Adel Awwad asked:


One of the ways to suggest an answer to the question of skill or luck is to watch the TV tournaments and notice how often some professional players seem to make the final table. Another clue to this question is taking stock of a local poker room and who seems to win more often than not. Some players are luckier than others, but it seems that skill over time wins out over luck. This is particularly true in cash games. Luck in tournaments does play a bigger part since one bad bet can end the tournament for a solid player. In tournaments you can often see a river card out of nowhere beat a very good starting hand of a professional and the amateur that lucked out continues in the game.

Many state legislatures have decided in favor of skill when letting poker rooms legally run in the state. The skill quality of the game overcame the prohibition against gambling. Watch the fate of any new player learning the game during the early stages of their learning curve and you can easily see that their skill level is suspect and they only seem to win with lucky draws or very powerful starting hands. They are lost when it comes to knowing when to bluff or play a marginal hand. Solid players who have a knack for doing the right move at the right time are the personification of poker skill. They rarely make a playing mistake and are only beat by an unexpected draw of luck or four running suited cards in the flop to give the Ace holding player a flush. You see many hands like this in online tournaments. Watching pairs of Aces get cracked online is an ugly display of how fickle the game can be at times.

Knowledge and experience are usually rewarded in a cash game and to a lesser degree in tournaments. The big reason for the difference is the player can rebuy in the cash game and when they lose their starting stack in a tournament they are knocked out of the tournament. Tournament play does seem to have a greater element of luck in its play. This is especially true when these Internet players are willing to go all in at the start of a hand. They play power poker and do not wait to see if they make their hand or not. In cases like this you may as well be playing showdown and not Holdem. Big pairs are likely to be over bet before the flop in tournaments and under bet in cash games. Patience also seems to be a bigger factor in cash games and less of an element in tournament play. Tournaments reward very aggressive play far more than cash games. As a group of players, cash game professionals are often more skillful players.

The betting level of the game also seems to bring more skill into play. The higher the betting level the more skill you will see in the play. Low-level games are hard to win with just skill, as there are too many players who will call even when the odds are very much out of favor toward them. No limit games will be filled with skillful players who know how to play. This is true in spades if the blinds are also very high. Players who are learning would be advised to stick with the lower level games until they have a better understanding of how the game should be played.

Making set up bets and bluffing are not the new player’s best play. Skilled players do it all of the time. They also seem to know exactly the amount they should wager to get their opponent to call. Getting the maximum amount of money for a winning hand is a learned skill and not a play that should be left to luck.

The other part of luck versus skill is luck cannot be counted on from day to day, but skill can be maintained from one session to the next. This alone may be the reason that familiar faces are seen at tournament after tournament. It is hard to beat a player who plays well and makes few mistakes. As the song goes, they know when to Holdem and when to Foldem. Mistake free play is hard to win against when a player is counting on lucky draws to bail them out of bad calls. Players sitting at a poker table make miracle draws every day. The difference from a skill standpoint is the odds are taken into account before the draw and the player knows that the play will depend on the odds. The player who depends on luck to win will be disappointed many times and does not even consider the odds of the play they are making. A blind eye to the odds of the play can be very costly over time and over many poker sessions.

Conclusions

Most solid players would come down on the side of skill in this debate. They saw it happen in their own play, as they got better at the game of poker. Early on they had games where they got very lucky, but over time they began to realize that they could not depend on luck to win. As they learned more about the inner workings of the game, they began to play with greater skill and their wins and losses were reversed to the win side of the ledger. Many of these same players have had two other significant advantages over the older players. They could read any of the really good books on poker that are now available. They could also play thousands of hands on the Internet at online poker rooms. The old time poker players had to spend a long time playing poker to log the same number of games and the experience that real time play gives to a player. This accounts to some degree for the young players doing so well in tournaments. Skill in the long run is the bread and butter to a winning poker player.

chilhyun asked:


keyword:

NEW YORK

Cancer

cellphones

 

NEW YORK – When Amy Morris’ twin boys, then 11, went on an academic trip to Washington last year, she agreed to give them cellphones at the program’s request. But this summer she was dismayed to learn that girls at her 8-year-old daughter’s day camp were using cellphones they’d taken along in their backpacks.

