A nostalgic tale of foolish and amusing inspiration

(and also a rejoinder that even foolish inspiration is still a very useful thing)

Today I have a funny little story about personal growth, inspiration, and how our perspectives change over time. The story is also about how you can beat a poker game using a submarine sandwich — well, kinda.

Some history: In 1990 I discovered Ayn Rand and her Objectivist philosophy. In 1991 I discovered the game of poker in a casino setting. In 1992, I graduated college with a business degree.

So in the early ‘90s, if I wasn’t reading a textbook, I was probably reading Rand’s fiction or non-fiction or a book on how to play (and win at) the game of poker. I literally read every book I could find on both of these subjects back then.

At one point, those twin passions merged in a little book I now hold in my hands. It’s called Poker: A Guaranteed Income for Life by Using the Advanced Concepts of Poker.

Reading the book, it was obvious that this Wallace guy was an Objectivist. He didn’t come out and say it, but his prose just reeked of it. His hero was heroic. His “villains” were pathetic. There was noble virtue and righteous reward oozing from every page.

Naturally, as a newly-minted Objectivist and poker player, I loved it.

Admittedly, there wasn’t very much actionable poker knowledge in the book beyond “play tight while appearing loose”. Most of the “lessons” in the book involve playing home games with weird rules that aren’t useful in a casino setting.

Even worse, most of the “skills” Wallace teaches in the book involve trying to maneuver around very amateurish cheats and hustlers while using your “superior intellect” to outhustle your roguish opponents with your superior virtues.

It’s pretty comic-bookish, actually. But still, I submit, a fun read. At least that’s how I remember it. The only actual poker-tip from the book that I remember is the following, which I am totally not making up. At one point he says something like:

When playing with opponents who are fat and hungry, try the following. Wait until you have a particularly good hand. Then pull out a submarine sandwich that you purchased on your way to the game and toss it into the pot as a bonus to the winner. Your chubby and weak-willed victims will therefore call you down with inferior holdings just for the chance to further gorge themselves!

Go read the book yourself. It’s still available on Amazon. See how well my memory holds up.

So, the book was kinda dumb. But it was also kinda hilarious. And there were some vague concepts that a young poker player could grapple with in a very murky way.

And Wallace’s conclusion in this book was a banger. My young, idealistic, impressionable self loved this passage so much that he (I) framed it and hung it on my wall. It’s still up there in a dark corner of the office I sit in right now. It says this:

Sheer Justice

The good poker player functions rationally. He views all situations realistically. With objective thinking, he directs his actions toward winning maximum money. He pits the full use of his mind against the unwillingness of his opponents to think… the good player cannot lose.

Poker is a game of money and deception; poker exposes man’s character, and the consequences are always deserving. The rewards go to the strong, and the penalties to the weak. The loser dissipates his time and money. The winner earns money and satisfaction. But what is the net result of poker? Is it merely time consumed and money exchanged with nothing positive produced? Is the net result a negative activity? Poker is a character catalyst that forces players to reality. Those willing to work and use their minds are rewarded; those who evade thinking and act on whims cannot escape the penalties. The results are clear and true; the lazy evader fails and can never fake success; the thinking performer is always rewarded.

In poker, man is on his own; he must act as an individual. No one will help him. Success depends on the rational use of his mind; success depends on exercising his positive qualities and overcoming his negative qualities; success depends on him alone. In poker, man can function entirely for his own sake. The results are his own. The winner has made himself a winner; the loser has made himself a loser.

Poker is sheer justice.

Some of that sounds kinda cringy to my ears now, but being cringy doesn’t make it wrong. It’s still hanging on my wall, and I’m not planning on taking it down. Too much sentimental value.

Frank Wallace ended up being a bit of a nut and a charlatan and a tax cheat, at least according to Wikipedia. Born in 1932, he died in 2006 in Henderson NV (a suburb of Las Vegas). I’m sorry I never looked him up. I bet he would have been an interesting fellow to talk to.

So, thanks for the inspiration, Frank!

Naturally,

Adam

Wanna learn some poker skills that are slightly more useful than bombing the pot with a submarine sandwich? I can help with that!