Prompt: Evaluate a significant experience, achievement, risk you have taken, or ethical dilemma you have faced and its impact on you. (500 word limit)
Any feedback you give is appreciated, thanks.
With seven-two offsuit, "pushing all in" would have been considered insane by any veteran poker player; but these poker experts didn't know what I knew. For months I had stared at the computer monitor in my kitchen playing, mind you, not online poker with real money, but instead an early version of computer poker considered a fossil by today's standards. I even achieved a moderate success that could only be described as a triumph of the preadolescent mind. To win the World Series of Poker would require no less than total commitment to my gambling cause. And so I pressed my nose harder against the grindstone and worked to further hone my skill as a poker player - which was, at that time, about as dull as the hand that cuts the card deck.
Mastery of poker strategy, as I quickly discovered, is more than the average kindergartener (like myself) could achieve. Despite months of regimented practice, and a worn-out computer mouse to show for it, I had not ascended the summit of poker proficiency. Clearly this approach would not lead to the success that I expected myself to garner. I had to find another method of beating this omnipotent dealer. A quick look at my chips would divulge that my losing streaks were long statements of my mediocrity, punctuated in brevity with winning rounds that seemed to appear with a marked regularity.
A pattern emerged: on every eleventh round even the worst hand of cards will win the pot.
Instantly, I was folding every round except the eleventh; and soon, I was certainly the world's wealthiest cyber-billionaire.
At that time I was happy enough with my dad thinking of me as a poker prodigy, and it took me several years of maturity to realize the magnitude of my discovery. Simply outwitting the programming of a 1990's computer poker program was not a feat in itself, but finding that pattern in the game and recognizing the benefit that it brought was my first experience with the wonders of "outside the box" thinking.
Being observant doesn't require thought. Thinking outside the box, although sounding trite, is the creative perception of non-readily observable ideas. Yes, I could have seen the pattern of the program by merely having an observant eye; but success in the game was the reward of creative thinking that utilized the pattern to play the game in an unconventional manner.
I found the secret to being successful and reaching my full potential in a lesson from the game of poker: a lesson about thinking outside the box - divergent thinking - to discover what works within of the bounds of the rules, even if it means defying conventional actions. In the case of 1990's computer poker, success depended on thinking beyond what was considered the correct way to play the game. In the same way, my success in life and the business world will hinge on my ability to defy traditional methods of thought to turn a gamble into a sure win.
Any feedback you give is appreciated, thanks.
With seven-two offsuit, "pushing all in" would have been considered insane by any veteran poker player; but these poker experts didn't know what I knew. For months I had stared at the computer monitor in my kitchen playing, mind you, not online poker with real money, but instead an early version of computer poker considered a fossil by today's standards. I even achieved a moderate success that could only be described as a triumph of the preadolescent mind. To win the World Series of Poker would require no less than total commitment to my gambling cause. And so I pressed my nose harder against the grindstone and worked to further hone my skill as a poker player - which was, at that time, about as dull as the hand that cuts the card deck.
Mastery of poker strategy, as I quickly discovered, is more than the average kindergartener (like myself) could achieve. Despite months of regimented practice, and a worn-out computer mouse to show for it, I had not ascended the summit of poker proficiency. Clearly this approach would not lead to the success that I expected myself to garner. I had to find another method of beating this omnipotent dealer. A quick look at my chips would divulge that my losing streaks were long statements of my mediocrity, punctuated in brevity with winning rounds that seemed to appear with a marked regularity.
A pattern emerged: on every eleventh round even the worst hand of cards will win the pot.
Instantly, I was folding every round except the eleventh; and soon, I was certainly the world's wealthiest cyber-billionaire.
At that time I was happy enough with my dad thinking of me as a poker prodigy, and it took me several years of maturity to realize the magnitude of my discovery. Simply outwitting the programming of a 1990's computer poker program was not a feat in itself, but finding that pattern in the game and recognizing the benefit that it brought was my first experience with the wonders of "outside the box" thinking.
Being observant doesn't require thought. Thinking outside the box, although sounding trite, is the creative perception of non-readily observable ideas. Yes, I could have seen the pattern of the program by merely having an observant eye; but success in the game was the reward of creative thinking that utilized the pattern to play the game in an unconventional manner.
I found the secret to being successful and reaching my full potential in a lesson from the game of poker: a lesson about thinking outside the box - divergent thinking - to discover what works within of the bounds of the rules, even if it means defying conventional actions. In the case of 1990's computer poker, success depended on thinking beyond what was considered the correct way to play the game. In the same way, my success in life and the business world will hinge on my ability to defy traditional methods of thought to turn a gamble into a sure win.