 

“We were outraged,” says the Connecticut mother, who adds that the camp didn’t know. “These girls think it’s a cute game. But it’s inappropriate, and it’s unnecessary.”

 

It’s a signature parenting dilemma of the wireless age: Should kids have cellphones? And how old is old enough? It pits our understandable desire to keep tabs on our offspring – not to mention make them happy – against the instinctive feeling that it’s simply, well, wrong for youngsters to spend their time chatting and texting over the airwaves.

 

Now, there’s further ammunition for Morris and other reluctant parents like her to stand firm: The warning last week by the head of a prominent cancer-research institute to his faculty and staff. Limit cellphone use, he said, because of the possible cancer risk – especially when it comes to children, whose brains are still developing.

 

The warning from Dr. Ronald Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, was based on early, unpublished data and came despite numerous studies that haven’t found a link between increased tumors and cellphone use.

 

But it’s struck a nerve among parents who already have other reasons to resist their children’s entreaties.

 

“Now we hear about this possible medical risk,” says Marybeth Hicks, an author, columnist and mother of four. “I couldn’t possibly know if it’s real or not. But I know that it’s probably not necessary for most children to have a cellphone.”

 

To her, “it’s part of this whole rush to adulthood – Hello Kitty backpacks for third-graders have cellphone pockets in them! Marketers have skillfully created a groundswell of begging among kids – and we all know that begging can work.”

 

Hicks, whose book “Bringing Up Geeks: How to Protect Your Kid’s Childhood in a Grow-Up-Too-Fast World,” is about just such problems, has personal experience with persistent children.

 

“My 10-year-old daughter thinks she’s deprived,” Hicks says. “She’s been saying she’s the only one at school without a phone, and it’s actually getting to be true.” And her son, she says, was the only kid in his eighth-grade class without a phone. (He just got one, right before freshman year in high school.)

 

Hicks, who lives in East Lansing, Mich., is aware that some parents feel cellphones are an essential security tool for their kids.

 

But, she says, “I always know where my kids are. A cellphone is a tool to negotiate the world once you have the responsibility to be out in the world on your own.”

 

Morris, of Weston, Conn., has decided that for her own kids, middle school is about the right time. “My boys are starting to walk home alone sometimes,” she says. “I want them to have a phone.”

 

Being boys, though, they tend to forget the darned things all the time – especially in situations when they actually need them.

 

So far, Morris has avoided giving one to her younger child, she says, not an easy thing in a society where kids, especially girls, are so sensitive to social pressures. “I think a lot of parents in this country just give in,” she says. She’s especially concerned about the rampant text messaging among the younger set.

 

Statistics from the Pew Research Center show just how deeply ingrained in our daily lives cellphones have become: Fully 78 percent of all adults own them, including 86 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds and 55 percent of Americans 65 and older. Pew doesn’t compile statistics on those under 18.

 

Text messaging, on the other hand, is the province of the young: 74 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds do it but only 6 percent of the 65-plus crowd.

 

Should the latest medical news cause huge concern among parents who have given in? “If you’ve got good reasons for them to have it, I’d go ahead,” says Frank Barnes, a professor who chaired a recent report on the subject. However, he added, “they’ve probably got other things they should be doing.”

 

Ultimately, parents have to make their own rules – but that’s difficult when the social pressure is so strong, says Lisa Bain, executive editor of Parenting magazine. “The age is creeping down,” she says. “Girls tend to get them younger. It’s become a status symbol – it makes them feel grown up.”

 

 

Matt Somers asked:

A wise man once said that apart from the spelling there is no difference between counselling and coaching. There’s a shade of truth in this but for the sake of the clarity I’m trying to achieve in this piece I am going to illustrate the differences such as they are. In fairness, it’s relatively easy for me to do this as I am concentrating on coaching that takes place at work; usually delivered by a line manager. We’ll see later on when we come to look at the different types and branches of coaching activity that the lines of distinction do become far more blurred.

