
well for the US now.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
The contrast to the Middle East is interesting, is like
the marketing strategy right in the sense that like, you know,
the Middle East turned countries will like sponsor huge soccer
teams and things like that, right, and they'll and they'll
have this marketing campaign more, Hey, come to Saudi Arabia
(15:41):
and in the pictures we show you in the ads, right,
it looks very progressive, and you know, and they'll bribe allegedly,
bribe FIFA to host World Cups allegedly and things like that. Right.
But it's a marketing strategy to paint a friendlier phase, right,
and it probably is probably has worked on some level.
(16:04):
I'm not looking at like what American perceptions are of
the wealthier you know, Gulf state, Saudi Arabia, cutar, et cetera.
I said kutar in one of the ways that you're
not supposed to say it. There's like five ways you
can say and I just kind of made up my
own pronunciation there, cut the guitar anyway.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Yeah, that's I Actually, I think that that's a really
that's a good analogy in the sense that foreign image
laundering is something that countries have done many times over
the years and sometimes successfully. And I think that and
it's always a huge, huge part of any diplomatic policy.
(16:43):
It's a huge part of you know, what the CIA does,
right to try to massage perceptions of the United States
and different countries. I think it happens all the time,
and yet when you see an opportunity like that, you
should take it. So I think the US should be worried.
It should try to be figuring out how to make
it so that you know so that these moves are
(17:05):
not going to happen. Right, how do you like, how
do you look ahead at the game theoretic board so
that you can actually counter these moves before they happen.
And that's not something that's happening right now, Nate. Let's
do a quick recap. So what are our key takeaways
from the current situation between the US and China and
kind of where the strategic choices lie.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
Yeah, I guess a little bit. What we talked about
before is like the US is abdicating its position in
some ways as a global hedgemon. I'm using all these
terms I learned in debate team years ago. The term
that we'd use is soft power, right, where like the
United States is seeing as being the most stable economy
(17:48):
in the world, a force for stability and international order generally.
Of course it fucks up and makes some mistakes, right,
but an anchor of safety. And if the US no
longer that then, you know, can China play that role?
And I think that might actually entail having a friendlier face,
and China has sometimes a friendlier face to the West
(18:09):
in particular. I mean, Europe is looking around for hey,
who can we trust here anymore? Looking for trade partners potentially,
and so it's an interesting moment, right, I think their
response is not necessarily to like go not to get
drawn into Trump's zero some game, which isn't really a
zero some game. I mean, we want global cooperation on
all these things ultimately, right, you know, both China and
(18:31):
the US weirdly have like an interest in like making
sure that we're the only two AI superpowers, right, and
that somebody else, I mean, at least whatever else doesn't
kind of catch up. But yeah, it's it's a moment
for she to think big, you know, the US maybe
abdicating its role as kind of the leader of the
free world. Whether trying to count as a free world
or not is kind of an open question obviously, But like,
(18:53):
you know, you counter sometimes the player who is being
playing zero s in the non zero S game by
being the bigger, better, more mature player yourself, right, And
so maybe, you know, maybe we open up Hong Kong
more and don't invade Taiwan until you consolidate kind of
(19:14):
more power and more authority. I think. I think playing
a long game is always, always, almost always beneficial when
others are short sighted.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
All right, let's uh, let's take a break night and
then talk some poker.
Speaker 2 (19:40):
Nate.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Have you been on poker Twitter this past week where
there has been a lot of controversy, shall we say,
around one particular hand that happened at a circuit event.
Have you been privy to this or have you been
too busy at Sloan conference?
Speaker 2 (19:57):
You know Twitter follows me. Oh, the Twitter was down
actually for parts of the day. Yeah, why don't you
introduce I have seen the hand in question. Do you
want to introduce this one though, Maria?
Speaker 1 (20:05):
Yeah? Sure, Okay. So we are at a World Series
of PO circuit event, which is not the main World series,
but this is kind of the circuit gives out rings.
It's a big deal and it's down to the final table.
It's down to the final three players. One of those
players is Maurice Hawkins, who has at that point seventeen rings.
