Saturday, January 27, 2007

Skill and Chance: Two Sides Of the Game of Life

A club owner in London charged with hosting poker games without a licence defended himself on the plea that poker is a game of skill, not chance. The UK's Gaming Act requires that clubs hosting games of 'chance' such as roulette get a licence to do so.

This is not required for games of 'skill' like chess. The jury was asked to deliberate and decide whether poker was a game of skill or chance, or a combination of both.

The question, of whether a game of cards is all about skill or chance has been the subject of debate for long. From a philosophical perspective, many see in it a striking parallel to the question of determinism vs free will: Are our lives governed by destiny — by the "cards" dealt to us — or is the final outcome of the game a testimony to our efforts, that is, in the manner in which we play those cards?

That brings us to the eternal question: Is life a game of chance or skill? Voltaire believed "Each player must accept the cards life deals him. But once they are in hand, he alone must decide how to play in order to win the game".

S Radhakrishnan echoed this thought while commenting on the Bhagavad Gita: "Life is like a game of bridge... We did not invent the game or design the cards. We did not frame the rules and we cannot control the dealing... to that extent, determinism rules. But we can play the game well or play it badly. A skilful player may have a poor hand and yet win the game. A bad player may have a good hand and yet make a mess of it... By exercising our choice properly, we can control steadily all the elements and perhaps eliminate altogether the determinism of nature".

The belief that we make or unmake ourselves extends from the atheist to the scholar of scriptures. We needn't worry about what's on the cards, since we can't change that. What we can do with what's on the cards is left to us, however. Which is not to ignore the factor of luck, or whatever else one might call it.

The defendants in the poker trial made the point that if a 'game of chance' includes all games where chance and skill both have a part to play, every possible game could be des-cribed as one.

In the game of life too, the element of chance may not be in our control, but our skills are. Indeed, having to play in a situation where you have little control is hardly limited to card games.

The next time you're watching a one-day international and a batsman walks into the stadium, ponder over what choices has he been given. He did not choose whether he would bat in the first session or the second; a toss of the coin and his captain's call in response did that. He did not know when the wicket would fall that required him to walk in. No one gave him a choice of weather, pitch, or quality of bowling that he could be subject to. He has no choice over who will bat at the other end nor predict how he will respond.

Yet, from the moment he steps in, he is expected to perform. No one gives us a choice in many things when we begin our innings in life either, but how we play the game is up to us.