As with mentoring, the skills of the coach and the counsellor are the same. They each listen attentively, ask probing questions and offer non-judgemental observations in the spirit of helping their ‘clients’ find their own answers. I don’t think either a coach or a counsellor would go down the “You should…”, “You must…” route. The difference does not lie in the skill set; it has much more to do with the content of the conversation and the desired result.

Counsellors are concerned with identifying root causes. They will guide us on a journey through our history to identify critical incidents and problems that have left a mark and cause us problems still. With such issues identified, the work of the counsellor develops into one of exploring ways of dealing with those problems and making changes. We can easily see that relationship counsellors, substance abuse counsellors, bereavement counsellors, etc. focus on dealing with what’s happened.

Coaches are concerned with moving forward. Coaches help the people whom they coach to identify a desired set of circumstances, to examine how that contrasts with current circumstances and then to plan out a series of steps to get from one point to the other. The coach starts from the here and now and, although aware that situations in the past can cause problems today, is more focused on creating mobility and momentum and on getting people started. Coaches focus on dealing with what must happen next.

Picture the scene: you’re three-nil down at half time. The team counsellor would examine the mistakes of the first half, but the team coach would set out the tactics for the second. Both are useful, and as ever are often combined. As always, the needs of the people we’re helping must override any semantic debate around the differences.

However, getting the positioning right is crucial. I’ve seen many a coaching programme get off to a shaky start because staff perceived that they were going to be counselled and were obviously uneasy about how well their managers were qualified to offer this kind of help and whether it was appropriate to talk about potentially emotive personal issues in a work context. Of course there may be a time for counselling at work, and what starts out as a straightforward coaching session may move in that direction. With this in mind it is worth checking out your organization’s welfare and access to counselling policy if you have the slightest suspicion that a coaching approach may uncover a deep seated issue and thus need a professional intervention.

The statements below are an attempt to put these comparisons in simple terms

Managing “Do this.”

Instructing “Here’s how to do this.”

Training “Have a go at doing this.”

Mentoring “My advice would be to….”

Counselling “What feelings does this invoke?”

Coaching “How do you think you could…?”

I wonder if in the end these differences are purely academic and of more interest to people like me who muse on these things, than to people like you who have the harder task of getting people to be the best they can at work.

Having said that, an appreciation of the similarities and differences is useful when it comes to positioning coaching in your team and in your organization. You may well find that if your team is unclear about what coaching involves and have confused it with other things, then they may not engage as fully as you’d wish.

Gian Fiero asked:

If you are trying to get a job, or a better job, your chances of doing so will be greatly enhanced by the experience and education you place on your resume, but the “soft” skills that you demonstrate will distinguish and differentiate you from the gluttony of competitors who are vying for the same job.

But what are those skills?

Apparently, in spite of the flood of resumes that employers are receiving during a time when the market is saturated with job seekers, they are not as happy with their prospects as you might think.

This is according to a comprehensive survey conducted by Randall S. Hansen, Ph.D., and Katharine Hansen, Ph.D. Their survey is a distillation of many studies done on the skills universally sought by employers.

A portion of the skill list derived from their survey follows.

Communications Skills (listening, verbal, written). By far, the one skill mentioned most often by employers is the ability to listen, write, and speak effectively. Successful communication is critical in business.

Exceptional listener and communicator. Someone who effectively conveys information verbally and in writing.

Analytical/Research Skills. Deals with your ability to assess a situation, seek multiple perspectives, gather more information if necessary, and identify key issues that need to be addressed.

Highly analytical. Thinking with demonstrated talent for identifying, scrutinizing, improving, and streamlining complex work processes.

Computer/Technical Literacy. Almost all jobs now require some basic understanding of computer hardware and software, especially word processing, spreadsheets, and email.

Computer-literate performer. Competent with extensive software proficiency covering wide variety of applications.

Flexibility/Adaptability/Managing Multiple Priorities. Deals with your ability to manage multiple assignments and tasks, set priorities, and adapt to changing conditions and work assignments.

Flexible team player. Someone who thrives in environments requiring ability to effectively prioritize and juggle multiple concurrent projects.

