In one of the top masterpieces of Soviet satire a brilliant con artist, to win a bit of money, convinces a local small-town chess club that he is a traveling maestro and organizes a tournament. He first gathers the fees from the awe-struck yokel-enthusiasts and then plays “twelve identical matches” without understanding much of what he is actually doing, this being the second chess game of his lifetime, but placing the figures more or less correctly, with the terrified locals reading too much into his banal moves. Very soon, however, he good-naturedly utterly loses all twelve simultaneous games, to the amazement of the town. Buy then, however, he has gained the time he needed and escapes with the money. He is not a good player, but he is a winning one.

The Twelve Chairs is the title of the satiric novel. It has been translated into English to become both a book and film adaptation on DVD readily available at Amazon.com. A Mel Brooks comedy was the subject of the film and unless you are fanatical about Mel Brooks, stay clear of this one. Mark Zaharov, a brilliant director, not as well known as his compatriot Tarkovsky, adapted it into a Russian mini-series in 1976.

At the heart of the satire is that a good player, poker or otherwise, can be defined by what his goal is. The fictional con man of the satire was an effective chess player because his goal was to make some money and run, and he did just that. In addition, he was ever so cognizant of his shortcomings as a chess player and structured a plan to play fast and get out with the money before the townsfolk were onto him.

Now, a surprisingly large amount of poker players are reluctant to admit their less than average abilities. Ego is often central with poker players, it seems, perhaps because of the peculiar aura around the game. How they fail to realize that poker is a complex game one spends a lifetime learning is something of a marvel, but these pros-in-denial are exactly what makes poker a profitable game for the serious and talented players.

There are also the players who have simply learned a set of rules they strictly follow without applying much thought or trying to improve radically. They conceal their inferiority carefully enough to convey the impression of competence and mostly win in terms of overall profits. If that is their sole purpose for playing, than they may be called good players.

For those players to whom poker is an art, the above types are not true poker players, not really bad, just not real. They are in the clubs but are not the stars. The good player is looking for growth and more and more insight to improve his already good game. He or she understands that the game is a complicated mix of skill, theater, and perception. They know their weaknesses and work hard on improving their good points while lessening their bad ones.

The author is a successful limit cash game player. He plays poker online and receives Rakeback at Red Star Poker and Rakeback at Carbon Poker.

categories: holdem,hold’em,poker,card games,games,gambling,recreation,sport