(20:28):
I want to say, if he wins this ring, he
will tie Ari Engele for the most rings in history
in the circuit at eighteen rings. By the way, Ari
just won another ring. Congratulations Ari, so Ari's now at nineteen,
but last week he didn't have that ring. And there's
a big hand where Maurice and another player are all
(20:51):
in and the dealer fans out the board and MUCKs
the other player's hand and says that Maurice has won
with a straight. Maurice has awarded the pot. The other
player is eliminated, and Maurice goes on to win his ring,
ring number eighteen. It turns out that the pot was
(21:14):
awarded incorrectly. The player who was eliminated had actually had
a flush and was supposed to win the hand. This
was all captured on camera in the moment, and so
there's a lot of controversy around what went wrong and
also kind of what is the role of the media,
right because someone was filming this hand, what is the
(21:36):
role of onlookers? What role do people have to actually
make sure that the pot is awarded to the correct hand.
Both hands were on their backs, we can see all cards,
you can see what the winning hand is. Somehow the dealer,
the other two players, the media, everyone on the rail,
nobody speaks up and this poor kid is eliminated instead
(21:58):
of doubling up, potentially changing the outcome. And this is
this is a lot of money, right, we're talking. Oh,
this is a difference in payout of over one hundred
thousand dollars. This is life changing money. This does not
happen often. But you know, how do we think about
this and what you know, what should be done? And
people are incredibly incredibly split on this, which actually shocked me.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Yeah, I mean, has the World series done anything for him?
Like I would give him?
Speaker 1 (22:26):
No? Okay, yeah, nothing has been done. It was it
was basically a tough shit, dude. It's your responsibility to
protect your hand and you're done well.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
First of all, the dealer it's an all in pot, right,
so both hands are face up for the entire table,
and he MUCKs the sensible loser's hand really fast, right,
which was just strange. Right, there's no reason to rush it.
He dealt the whole so it's one thing. Also, the
guy said, oh I thought I won, right.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
Yeah, so this is this is crucial. Yet on the video,
the person who loses actually says, oh I thought I won,
and instead of a knowledging that the dealer takes his
hand which is still perfectly identifiable, and pushes it into
the muck, which is the big pile of cards, which
is something that you should absolutely never do.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
You know, they have cameras because he knows, so you
can always and you know, there are sometimes circumstances where
if if one player thinks a few chips are missing,
they can pause the entire table, if not the entire
tournament for you know, for a long periods of time sometimes,
I mean, so, it was just it was very weird,
and also, like my experience has been that, like, especially
in the four Card games, that players like actually go
(23:43):
out of their way to point out errors when it's
not in their best interests to do so, right, especially
when the thing I'm thinking about is like kind of
like you know, early in the World series, where the
dealers are very new and not used to dealing. This
is to hold them, so I don't know what the
dealer's problem is, right, used to deal, they're doing all
these types of different games, Like players are acting as
(24:04):
like the eyes of the house, right and are go
out of their way to like point stuff out. I
actually had something work in my favor one time right
where like I was playing Omaha uh eight, which is
a high low game. It's a limit game. It's not
all in game, not a pot limit game, I should say.
(24:26):
And like I called with with hoping to win the
low half of the pot. I had a bad call.
I could badhand good pot odds just lo across country, tired,
don't play am that much, right, and I don't have
the best low and I'm about to muck my hand, right,
(24:47):
but someone says, oh, you can't beat you can't win
the high, right, you have any pair at all? And
I did an a pair of asses and a bad kicker.
The other guy busted out in the high had only
a low hand right because my hand had not was
not reprievable in the muck yet I was able to
turn it over the dealer had not mucked quickly enough. Right.
But the point is even then people are saying, okay,
(25:08):
just make sure you didn't do something stupid and give
away like half the pot, right. And so it's very
odd that like nobody else at the table said anything.
I have that one or two times where it's like
did you miss that straight on the board, right, And
no one else will say anything. Anyone kind of like
picks themselves into saying, okay, well if it sure looks
like there's a straight on the board, right, but no
(25:29):
one else is saying anything, so I won't say anything.
