  I thought I had this all out of my system but then I go to ESPN to read some NFL information (the one thing they still do right) and I am assaulted by this nonsense. There are two other articles there today as well (Lovinger's Is Poker A Sport? I still want to know why that matters at all and one by Glazer concerning Poker Superstars, which is mildly interesting to people with zero poker exposure), but this one by my favorite "sportswriter" to bash, just takes the cake. From the article: Then it happened. First-timer Chris Moneymaker came out of nowhere to win the 2003 World Series. This could never happen in any other sport. You won't see the Lakers pluck someone from the stands to run the point against the Pistons.
The mystique was gone. After Moneymaker, everyone realized the same thing: to play poker, you needed ... a wallet. Watch some shows, read some books, play a few hands on the Internet, throw on a pair of crummy sunglasses, and you're ready to roll. I can't begin to rip this one apart. Is that really all it takes to play poker? I was unaware that it was so easy.
I suppose I should want this myth to perpetuate, as it will just keep on bringing the crappy-ass fish to the tables, but I just can't stand people with a passing understanding of the game watering it down. After all, isn't playing golf just buying some clubs, a few balls, a glove and some spiky shoes? Maybe. But all you'll have at the end is an empty box of balls, a broken driver and a sunburn.
This next section really gets me though: In the recently completed World Series, the number of entrants nearly tripled. Everyone was banking on a puncher's chance of becoming the next Moneymaker. My buddy Sal entered this year for a segment on "Jimmy Kimmel Live. " He figured he'd get knocked out in a couple of hours. The sum of his poker experience? Three weeks on the Internet, three books and six tutorials in Vegas right before the tournament. That's it. He ended up hanging on for three full days, cracking the final 500, outlasting all of those authors and tutors.
And he was wearing a pair of Elton John-style sunglasses to boot. "It's all about luck," a surprised Sal said later. "Once you know what you're doing, it's all about luck. " Again, I suppose I should be saying "Please come sit here on my left. I have an empty chair waiting for you", but I can't. Surviving into the top 500 in a tournament with 2500 people, one time? It is all about luck at that level, stupid. Please try doing that again and again, ad nauseum.
I'm willing to wager that if he enters next year, he's out on day 1. Variance is a bitch like that, and I guess what really gets me is that it is completely ignored when these people talk about poker. The short-term is emphasized, variance is ignored and everyone thinks they are Mike McD. I hope these posts go away soon. I'm so tired of bitching. To the three people that came back to read this when I returned from hiatus, I really apologize for the level of curmudgeonly whining that has been taking place.
Not playing online has afforded me the luxury of actually paying attention to what the media is saying about something poker, a game (yes a game, not a sport. BFD. ) And, on my own behalf and on behalf of those that don't need or want to see poker dumbed-down anymore, I say to Simmons, Lovinger, et al., please shut up. I'm sure there's a Red Sox column that needs writing. 
