Paddling up the "River" at Winstar - Part 1 of 5

I am not a professional poker player.  I am a random poker enthusiast who tries to grind out a profit engaging in my hobby.  

This trip report will be much shorter than my WSOP adventure, but its genesis came from a conversation I had in Las Vegas.  One day at a table during the main event, I engaged in a conversation with another player from Dallas. The conversation turned to the “River” tournament held at the Winstar casino, in Thackerville, Oklahoma (this is the nearest casino to my home).  I asked him his impression of the tournament - he had played the year prior.  He said I should definitely give it a shot.  How many opportunities would I get to play in a live 2.5 million guarantee poker tournament that was within driving distance to my home?

I had seen advertisements for the tournament around the DFW area, but hadn’t really thought about playing in it for several reasons.  1.  Before the World Series, I had never bought into a major live tournament, 2.  I heard the structure was terrible, and  3.  It occurs at a bad time of the year for me (right at the beginning of the school year).  My new friend told me I should really try to get there because even with the structure not being very player friendly, the tournament was a great value due to the larger number of relatively inexperienced players who satellite in.

When I returned home from 10 days in Las Vegas, I was exhausted.  I was enjoying the last of my time off with my family before school started back up.  I was poker’ed out.  But as the echoes of riffling chips finally began to subside.  I started to get the itch to play.  I jumped online and did my daily SNG grind.  Immediately the poker gods exacted a bit of comeuppence, putting me back in my place.  I proceeded to have my all-time worst month’s results.  At first I was playing well, but getting unlucky and taking some brutal beats.  Then I started playing poorly.  Like every good poker player, I blamed it on bad luck and the poor play of others – those donkeys never know when to fold.  However, when I was honest with myself, I admitted I wasn’t playing well.  I wasn’t focused, I was pressing, trying to make things happen, I was chasing draws thinking, “I’ve got the get there, this time.  I’ve missed every other time this month.”  I was playing bad poker and I knew it.

School was starting and my time was limited.  I was stressed out.  What I really wanted, was to have some real chips in my hand and to look across into the eyes of a real opponent.  I was invited and went to a home game with a bunch of 20-something lawyers.  However, playing 50 cent/ dollar cash in someone’s kitchen was not enough to sate my yearnings.

As I was driving home from that game, (un-justifiably late for the amount of money I had won) I saw the billboard for the Winstar “River” Tournament.  I decided I couldn’t pass up the opportunity.  I may not get the chance to play a big tournament until next year’s World Series.  The “River” series includes 8 different tournaments with buy-ins ranging from $300 to the main event at $2100.  School would be underway, so the only one I was even thinking about was the main event.  I figured I could miss one day of work to pursue the dream once more.  However, being the nit I am, (I found a way to disregard the bankroll I had earned the month prior), I looked into satelliting in.   

I drove up two weekends in a row to play the $440 mega-satellite that puts the top 20% in the field.  I thought, “I placed in the top 2% of the WSOP ME, how hard could it be to place in the top 20% of this tournament populated by mostly recreational players?”  (side note:  5000 starting stacks and 20-min levels = Yuck)   After lighting $880 dollars on fire, I was frustrated.  With a week to go before the event, I didn’t have entry and wondered if I should buy-in for the full amount.

My confidence had taken a beating from my record online downswing and my failure to win a satellite.  I thought about not playing.  “If I couldn’t satellite in, I shouldn’t be playing” -  was my mindset.  Even with my take in WSOP, I was not comfortable plunking down $2100.  Especially when it seemed I wasn’t on top of my game.  Maybe I wasn’t as good as I thought.  Maybe the World Series had been a fluke.

I looked to my wife for a nudge in the right direction and a boost in confidence.  She said, “Go play.  Quit your whining.  Just buy your ticket, but don’t be pissy if it doesn’t go your way.”

Instead of calling the casino and buying my entry for full price, I went on 2+2 and craigslist to look for people who were selling their entry for a discount.  I struck a deal with a local regular, who had won multiple satellites.  I purchased, my $2100 entry for $1850.  I was now in for $2730.

Winstar organized this tournament with 3 different starting days (Thursday- Saturday) limited to 500 people plus alternates.  Each day they would play down to the top 10%, who would be in the money and return for play on Sunday.  If you busted out on Thursday or Friday, you could re-enter on a later starting day.  I opted for a Thursday start even though it would require me to miss a day of teaching.  My daughter’s soccer team had a tournament scheduled for Friday and Saturday.  I didn’t want to miss a game.  So I took a “sick day” on Thursday.  I actually headed up Wednesday night and stayed at the casino.  It is only an hour and 20 minutes away, but I didn’t want to fight traffic and show up irritable or tired.  

BTW the hotel at Winstar is brand new and very nice.  I was able to get a discounted poker rate of only $49.  Good deal.