But it's it's it's very bizarre that, like a bunch
of things that don't usually happen, the dealer has to
make this mistake. The player has to be like, how
are you not like sweating this hand? Right? I mean,
they're a weird way. We need to get more detail about,
like under what circumstances you might be mentally checked out?
Speaker 1 (25:49):
But like, yeah, so I think kind of from a
broader perspective, I think there are a few things going
on here. So first, like in terms of decision making, right,
this is I think we should point out that this
is a much higher emotion, kind of and hotter situation
than normal.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
Right.
Speaker 1 (26:04):
This isn't a normal poker hand. This is the final
three players in a huge turn for a ring. Right,
So emotions are running high and people are kind of
people are much more kind of in the moment. This
is much more consequential, right than if this had been
an all in the day before. Right, with thirty players left,
three hundred players left, however, a enemy. So that means
(26:28):
two things for decision making. First, your decision making does
get worse in those moments. But secondly, because the kind
of the risk reward is so much higher and the
consequences are so much higher and the payoffs matter so
much more, you should be it's in those moments where
you need to kind of be paying the most attention
and so and so I think that we have kind
(26:49):
of that sort of dynamic here where I think that
the player who busted he did say I think I won,
but then he didn't insist on it because I think
that he's flustered, right, he just busted this tournament in
this big spot, and he doesn't want to look dumb.
He doesn't want to be like, no, I think I
won and then realize that he didn't actually win, and
he you know, I think that all of these things,
(27:10):
all of these emotional things, are clouding the moment. But
I think that the other part of this, and the
reason that I was really interested in this, because as
you know, I'm writing a book about cheating, is kind
of what is the responsibility of different people in this hand?
And obviously, like ultimately the mistake is absolutely the dealers, right,
and the players, but the dealers, the speed of mucking
(27:33):
was huge, But is it you know, people were very
were incredibly torn. And to me, this is the interesting
part on whether the media should have spoken up, right,
And I was shocked at how many people are like, no,
they should absolutely not speak up. They should not insert
themselves into the story. I'm like, are you kidding me? Right,
As someone who is a member of the media, who's
(27:55):
been trained, you know, to not be part of the story,
that completely goes out the window when it becomes an
ethical issue. Right, So we are trained you do not
become part of the story. But if you see that
someone got stabbed, you call nine one one. You don't say, oh,
I'm just observing.
Speaker 2 (28:11):
Yeah, it's a prime directive of Star Trek. Like, it's
not a rule, the prime directive. I don't know, I'm
not as much of us, but like, you're not allowed
to interfere in a primitive alien culture, right, there's no
rule like that in the poker book. In fact, the
rule is that cards is that cards speak.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
Right, cards speak, Yes.
Speaker 2 (28:27):
Cards are face up in the sand. It's not a
case where somebody incorrectly mucked, then you can't do anything
about it, right.
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Yeah, this is this is a case where both hands
are tabled, and so I think it's absolutely the ethical
responsibility of someone who notices it to speak up. Let
me give a less extreme example, like imagine, Nate, I'm
set on a beat to cover life in Central Park
right in New York. So I'm there kind of observing
and I'm writing about this, right, I'm not going to
interfere because I'm just watching people. And then I see
(28:55):
someone's wallet get swiped. Do I not say anything because
they because a person didn't notice and they're just standing
having a conversation, Or do I say, hey, thief, right
and actually point out that something that your wallet just
got stolen. Of course I'm going to say something. I'm
not gonna even if you're not dying, I'm going to say, hey,
someone just stole your wallet, right, like we need to,
(29:17):
I'm sure, I think.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
I mean, you know, if I were covering a political
campaign and I detected illegal activity, right, I wouldn't tell
the police about that. I'd write about it, or I'd
choose not to. I don't know. I mean, it's like
the analogy. But like, look, I don't.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
But that's different. So we're talking about something where you
can immediately right where you see a crime being committed
in the moment, and you can immediately do something. If
you detected a legal activity in a political campaign, you know,
and you had to follow the money, et cetera, et cetera,
you'd report out the story. But if you actually observed
something illegal happening that you could change in the moment,
(29:51):
I think you would. That's a very difficult.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Let's say we are at the World Series of Summer
only a couple months away now, and we have may
plans to get dinner together. You say, I'm a table
six hundred and twelve or whatever. Your table's taking a
long time to finish a tend. I come over. I
notice you, full right. I noticed that. Then the two
remaining players, the pot is pushed to the wrong player,
and I say, nothing at your table. Wait, that dude
(30:16):
just made a flush. Yeah, Like that's okay, Right, so
it's an immediate thing.
