|  
               
            Web Exclusives: From the P-Nut Gallery  
              a column by Nate Sellwyn nsellyn@princeton.edu 
             
            April 7, 2004: 
             Knowing 
              when to fold ’em 
              P-Nut’s take on college gambling 
            Can a card game be a sport? No? Well, poker’s a sport, bucko, 
              at least according to the media. Don’t think so? It gets more 
              coverage on ESPN than hockey. Or cricket. Or just about anything 
              that’s not basketball, baseball, football, or cheerleading. 
             
            Not only does it get more coverage, but it’s played by more 
              Tigers. Recently, the Daily Princetonian ran an article on the amount 
              of poker played on campus. It spoke in shocked tones of a game in 
              “which players regularly lost upwards of $500” and how 
              “gambling easily takes over the lives of many players.” 
              Of course – like many a hyperbolic Princetonian expose – 
              the article was in no way news to the undergraduate student body. 
              Since the release of the film Rounders in 1998, poker has steadily 
              grown in popularity among college-age kids. A bundle of recent television 
              programs devoted to tournament poker coverage have only served to 
              accelerate this trend. Poker is hot right now, especially at college. 
            Of course, some groups are less than thrilled about this. By “some 
              groups” I mean the University administration, and by “less 
              than thrilled” I mean seriously upset. Citing poker as addictive 
              and often illegal, West College has taken a serious stand against 
              the game. The Princetonian article quotes Associate Dean Hilary 
              Herbold as saying, “If I learned that a student was gambling 
              on the Internet, he or she would face disciplinary action, and I, 
              or a residential college dean, would also work with the student 
              to determine, through a counseling evaluation, whether he or she 
              needed treatment for compulsive gambling.” Yikes. Evidence 
              definitely sits in the Dean’s corner, though, as 18- to 24-year-olds 
              are proven to have some of the highest rates of gambling addictions. 
              Even some of the eating clubs are jumping on the antipoker bandwagon. 
              After a meeting with Herbold, several of the clubs – including 
              Tower, previously notorious as a home for big-money games – 
              changed their policy on poker games to forbid the exchange of money. 
              If the administration has its way, poker will halt its emergence 
              and return to the college underground. 
            What does the P-Nut think? Well, I won’t comment on my own 
              poker experience, since you can never tell who might be reading, 
              but I’ll say this: Is this really what the administration 
              is focusing on right now? The biggest problem on campus is… 
              high-stakes card games? Oh my goodness! I mean, if you’re 
              smart enough to be here, you should know not to enter a game you 
              can’t afford to lose. Yes, some kids will get burned, and 
              that’s obviously an issue. But not a huge one. Poker gets 
              people together in groups for long periods of time. It uses more 
              brains than a video game. It kills fewer brain cells than drinking. 
              It involves active participation from all parties present. What 
              more does the administration want from an activity? Something that 
              involves actual learning? The P-Nut thinks what’s needed is 
              a backdown from the crackdown. Or else someone will get the smackdown. 
            Speaking of college gambling, I bet no one made a fuss about undergraduates 
              filling out N.C.A.A. brackets. I lost in glamorous fashion, picking 
              three of the Final Four squads. The one I was missing was, of course, 
              UConn. Thus I finished second in every single one of my pools. Just 
              the P-Nut’s luck. 
            Why didn’t I go with the Huskies? I didn’t think Emeka 
              Okafor was healthy. Once he was, though, it was a cakewalk for him, 
              Ben Gordon, and their hairless friend Charlie Villanueva, as it 
              should have been. The impact one dominant big man can have on the 
              floor these days is ridiculous. There have been articles everywhere 
              recently praising the college game, describing how – despite 
              the best talent going straight to the N.B.A. – the collegiate 
              game has never looked better. The P-Nut says: Come on. This was 
              a lackluster tournament. No one can tell me it would not have been 
              a HUNDRED times better to see Syracuse sophomore Carmelo Anthony 
              facing off against Ohio State freshman LeBron James in the final. 
              Instead, we were forced to watch a blowout, highlighted only by 
              Okafor educating a red-haired kid from Australia on the finer points 
              of “getting out of my house.” 
               
              Not that I didn’t pick Georgia Tech to win the title – 
              I did, four weeks ago. Speaking of month long periods, that’s 
              about how much time I have before my last column runs in this space. 
              Now, I’ve obviously got my closing piece prepared, but there’s 
              still time between now and then. Anything you’d like to see 
              me write before I pass through the gates? E-mail me. I know – 
              thanks to an e-mail from some Idaho middle schoolers – that 
              someone’s reading this stuff.  
                
             
              You can reach Nate at nsellyn@Princeton.EDU 
 |