Interpersonal Abilities. The ability to relate to your co-workers, inspire others to participate, and mitigate conflict with co-workers is essential given the amount of time spent at work each day.

Proven relationship-builder. Someone with unsurpassed interpersonal skills.

Leadership/Management Skills. While there is some debate about whether leadership is something people are born with, these skills deal with your ability to take charge and manage your co-workers.

Goal-driven leader. Someone who maintains a productive climate and confidently motivates, mobilizes, and coaches employees to meet high performance standards.

Multicultural Sensitivity/Awareness. There is possibly no bigger issue in the workplace than diversity, and job-seekers must demonstrate a sensitivity and awareness to other people and cultures.

Personable & Professional. Strengths include cultural sensitivity and an ability to build rapport with a diverse workforce in multicultural settings.

Planning/Organizing. Deals with your ability to design, plan, organize, and implement projects and tasks within an allotted time frame. Also involves goal-setting.

Results-driven achiever. Someone with exemplary planning and organizational skills, along with a high degree of detail orientation.

Problem-Solving/Reasoning/Creativity. Involves the ability to find solutions to problems using your creativity, reasoning, and past experiences along with the available information and resources.

Innovative problem-solver. Someone who can generate workable solutions and resolve complaints.

Teamwork. Because so many jobs involve working in one or more work-groups, you must have the ability to work with others in a professional manner while attempting to achieve a common goal.

Resourceful team player. Someone who excels at building trusting relationships with customers and colleagues.

As someone who specializes in career planning, I have to give kudos to Randall and Katharine for this meticulous list. It’s one of the best I’ve seen. If you are serious about finding a job, including and demonstrating the above skills on your resume, and highlighting them in your interviews, may be the key to opening the door to greater opportunities for you.

Steven Sonsino asked:

One of the skills that successful leaders need to master is a bit of a dirty word these days. It’s not the sort of thing they offer leadership training courses on, but it lies at the heart of most business relationships. What I’m talking about is office politics.

When we call someone ‘a political animal’, we’re often not being complimentary. We tend to mean that they’re manipulative and untrustworthy, maybe even immoral or dishonest.

A person who’s good at politics, in our eyes, is someone who likes to score points over others, who tries to scramble to the top of the heap over his or her colleagues.

But politics isn’t all about manipulation. There’s more to it than that. And whether we like it or not, politics is everywhere in the workplace and a good leader needs to know how to make the most of it.

So what does politics have to do with good leadership? Well, to start with, politics involves being aware of the effects your words and actions have on others. And – even more importantly – it also means knowing how to influence people.

In an earlier article, we touched on leading change as a political process, but let’s focus for a moment on your interpersonal political skills in leading change negotiating, persuading, influencing. These leadership skills are essential for success and survival.

In a way, introducing change into an organization is like running a political campaign. If you get it right, your people will support you and your decisions.

How to get your people to accept change:

1. First, set up your campaign team. This isn’t just your fellow leaders, who’ve helped you draw up the plan behind the scenes, it’s also the movers and shakers in your organization. You need to identify them carefully and well. These are the people who can influence OTHER people. Perhaps the people that you can’t reach. If the movers and shakers know about and support what you’re doing, the job will be that much easier.

2. Now prepare yourself. You and your fellow leaders have been working on the plan for a long time. You know how much work has gone into it, and you know how vital it is for your business. Now is the time to get everyone else on board. But be prepared: not everyone’s going to like it.

3. Let the debate go on. Listen to what everyone says: be careful not to spend all your time with people who agree with you. Your fiercest opponents are valuable people: they help you gauge the level of resistance, they set out the arguments you need to defeat, and, if they eventually come round to your way of thinking, they will be some of your most valuable supporters.

The politics of business:

1. Find allies in ALL parts of the organization: you can exchange vital information that you might otherwise not have access to. And you can form coalitions, so together you can influence current and future developments.

2. Intervene in the political processes of the organization: share agendas, influence decisions and decision-makers.

3. Make sure you’re not simply surrounded by ‘yes’ men and women. You need to listen to the devil’s advocates – that way, you’re less likely to make mistakes.