Speaker 1 (30:20):
You're like, it's absolutely okay. And I also want I
hate when people start immediately going out to the grander arguments. Well,
the media's job is to report, it's not to kind
of police the hand. Yeah, absolutely, that's exactly right. The
media's job is to report. I'm not saying it's their
responsibility to be paying attention to who's awarded the pot
in every single hand. That's not their responsibility, right, Just
(30:43):
like it's not my responsibility to walk around Central Park
looking to see if there are crimes being committed that
I can help. We have police, we have people who
do that. But if you happen to see in the moment,
and if you happen to know that, then you should absolutely.
I think it's your ethical obligation to speak up.
Speaker 2 (30:59):
Yeah, and as part of the poker again, I go
back to these events. You know, the ethic of the
community is that, like we speak up, to speak up
to dealer errors or errors in terms of how the
tournament is run, but especially dealer errors. Right, it's a
community's responsibility to speak up. But by the way, if
(31:19):
you want to talk about like the equilibrium, right, like
if you didn't have people willing to help out a
confused dealer, then you'd have to like you would have
longer lines because you wouldn't have enough qualified dealers, or
maybe they pay dealers more, but then the rake is
higher and things like that, right, and so like I
think it's kind of like explicitly ethical for if a
(31:40):
player to speak up when when dealers make mistakes. I mean,
the thing is too that's weird about it though, like
like didn't Maurice Hawkins, No, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Or I'm assuming, like we don't know, but I'm assuming
he did given how he behaved, because he is someone
who always celebrates and is very in your face when
he wins and you see him on the term, on
the turn like being like you know, straight, like blah
blah blah, like I got this, and then on the
river as opposed to celebrating, he just goes quiet. He
(32:12):
goes silent, and that is we don't know, We don't
know this, but I think that you know, we have
a duty to any kind of community that we are
part of that we love to kind of keep to
keep things above board, right, to keep things to keep
the community good, and to actually like ensure that good
(32:34):
behavior is rewarded and bad behavior is punished. And let's
just like if you zoom out even further to journalism,
like some of the best journalisms, journalists have sometimes fucked
up right and not intervened when they should have, and
they were punished for it. Because I think that just ethically,
we do have kind of this duty to speak up.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
We'll be right back after this message.
Speaker 1 (33:16):
The bigger, the bigger point here is that like we
all make poor decisions when we're tired, when emotions are
running high, when you know, when you're in hot situations
and everyone you know, you can just not see things
that are right in front of your face. You know.
An attentional blindness is a real thing. When you're not
looking for certain cards, you're not looking for certain things,
(33:37):
and you just completely miss It can happen to anyone.
Just back in December, by the way, I missed a
flush yet had and this was and this was the
ten k when main event. This was day three or four,
I think it was day four. It was very deep
and you know, I had gone all in with a
pair of queens against a pair of kings. The kings
(33:58):
hit a set on the flop, so I was like,
you know, I'm dead right, And then on the turn
I was drawing to a straight. But I also did
not realize that it was another club and I had
the Queen of clubs and he did not have the
King of clubs. So when the strait didn't hit on
the river, I left because I thought I busted. And
the player who lost the hand who had the kings
was like, wait, you have a flush, and the dealer
(34:21):
was like and called me back. Right, That's that's what
you do. That's the only ethical way of handling that situation.
