As I've pursued gainful employment the last few months, I've mostly used a resume that includes poker as work experience. As far as I'm concerned I was running an internet small business out of my home. I had to make instant high-pressure strategic decisions, perform in-depth statistical analysis, and make capital allocation decisions based on trending and forecasting. These are experiences and skills that I think a smart employer should value.
However according to a recruiter specializing in Montgomery county finance positions, a gaping hole in my resume is much better than mentioning poker. Poker, he claims, evokes images of "gambling, cocaine, and tattoos. Maryland is still in the Bible Belt you know." The Bible fucks me yet again.
The job search process has taught me that appearances are more important than honesty, so I'll be downplaying my poker career in all proceedings henceforth.
14 comments:
I always forget about the whole Maryland-is-the-south thing. When I'm at my parents' house (St. Mary's County) I occasionally am reminded of it, but then I just drive an hour to the Beltway and forget about it. Here in Kentucky, there's the whole "is Kentucky the south" debate (my personal opinion: hell yes!), but I was reminded of the Maryland thing again recently: I met with a guy who wants to start a chapter of the Southern Medical Society at my school (a non-political organization, actually), and as I was going over the brochures I noticed the list of states that are eligible to be members of the SMA, and Maryland is the northernmost one. Considering the only medical school in Maryland is in Baltimore (not counting USUHS here), and I don't really think of Baltimore as being the south, I'm not sure how successful the SMA is in Maryland.
God love ya, but I cannot see how anyone could view this as the bible "fucking you again." Perhaps this is just a saying, but I think you're a bit off task here.
I think is more of a Sammy Sosa style case in which you were doing sometime that, while perhapt not inherently illegal, certainlyhad a shadow of criminality or relations therein floating above it. Sammy knew eventually it would catch up him, but he did it anyways. Would anyone in their right be mind think that if Sammy wanted to make a comeback with the Astros, he would actually put on his resume that he hit 60+ homeruns way back when when the world knows he was juicing, and tell his new potential managers that he will only sign if he is giving the starting slot in right field?
Or do you think perhaps he would be able to best initally market himself to MLB teams as a dependable clubhouse guy who has learned alot over his life experiences and in need of a chance to prove himself. Perhaps that he has continued to study the art of hitting and has been working with a personal coach, and is in the best shape of his life...
Uh, steroids ARE illegal. No shadow. Steroids should make you look bad. Poker shouldn't.
That being said, I certainly was aware that poker would likely have an image that employers would shy away from, regardless of how well I marketed my experience as a professional asset.
It is people's close-mindedness that is fucking me here, and the bible is a good symbol for close-mindedness.
Nit-picker,
Some steriods are not in fact illegal. Besides, their use in my metaphor referred to the past status in baseball/athletics in generak that some steriods were not illegal at times, and many athletes used them more or less knowing that the they would soon become banned substances.
No methaphor is going to be EXACT, unless I meet another guy who left a job to pursue a career in online poker, and while successful to a point, eventually decided to return to the work-force. And even then, my metaphor won't be perfect unless this guys lives in the DC suburbs and went to an all boys high school in Towson....
Anyways, see the forest from the trees here.
It's not as if people suddenly became close-minded to the merits of online poker in the past 12 dang months. In fact, if nothing else people are more likely to be open minded toward it. You knew this situation when you made the venture, so why does it seem like you're now pissed that the situation exists? Did you think that when you made your foray into this line of "work" that over the period in which you were involved, the rest of society would come to value the skills/work ethic or online poker players as on par with those of doctors?
Nobody is debating that there is truth the the value of playing poker. What is undeniable is that you were no doubt in the 99% percentile of persons who played poker the right way, and did not abuse the money, but rather honestly tracked your progress and made prudent financial decisions. While other guys do this I am sure, I doubt many of them possess your intellectual gifts and your desire to be a fiscally viable and responsible person in the long run.
You are in a system that is society. We all have to operate within this system - this is how humankind lives. People are free to live outside the system, but it is going to require some deal of sacrifice on your part. This could include moving to California...
Steak,
Understanding the existence of someone's ignorance, intolerance, bias, or weakness doesn't make me less inclined to speak out against them.
In the case at hand, that I might have known that people would be unfairly prejudiced against poker players doesn't in any way make it more acceptable to me that people are unfairly prejudiced against poker players.
The difference between me and Sammy Sosa is that he did something that is wrong, and I did something that isn't wrong but some people think it is.
You give good strategic advice - I'd be much more likely to get a job by marketing myself the way you suggest Sammy should market himself. The point of my post isn't to complain about my self-induced misfortune, but to complain about a system that is unfairly flawed to my (and everyone else's) detriment.
The other weakness of your analogy, by the way, is that Sammy can't get the job he wants because he's old and washed up, not because he cheated. On the other hand, I'm perfectly capable of doing a good job, but people aren't willing to overlook something "controversial" in my past.
Well, we're almost there.