There’s more, of course, there’s more. But deal with office politics on a project by project basis and you won’t go too far wrong. Leadership is sometimes described as a contact sport. It isn’t so much what you know as who you know.

So let me ask you this: who do YOU know?

Jeffrey Wyrick asked:

Before you start up your email or fax machine to send resumes, have you done a self analysis of your career skills. Gaining a prospective employers confidence early in the job interview could go a long way.

While applying for a job, it’s idealistic that you discover your strengths and weaknesses and be ready to address these. By knowing your advantage, the chances of finding & getting the job that you wish will certainly get smoother. But you shouldn’t become too confident because this is among the more common mistakes that plague job applicants. Appearing too surefooted or as somewhat of a know it all individual will merely get you tagged by your interviewer as unfit for the job.

IDENTIFYING YOUR SKILLS

1st thing’s 1st. You had better identify your accomplishments and skill sets. This is your ticket to get that job and you ought to be able to articulate your abilities and expertness as best as possible. A lot folk’s experience a difficult time narrating their accomplishments and abilities as this could appear to be boasting. But you shouldn’t be timid or afraid to talk about your skills. As a matter of fact, it’s crucial that you express to your possible employer what your gifts and talents are. You ought to be able to sell your abilities to your employer. That’s how you’ll acquire the job that you wish. It’s crucial that you don’t come out arrogant or condescending but you should as well avoid selling yourself short. Whenever the interviewer inquires you about your very strong points or what assorts you from the remaining applicants, you ought to be able to promptly apply an effective answer, but before you even go to the interview part, your resume had better spotlight your acquirements and talents for your likely employer to view.

TYPE OF SKILLS

There’s 2 primary classes of skills, hard skills and soft skills. Hard skills are tangible in the good sense that these are matters

that you do like: knowing how to control diverse types of machinery, knowledge of a specialized computer program, ability to type quick, skills about applying many types of tools, credentials concerning particular crafts, etc. Soft skills are skills that are kind of abstract in nature as if personal qualities. This may include the following: being a good team player, holding the power to work on your own, being enthusiastic or organized and decisive.

THE STEPS TO FOLLOW

Constructing a list of your former jobs and experience acquired 1st matter to do is to make a list of all the businesses that you had been employed at for and the skill-sets that you acquired by these employers. There will be numerous things to name and you had better be heedful enough not to forget even the most minor things or activities that you were part of or organized. It is also a good idea to list the volunteer activities that you participated in.

INCLUDE A LIST OF YOUR HOBBIES

Though it could deem trivial at first, it’s likewise really helpful to list altogether your hobbies. There are a lot of abilities that your likely employer may acquire from your hobby list. These will as well as give an approximation of your personality. For instance,

whenever you were part of the school’s debating squad, then your employer may derive that you have good analytical skills. If you were a whiz chess player, then your employer will hold the impression that you are good at arriving at critical decisions. Think of your day by day routine and the matters that you do and frequently take for granted. Are you an organized individual who always maintains your things in decent order? Are you an extrovert that could easily form friendships in a matter of minutes? These may appear ordinary to normal matters to you, but your next boss may believe differently.

CHOOSE WHAT CAREER YOU DESIRE

After listing all your skills and all the things that you do good, you may now resolve what area or career you would like to take a

crack at. Choose the accomplishments contained from your list and partner it with the career type you are seeking. Always acquire time to think if your skills are applicable to the job that you are shooting for. Do not be annoyed if you have to cut down a few of the skills from your list. It’s also crucial to include in the list your skills that the prospective employer will probably value.

ADHERE WHAT YOU WRITE

You had better be realistic about your skills and the degree of expertness that you have with it. For instance, if you suggest that

you are a really organized person, then you should be able to demonstrate this to the interviewer by being able to organize your

thoughts and effectively use the time that was afforded for your job interview.

It’s significant to recognize your skills every time you are job hunting. Always put your best foot forward and good luck!

Tom O\’Dea asked:

Introduction

Leaders need to seek better communication skills not only for themselves and their leadership teams, but as part of the organization’s culture.  Successful change management requires getting everyone moving in one new direction.

