The first sentence currently reads "Poker players like to brag they win with luck not skill" - I think that is the wrong way around? I believe it should read "Poker players like to brag they win with skill not luck", based on the rest of the intro.

As someone who has spent a good deal of time playing poker, I totally agree that this is a glaring editorial oversight.

Yet when phrased this way, it reminds me of "I'd rather be lucky than good" - something I've heard players say when criticized after winning in spite of poor play.

Sometimes this is sarcasm, but sometimes not.

There are in fact some folks who approach poker with a sort of chaos or joker mentality, and many who gain great satisfaction from winning by knowingly playing against and defying the odds - especially when the statistical aberrance is at the expense of another player who played the "right" way and lost all their money as a result.

For others, I think the saying is just a recognition of the supreme influence of variance in a poker player's lifetime success, a tacit admission that knowledge and skill alone are never enough.

Sub editors are the most undervalued people in the world. I mean for the very first sentence to get published meaning the opposite of what the author intended is just dismal.

Came to the comments to see if I was losing my mind trying to understand that sentence.

In poker luck is a setting that cannot be control, the author says it makes it beautiful. It makes sense if players like luck as much as skill.

thankyou

Pretty powerful statement. You can only do one thing with the stuff you can't control - appreciate it.

You can hate it. You can avoid it. Both are quite common.

ultimately we want randomness even if first part of our existences are about running away from it

Randomness? Or entropy?

what's the difference in this case?