Perhaps a better analogy would be a political strategist who decided to run a massive smear campaigns in 2002 and, although his candidates won, he now can't get a job as a campaign manager in 2006.
Is it because people are intolerant or wrongly biased against his tactics? Are they unfairly prejudiced against smear campaigns? Uh, no. There are certain ways to do things which are less honorable or less accepted than others. The risk is evident before making that choice. It's not a surprise that guy cant run a campaign anymore. He could be the best guy in the world, but there are 100 guys like him competing for the same job who didnt run that smear campaign.
Human beings view certain things as more praise-worthy than others. Winning over losing. Participation over laziness. Hard work over winning the lottery. Unfortunately for you, one of these things upon which society frowns is gambling. Now maybe I am not wording this right, as the USA loves gambling...but I mean it in more of a livelihood sense. Sure its ok when a guy is 50 and already a millionaire, but you've got to realize there are 50,000 little punk teenagers playing online gambling and they're losing their parents money and not going to class at college.
Uh, these are the types of people who are ruining your resume right now. It's not the fault of the "unfairly prejudicial." That's bananas.
If it was out in the open that every world leader does cocaine off of the shaven bellies of cats...well then if you did the same thing, it probably wouldn't be frowned on as much.
Think about the stigma of gamblers. You certainly aren't foolish enough to think one man (you) can break through and change everyone's opinions.
I know you're going to tell me that society is dumb and they all believe in God and its only because they're weak-minded and follow safety in numbers. Well, while noone can offer you a fact-based argument otherwise - I think it is relevant that you realize you can't just act however you want in society and then blame society for being narrow-minded about who thinks what is wrong.
I think I have had the same discussion with people about pot... about how smoking pot aint the worst thing in the world, but if out of 10 applicant (all else equal) and 1 of them smoked pot in college for 2 years and the others didnt, well shit...you cant discount that. It shows a pattern of decision making inconsistent with what companies are looking for. IN relation to gambling, only in a very progressive, modern type of business would they want to have someone on board whose resume has poker pro on there. It's the same way thesehi-tech forensic firms are the only ones who publicly hire former hackers. It's an issue of street cred there that these guys know there shit. What kind of street cred would a poker pro bring in? Risk management? Compared to someone who has experience in this area for crucial functions of another business?
Again, NOT that an argument can't be made for the poker pro in general - but more that he is not in a vacuum, but rather competing against equally or better qualified applicant who weren't poker pros and were doing something else with there time.
Which brings another point. Maybe it isnt even so much the poker - but that fact that your competition was doing alot of other more valuable things (business experience-wise) in that time...
Anyway, instead of focusing disdain on people who are not supportive of the poker thing - ask yourself what kinds of people you're competing against in the job market right now?
coincidence
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/060818
I'm not out there claiming my poker experience as equivalent to equal time in experience in a relevant business. I did 2.5 years at my job, and I'm out there looking for a position with that kind of experience. I'm just saying my poker shouldn't take me out of the running. Comparing me to some other applicant who has similar professional experience, 2.5 years, I don't think adding poker on top of that should detract.
OK, sounds fair.
However, assuming this company wanta to hire a career man, what do you say when they ask you why you left?
It seems the poker foray might make them worry that you weren't happy and are possibly 1% more prone to leaving a new job than someone else.
i think 2.5 years working was long enough to realize whats its like in the corporate world...
"In the case at hand, that I might have known that people would be unfairly prejudiced against poker players doesn't in any way make it more acceptable to me that people are unfairly prejudiced against poker players."
i enjoyed this statement but i did not completely agree.
sure, you may have a right to be bitter (you can act/feel however you want. and i understand how you may have poker experience that exemplifies desired skills, i am not debating that at all) but since you had the knowledge/experience to know that they would exist i feel like there is no one to blame but yourself.
you know from playing poker the most important thing is your opponent. and in this case, you are semi-bluffing a calling station, getting called and losing. or getting sucked out by a 2 outer on the river. then complaining about the poor play. you are right the play might not be the best, but isnt the winner of the hand the most successful?
it seems to me in the end the most successful job applicant is the one who is most desirable to the person doing the hiring. so if you knew poker experience wouldnt be +EV to an employer then you are better off working on ways to improve you EV instead of just complaining about things you cant control (like the poor play of other poker players or the paradigms of employers).
by the way, having said all that... if i were you, i would definitely LEAVE it on my resume.
Alright well it must be time to clarify that "the bible fucks me" isn't really a serious comment here. It is just a humorous reference to all of my other atheistic thoughts.
I do resent that I have to manipulate the truth and avoid something that I know adds to my skill set, but I agree that it doesn't "fuck me" over or anything since I was well aware of it before I started.
Also, the thought that the poker time might mean I'm more likely to quit is certainly a very valid concern.
i think it was mentioned somewhere in here already, but perhaps including it would also tend to lead you to a firm that would value things that you value. that might be a good thing as compared with working somewhere that you had to hide it.
That was my initial approach. Things have changed now.
Post a Comment