Speaker 2 (34:29):
I had a spot where a lot of at one
point I had a lot of chips in one of
these poker goat tournaments and then lost a big flip
and they didn't have many chips, and then like, you know,
another hand shoved like fifteen big linds from the small
blind open shove with like a decent queen, you know,
Queen seven, Queen six, suited, Queen ate off something in
(34:52):
that missiny middling strength hand right and made trips, I mean,
three of a kind queens. But the guy backed into
like Broadway straight. So it was kind of pissed and
like I just lost this flip and then lost this
other thing that wasn't technically a flip, but whatever, right,
and you know, I get up to leave and he's like, no, dude,
that guy only had two bling buds left, right, He
(35:15):
had almost busted in the previous hand and kind of
being like tired and like, you know, a little mine
off has tilted. But like but yeah, your your attention
span can, yeah, can wane in situations like this. This
is why it's bad idea to play four card games
and you just flew across the country by the.
Speaker 1 (35:32):
Way, Yeah, I mean, I think that's one of the
bigger issues here. Like we all make mistakes in emotional situations,
and so everyone else should like people should try to
rectify those mistakes. You should try to be helpful, and
that is I think something of a of an ethical
obligation there.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
And also if you you know, don't be afraid to
do things that are mildly embarrassing, but that like yeah,
or you know, so for example, let's say that I
didn't eat breakfast and wait for the dinner break and
it's a little shaky or something, right, like I'll just
verbally start declaring my bets, you know, five thousand or something, right,
because I don't want any tales having to do with
(36:12):
like my handshaking or things like that. Or like, you know,
sometimes you'll see you where a player is confused about
how to read the board, right, usually not and hold them,
but sometimes and hold them too, and they'll look at
their hand and stare at their hand and try to
figure out whether they made something, especially in Omaha games. Right,
Just table your hand, right. Everybody misreads boards in Omaha, right.
You never know when you are missing, like especially like
(36:35):
some bomb pot or something right, or a split pot game,
like you probably made some two pair that you forgot about,
you know, if you're playing big oh five cards, right,
So just table your fucking hand. It's not that embarrassing.
Everyone plays all kind of crap and the big old
games anyway, rights, you know, because you're gonna feel a
lot worse if you go to bed like, oh shit,
I think I actually rivered a back door straight kind
(36:56):
of thing.
Speaker 1 (36:57):
Yeah, now, of course. So I think the big takeaway
from this is everyone makes mistakes. It's hard to make
decisions when you're tired. Give yourself some slack, give other
people some slack, don't be afraid of looking dumb, and
do speak up, right, because as you get more and
more people who say nothing. I think that's the other
part of this. There is this tendency to say, oh
(37:20):
I must be wrong. Don't succumb to that and be
the one person who says, wait, can we just look
at this one more time? And I think that everyone
will be better off, whether you're playing poker or in
some other situation.
Speaker 2 (37:33):
And by the way, this helps the less experienced players
that we all want in our game. Right, I make
far fewer misclicks, meaning when you actually bet the wrong
amount right or mystery people's stacks despite the previous example,
you know, you just do a lot less of that,
whereas those things are like super fucking stressful to players
if they only play live poker like once every now
and then, right, and so like being again, don't give
(37:54):
players strange but at least protect errors that the dealer
makes some things too, like if dealers are are pitching
cards too high right so you can see maybe the
color of the card, right, like, you should say something
about them, like don't be like, oh, I'm being rude
to this dealer. You know it's like no, that's going
(38:15):
to create an advantage for players in certain seats and
maybe including you, right, and like, so you should you
should say something.
Speaker 1 (38:20):
You should Yep, you should always speak up if you
see something, say something. Brought to you by the New
York City Subway.
Speaker 2 (38:38):
And if you're not subscribing yet, consider signing up for
just six ninety nine a month. What a nice price.
You get access to all that premium content and ad
for listening across Pushkin's entire network of shows.
Speaker 1 (38:50):
Risky Business is hosted by me Maria Kanakova.
Speaker 2 (38:52):
And by me Nate Silver. The show is a co
production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia. This episode was produced
by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer is Gabriel Hunter Chang.
Sally Helm is our editor, and our executive producer is
Jacob Goldstein. Mixing by Sarah Bruder.
Speaker 1 (39:09):
If you like this show, please rate and review us
so other people can find us too. Thanks so much
for tuning in.
Hosts And Creators
Maria Konnikova
Nate Silver
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com