So my second foray into big buy-in live poker tournaments ensues.  I am no longer a naive rookie, but instead a season pro…..???  Hell, I had taken on the best the world had to offer in Las Vegas.   I could handle the Texas/Oklahoma Indian Casino regulars.  Right?

For parts 2-5 click here.

Water Under the Bridge - Post Reunion Blog

I started writing this blog as I sat on the plane traveling home from my 20^th High School Reunion.  I finished it 6 days later.  If you read my previous blog entry, then you know I went to this event with a great deal of apprehension.  The prospect of going home after twenty years and being thrown into a social situation with people with whom you first developed your social “self,” with whom you developed your life goals and dreams, with whom you shared all of the awkward and embarrassing moments of adolescence was terrifying.  It brought to surface all of my insecurities and doubts.  And then I wrote about them in a very public blog and asked people to read it.  It was, in a way, a defense mechanism.  Kind of like making fun of yourself before others can make fun of you.  It was cathartic and disarming and apparently not so unique.  The feedback I received both directly on the blog and later in person was overwhelming.   It turns out I was not alone in the feelings I had.

I hoped that the weekend would provide some great epiphany, or that some outrageous events would ensue to give me fodder for a full recap, or at least for a semi-cogent bookend to the prior entry.  But as I sit here in seat 5C, I don’t see them yet. I will say my brain is not working optimally at this moment as I am working on very little sleep and my liver is in a remotely familiar place trying to process out the alcohol which served its purpose as a social lubricant.  I think the best approach is to start with a play by play and see if as I write and recollect anything compelling percolates to the surface. (Click here if you want to read that more detailed trip report – some funny stuff here)

Is the 20^th high school reunion the great equalizer? Has enough water passed under the bridge?  Have wounds healed? Have crushes faded? Have we toughen up enough?  Have we softened up enough?  Have friendships that were based on ‘real’ things stood the test of time?  Have petty differences built on youthful ignorance faded away?  Have we had enough life experience to understand what is truly important?  After an extended highly scientific analysis I have determined that we can say with some confidence that for 97.43% of people the answer is YES. 

Below you will find a few random insights that I ended up taking away from the weekend.

5^th and 10^th year reunions are about sizing other people up.  It is still about me.  How do I stack up?  How do other people view me?  Will people see me as successful?  We still needed that external validation.  But now, with 20 years under our belts, I felt we were more concerned to find out how other people were doing.  We needed to know others were in a good place, happy and healthy.  We no longer needed or were looking for validation, we know where we are without anyone telling us.  We have made our mistakes, we have had our successes and we survived both.  We have had our own children and we have moved from being young parents to being parents of teens and preteens who we are trying to guide through their insecurities, rather than being concerned with our own.

I will openly admit I was concerned with my appearance.  I did put in the hours in the gym and I did get my hair cut (the little I have left) before the reunion.  Maybe I haven’t out grown my vanity.  I know I was not alone in wanting to see who had put on a few and we all sized up the spouses of our middle and high school crushes.  But let’s all also admit that there were some late bloomers who turned some heads when they walked though the doors.  We wanted to look good, but we didn’t need to be cool.  Maybe our concern for appearance is more stress over aging than it is about fitting in and looking cool. 

One thing I learned this weekend is that there is growing up and there is growing older.  We have all grown older, except for Billy Coulter and Meredith Meadow both of whom must have made some deal with the Devil or have possession of some high tech time machine that allowed them to turn up at the reunion looking like they just walked out of graduation.  We all have added a few pounds, wrinkles, and spouses.  Many of us have lost hair, jobs, and … spouses.  With every year gone we have gained life.  We are accumulating experiences both good and bad that we build upon. 

Growing up is different.  I don’t think everyone grows up.  I think we all know someone we wish would grow up and others that we are glad never seemed to.  Keeping a young outlook, staying spontaneous and playful are all the good parts of not “growing up”  or maybe I should call this staying young at heart.  I feel that teaching has -- on some level -- allowed me to stay young (though my aching back, knees and shoulders would disagree).  But refusing to take responsibility, living in the past and holding onto those youthfully ignorant perceptions, that is the bad kind of not growing up.

The other thing I was reminded of this weekend was that we don’t always know the affect we have on people.  I had more than one conversation over the weekend in which someone recounted a story -- that I hardly remembered -- where something I had done or said had affected them in a fairly big way.  To me at the time, it was no big deal (thus the vague memory).  And I am sure that some of my big deal moments in life barely registered for people who greatly affected me.  And while the recollections recounted to me this weekend were positive in nature, it makes me wonder about the times I hurt people and didn’t even know it.  I am glad to know that a moment of courtesy or kindness over 20 years ago was remembered.  I just hope that there were more of those moments than ones defined by callousness or insensitivity.  The lesson I take away is to always be kind and never discount how the small things can affect those around us -- even when we are not aware.

