tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16531245.post5076351863196812855..comments2023-09-28T08:06:35.641-04:00Comments on Meanwhile, back at the Ranch...: Mr. Obama, please don't "swing for the fences"el rancherohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03481794179892215503noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16531245.post-68188129711517183882009-01-27T23:52:00.000-05:002009-01-27T23:52:00.000-05:00Here's something funny - in your attempt to rectif...Here's something funny - in your attempt to rectify a sports analogy you still got it wrong.<BR/><BR/>just for reference, doubling down is not a poker term, but a blackjack one. <BR/><BR/>Double down: On his first two cards, the player may "double down," i.e., "double" his bet and receive only one card face "down." To do this he moves a second bet equal to the first into the betting box next to his original bet. <BR/><BR/>Now to be sure, the player needs to be in a position of strength relative to the dealer's up card for the doubledown to make sense, but because he's playing blackjack he's making a losing wager no matter what he does, so the "position of strength" he enjoys is still actual weakness. <BR/><BR/>that's just semantics though really.<BR/><BR/>Allow me to offer a quick refinement of what is a good premise based on my studies in both poker and other competitive endeavors:<BR/><BR/>In any competitive event (and we all know that politics fully qualifies) the eventual winner is determined by a his own abilities, preparation, and focus as measured against the same qualities of his opponent. <BR/><BR/>The guy at the plate will only ever hit the ball if he is physically capable of it, knows the situation well enough to anticipate what kind of pitch is coming, and focused enough to execute the swing once the realities of the exact pitch he's seeing become clear.<BR/><BR/>Because of this, swinging for the fences is only ever appropriate in baseball when the pitcher initially makes a mistake (leaving the ball over the middle of the plate). If the pitcher never does this, swinging for the fences is never a good idea. If the pitcher always does this, swinging for the fences is always a good idea.<BR/><BR/>--------------------------<BR/>Its all about anticipating the next move and capitalizing on mistakes. <BR/>--------------------------<BR/><BR/>Its for this reason that pro athletes (and pro poker players, and other professionals in competitive endeavors) are eternal students of their own games. Much more so, in fact than of the games of their opponents. When they watch game film, they start with themselves.<BR/><BR/>By limiting one's own mistakes, one limits his opponent's ability to capitalize, which in turn forces the opponent to take risks that can lead to mistakes themselves.<BR/><BR/>Politically, every president is at an inherent disadvantage in the game of politics. The reason is what poker players (and negotiators) call "positional advantage" or - the power of acting last.<BR/><BR/>The president sets the agenda - especially with his party in power. He determines the policy recommendations, and his party sets out to make those into a reality. <BR/><BR/>By acting first the president exposes all of his mistakes before the opposition has to make a move, which can be an insurmountable advantage vs expert opponents. <BR/><BR/>Of course we know now that the democratic leadership in congress was far less than expert in exploitation of Bush's mistakes politically, but we can't expect the republicans to be so inept. <BR/><BR/>With that said Obama is probably the single most skillful politician I've ever witnessed, and his moves are often very far in front of even his colleagues and the media, much less those that he's politically maneuvering against. I think that's the reason for his whole bipartisan approach and concessions given in the stimulus. <BR/><BR/>It forces the republicans to choose between supporting it, which could lead to their ouster if it works; and opposing it which could lead to their ouster if it works. The end result is they can only either hope that the stimulus fails, or otherwise try to sabotage it - which could lead to their ouster if it works.Renehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14936940997463976253noreply@blogger.com