Jan 12
The good old days
My buddy and I walked over to 30th Street Train Station for a late night snack tonight. While we were there we noticed that a train was leaving for Atlantic City shortly. This was the 6 dollar “gambler’s express” that we used to love taking in college to play 2 4 holdem at the Taj. We used to go at any hour and enjoyed it like few other activities when we were learning poker. As we were walking home I asked him how much it would take for him to just leave at 2am tonight, and take the train to AC for a 5 hour 2 4 holdem session just like the old days. He said he would need to be paid 700 dollars. I question whether he would even do it for that much.
I remember it always used to be very exciting to go, but then something about getting no sleep, usually coming home broke (when our whole bankroll for the trip was $100) and sharing a 5 am train ride with an eclectic mix of mostly miserable degenerates was really depressing. The funniest part of the whole thing is, even though we remember clearly that coming home stunk, and that now we wouldnt repeat that sort of trip now even for a very nice hourly wage, we have very fond memories of doing the exact thing for no payment of any sort.
I’m pretty sure that GA says a sign of a gambling addiction is a loss of interest in formerly desirable activities. To me this begs the quesition, does it still hold true when the formerly desirable activity for which interest is lost happens to be degenerate late night low limit gambling?
January 12th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
It looks to me as if you are describing a textbook case of cognitive dissonance; refer to Festinger, L. and Carlsmith, J. M. (1959).
You see, there are powerful psychological forces in play in your story. And for you and the benefit of your readers, I will outline them here for you now. First, a brief recap of the facts.
The task you were engaging in (marathon poker sessions) was largely monotonous, repetitive, and for little no money, as you describe that you often “came home broke” and it was “depressing.” One might describe this as boring. And yet, if seemingly contradictory, after the long train ride and virtually no sleep you still have fond memories of the experience and remember it as exciting. How can this be? Especially if, for hundreds of dollars (if not more) you still wouldn’t repeat it today.
Well, it is actually quite simple. Without sufficient external justification, the mere fact that you received no money for your toils caused you to change your attitude and beliefs—“Well I didn’t make any money, so I must have had a good time.” This is known as forced compliance.
Today, if someone paid you money to repeat the experience (a nice hourly wage) you would have a clear external justification and therefore no internal conflict, which would result in you not having a good time. The money becomes the new justification, and your actual attitudes of the event are no longer conflicted — which is exactly what you predict in your blog when you say:
“The funniest part of the whole thing is, even though we remember clearly that coming home stunk, and that now we wouldnt repeat that sort of trip now even for a very nice hourly wage, we have very fond memories of doing the exact thing for no payment of any sort.”
Yeah, I’m that good…feel free to buy my latest book.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
are you the science guy?
January 13th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
It is probably just experience and growing up. It isn’t all about money. Being broke in college and going to crowded, stinking parties with crap beer and waking up with a wicked hangover. Drinking in the woods with friends in high school. Good times because that was all you had. Just because you have grown up (or moved up the limits) and paid your dues, it isn’t necessarily a bad thing that you don’t want to go back and repeat the process and the things you enjoyed at that stage in life. Just a couple cents.
Great blog and keep it up.
January 16th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Whoever won the $5 for New Year’s?