Poker, cards and delta STs. This is an actual thing I have noticed in several of them, this love of playing cards. Especially SLIs.
Anyone else seen it?
Poker, cards and delta STs. This is an actual thing I have noticed in several of them, this love of playing cards. Especially SLIs.
Anyone else seen it?
I know beta STs and alpha NTs into poker as well. I used to play a bit too. Is it really type related?
Everyone on these top poker players VI delta ST to me. Most seem SLI.
The necessity to remain cold and unaffected visually lends itself well to poker.
Like does it get anymore SLI then this?
--->
Attachment 7610
^ I mean I guess you could call this guy an alpha NT, maybe.
But this guy as anything but an ST? come on.
--->
Attachment 7611
And then there is this gomer.
----->
Attachment 7612
It's something I've noticed. I type a guy SLI and lo and behold he has a poker table which he uses regularly. How surprising.
It's an Si thing mixed with logics of actions mixed with introversive sport.
Negreanu 100% not a sli, probably Exxp something.
phil ivey Se something
Tony G Efxx
Off the top of my head (take with a huge grain of salt...)
Phil Hellmuth - Could be a very conceited ILI I guess, but likely Si/Ne valuer (LII/SEI)?
Tony G - SLE
Negreanu - ILE
Phil Ivey - LSI as a guess, way too secretive to be certain
Sam Tricket - Si/Ne, SLI
Tom Dwan - Think I typed him as IEI at one point but seems Gamma NT to me now, LIE-Ni?
Phil Galfond - LII
Vanessa Selbst - SLE
Antonio Esfandiari - ILE (looks like Jurgen Klopp?)
Phil Laak - Si/Ne
Barry Greenstein - ILI
Doyle Brunson - LSE-Si
Erica Schoenberg - ESI
Gus Hansen - Looks EIE?
David Benyamine - LIE
Never was interested in card games.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I know an SLI who was really into poker. Basically he saw it as a get-rich-quick scheme (mostly with ). However he wasn't really able to assess his ability accurately because of weak (he was pretty bad actually and ended up losing a lot of money). Fortunately last time I checked he has been putting more energy into a more stable career.
The actual playing of poker is mostly about , with some . Theory and calculation are only going to help you up to a point, it's a hugely psychological game based on intimidation and being unpredictable.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Sure but be aware of the risk involved. A friend of mine wanted to play as well but he has the type of personality that gets addicted to things very easily, so I ended up having to sort of prohibit him from ever playing
Just make sure you never gamble with what you're not prepared to lose and it'll all work out