Who are you?

I'm a lifelong serious poker player and a professional financial quant (that means I work in finance but spend a lot of my time doing math). I like to write and teach.

Why did you write the book?

I've always wanted to write a book and this time the thing I wanted to say and the thing a publisher would pay me to say came together. It was bound to happen sooner or later.

How good a poker player are you?

A simple question that deserves, but won't get, a simple answer. If you think poker is a sport, then I'm an amateur. To me, poker is only poker when people are playing for money. If they're playing to beat other people, as in a tournament, then it's an entirely different activity. It's the difference between hunting for sport versus target shooting for a medal, arguing politics to change someone's opinion versus competing in a debate tournament, singing to the stars from your heart versus being on American Idol. Similar skills are required for both activities, but different people do them for different reasons. Some people do both well, but not me.

So how do you rate a poker player who doesn't play many tournaments and doesn't play hundreds of thousands of hands every year in televised matches to beat top pros? The old-fashioned way. I've played only a couple hundred thousand hands of poker in my life. With all the randomness in poker, that's not enough to establish for sure whether I'm better or worse than most of the people I play with. What you can establish is that certain games are among the best in the world because players from them are consistent winners everywhere, and losers nowhere. Some of these are private games, some are public, but enough players play both to make it clear that neither one has a monopoly on poker talent. Anyone who is a consistent winner in these games over a long period of time can consider him or herself among the best players in the world. I've done that, and I've also gone to cardrooms and casinos to try my skill at tables with top professionals.

I think there are something like a thousand people about as good as me, and there's no way to tell who's at the top or bottom of that group. You can say it's two hundred or five thousand and I won't argue, but I think it's in that range. Some of that group are also top tournament players, but others (like me) don't have those skills. To do well in a tournament you have to maximize your winnings against weak players and eliminate strong players. You also need quite a bit of stamina, to be willing to sit in uncomfortable seats amid people you may not like for many hours on a schedule set by the casino. I'm either unable or unwilling to develop those abilities, I play almost exclusively against very strong players whom I like, in comfortable surroundings at times and places I choose, with a goal of making money, but not breaking anyone. I am very good at finding good games and collecting winnings, abilities that some casino-only players never develop.

How good a trader are you?

My trading days are through. When I was trading, my advantage was math and coolness, I was never a natural trader. With computers, my advantage was gone. I understand and love trading, but there are much better people than me at it. However, I am very good at developing and managing traders, and evaluating trading skill.

How can I learn how to play poker?

First you should learn the basic cardplay and strategy. A good book helps; you should also play lots of hands against a computer simulator. The artificial intelligence doesn't have to be good, you just need to train your mind to know automatically what combinations are possible, and how likely each one is. Knowing the odds of hitting an inside straight are no substitute for drawing to a thousand of them. With a simulator, you can play more hands in a few months than older professionals played in their lifetimes. Once that stuff is second nature, you will be able to pay attention in a real game, and you won't give anything away by having to calculate. I can't help you much beyond that point, you'll either have the instincts or you won't. If you do, you can be coached to be a very good player. If you don't, you can learn to be a solid player by rote, but why bother?

How can I learn how to trade?

I don't think there's much point in amateur trading. Good traders are obvious early. They prefer to trust their judgment over advice from other people or consensus. They have to start young, otherwise the mistakes would kill them at adult stakes. But if they persist, they learn trading judgment. They make good agents and poker players; they make bad team players and leaders. The world needs them, especially in times of rapid change, but it needs more of the opposite kind of people.

If you have it, you should know it. There's no benefit to trying to fake it. You probably won't get away with it, and you won't like it if you do. Given the raw ability, the only place to learn today is at a top trading shop. Floor trading and small shops are not the way to learn about the modern game. You start as an assistant, and learn by watching. No one has yet figured out any better way.

Do I need to know math to play poker and trade?

Well, lots of good people at both hate math. But I find love of math puzzles to be deeply entwined in both activities. That doesn't mean liking math class or studying theorems, it does mean a love of solutions and the clarity that logic can bring. I think you'll do either one better for refining that math ability. I also think both activities are evolving to require more math. On the other hand, math is not enough for either one.

What's your favorite poker game?

I associate certain games with certain times and types of games. Five card stud is mostly boring, with all the money changing hands in a few intense hands (often ones that start innocently). It only makes sense no-limit. That can be great with the right group of people and surroundings, but would be unthinkably tedious in a casino with strangers. Hold'em is a great all-purpose game, works at any limit type, with friends or at a casino, for high stakes or low, fun to watch; but it still feels like a professional's game to me.

The math part of me likes Omaha high/low 8-or-better. It's probably the most fun to play if you don't care about the stakes. On the other hand, there's too much randomness for me to like it at really high stake levels. So I'd pick seven-card stud high as my single favorite game. I can have fun playing penny-ante, but I don't feel like a gambler playing it at high stakes. I've played most of the other variants popular today, and a lot more that aren't. Some I liked, some I didn't. Also, in most of my games we rotate the game from three or four different ones. I tend to prefer no-limit, as long as I know the other players.

Do you want to hear my bad beat story?

No.

Are you going to write another book?

I think so. I'd like to rest up a bit, and find out what people think of this one first. So let me know.