People will be talking with one another while you’re trying to drive change.  As a leader, you want to make sure those conversations are out in the open so that objections can be addressed and people will grow confident in your leadership.

Better Communication Skills at the Organization Level

What do we mean when we talk about the communication skills of an organization?  At the individual level, we know how to describe communication skills.  We talk about someone’s style, their subject matter knowledge, their ability to adapt their message to their target audience, their preparation, etc.

In an organization, better communication skills are something we seek to build in the culture.  To be specific, we’re seeking to create a cultural norm of frequent, open dialogue.  When that’s the norm, people feel safe in raising concerns and objections, knowing that they will be heard.

They also recognize that they are obligated to participate in dialogue, whether in meetings or less formally among their peers.  It’s part of their job, making sure they are contributing not only their labor but their expertise, insight and ideas whenever possible.

Leaders need to look out for the two biggest barriers to better communication skills in an organization: silence and violence.

Recognizing Silence

Very simply, silence means people are not participating in the dialogue.  Said another way, important conversations are not happening because people are choosing not to engage in them.

Why is silence a problem?

Hopefully you’ve hired smart people.  It only makes sense, then, that you want and need the insights of those smart people when you’re leading a change program.  Smart people always have thoughts and opinions.  When they go silent, you lose the benefit of knowing those thoughts and opinions.

Besides not having the input, when people are silent you don’t know where they stand.  Do they understand what you are trying to accomplish?  Are they committed to working with you and your team, or do they have reservations?  Without clear understanding and commitment, how will you bring these people along with you?

Addressing Silence

First and foremost, make sure you’ve created an environment where it’s safe to speak out.  Many people who turn to silence do so because they feel they may be ignored or worse yet criticized for speaking up.

Examine your behavior — what do you do when you are challenged?  Do you fight back right away?  Or do you give considered answers and act respectful when you disagree with the challenger?  Check the same behaviors in your leadership team, and within the organization in general.  You’ve got to make it safe for people to engage.  Your behavior will set the tone.

If you’re sure it’s safe and you see individuals are still reluctant to add their input to the dialogue of the organization, coach them individually.  Let them know how much their input is valued and needed, and thank them when they open up.

Recognizing Violence

In this context, violence can be described as the tendency of one or a few individuals to dominate conversations.  When there is violence, there is no chance for open dialogue.  The dominators, if there are more than one, may argue their points without effectively listening to one another.  And those who are not dominating the conversation will end up going silent, out of frustration or boredom.

So in the end, violence begets silence.  How do you address violence?

As a leader, maintain your own objectivity.  You’re a participant in the conversations taking place, but you must also be an observer.  Learn to step out of the discussion from time to time and assess what’s happening.  If you observe individuals dominating to the point where others are checking out, you need to intervene.

The degree of intervention depends on just how “violent” the dialogue is getting.  It can be as simple as reminding someone to ease up a little and open themselves up to push back from others.  Or it can go all the way to having to call a time out and taking people aside to help them see that their passion is overwhelming others and suppressing good dialogue.

The Result of Silence and Violence

One of two things is going to happen when you don’t have open dialogue in which everyone is actively engaged.

You’ll stall. Some strong people will argue and debate ad infinitum, while others check out.  And your change strategy goes no where.

You’ll move forward.  Not everyone will be participating, but strong people will drive and dominate the dialogue and the resulting actions.

Stalling will be very clear to you, and you’ll need to intervene to create safety, get people engaged, help break logjams, etc.

Moving forward might not seem so bad, but beware.  Depending on just how many people have gone silent, there may be a time bomb in your implementation plan.  When things go wrong, as they do in any change initiative, there will be a number of people who will have effectively positioned themselves to wash their hands of all responsibility.

As we noted earlier, just because they go silent doesn’t mean they don’t have input and opinions.  When the plan goes forward and they’ve been shouted down, or chose not to engage because they felt it wasn’t safe, they will be in a position to say “that wasn’t my idea”.

Even though such behavior should be unacceptable, it happens way too often.  Prevent it by setting expectations around organizational communication, specifically creating a shared value for open, honest dialogue without repercussion or disrespect.