I wish the weekend would have provided me with something more provocative, something more insightful.  But from my personal experience, which is all I can confidently speak from, I will say that it was nice.  It was not terrible.  It was not scary (after the fact).  I had some great conversations with some great people.  It was wonderful to reconnect with old friends.  I really had regretted that I had lost contact with a few of my very good friends.

I love my life in Dallas, Texas, but I could still see myself living back in Columbia.  Could I go back home?  Do we ever leave?  I know I will always have a place where I belong there and part of me has never left.  But home?  Home is where my family is.  Home is now a small corner in west Plano, and I am happy to be landing soon to the hugs of my wife and kids. 

I wish I had a bit longer to visit, and I hope it will be less time before I return.  To my fellow classmates, the Spring Valley Vikings Class of 1990, I wish only Love, Peace and Happiness.  Cheers.

Three quick postscripts: 

1. A big kudos to Kelley, Ferris and everyone else who helped plan and pull off the reunion. THANK YOU!

2.  For a much more witty Post Reunion recaps visit the blogs of my very good friends The Other Kevin Ginsberg and Marty Simpson

3.  Please feel free to comment below.  I know that many of you are much better equipped than me to expound upon this weekend and what it meant.

20 Years and Counting

Do we ever really grow up?  Can we ever really go home?  Or maybe the question is do we ever really outgrow our insecurities we encountered in our youth? 

You may wonder what brought this up.  Why am I asking these questions now?  Well, at the end of this week I head home to Columbia, South Carolina for my 20^th high school reunion.  As the date gets closer I am feeling more and more anxious.  All of the insecurities, all of the doubts, all of the confusion, all of the promise, all of the dreams I had as a teenager seem to be coming back to me in some weird non-drug induced flashback. 

I will be seeing people I’ve known most of my life, but haven’t seen in 20 years.  Old friends, old rivals, old flames, old teammates, people who long ago were too good for me, and people I could have been nicer to when I had a chance.  Most of us came from modest means. Some had more than others, but when we were in the sand box at Windsor United Methodist Preschool and Windsor Elementary we knew very little of social differences and standing.  We just played super heroes and took naps listening to the “Sound of Music” soundtrack.  We played kickball, hated square dancing in PE and lived for field day.  We had everything in front of us and our parents assured us we were destined for big things.  We progressed through middle school (shout-out to the E.L. Wright Warriors) and started to develop our different talents and personalities.  We all went through that awkward stage (some of us more awkward than others) and we realized that we all weren’t equal.  Some stood out as smart, athletic, artistic, socially adept and others of us seemed to stay in the background.  It was an interesting time to grow up, in a fairly sheltered and mundane part of the world. 

The materialistic 80’s was the backdrop for our formative years.  We were raised on MTV and John Hughes movies made it painfully clear that our lives were not nearly as cool as those rich kids in the Chicago suburbs.  We believed in Reaganomics and Duran Duran.  We went retro with Zeppelin and progressive with the Cure.  We watched the shuttle explode and the Wall come down.  We went from thinking our parents could do no wrong to being certain that our parents knew nothing and couldn’t possibly understand.  Ours was a time when there seemed to be a lull in controversy.  We were winners of the cold war as the Soviet Union embraced capitalism.  We had no war to protest (except the war on drugs).  The economy was growing.  Computers became personal.  It was the “me generation.”

And Columbia, South Carolina was a sleepy town, without much excitement.  Carolina football and the State Fair, soccer leagues, and little league, weekends at the lake, vacations to Myrtle Beach, and homecoming floats were the highlights of each year.  We knew there was a bigger world out there but we weren’t that interested in seeing it.

As we entered Spring Valley High School we knew we were going to close out a decade of decadence (thinly veiled musical reference) as the graduating class of 1990.  And we were going to take over the world, or something along those lines.  We were successful.  We passed tests.  We performed.  We won championships - or came close (I do know the farther in the past it gets the better we were).  An exciting night out was going to “Whiteroads” to park after a football game.   We would listen to music, try to get up the nerve to talk to that girl.  Some would drink beer.  Others would smoke.  I would… well… be the designated driver.   At some point someone (usually of the redneck persuasion) would start a short-lived fight, the police might come and we would scramble.  Ah, those were some memorable nights.

For a few years after we lived on our past accomplishments.  We relived the glory days (musical reference) of our high school success.  Then we realized that everyone else at college had similar stories.  We weren’t overly special.  We were fairly ordinary.  But our parents and teachers had told us we were going to make a difference. 

That realization begs the question: how? How are we going to stand out?  What will we really accomplish?  How will we make an impact on the world?

So what did we become? What were we supposed to become? Did we live up to our potential? Did we live up to expectations? 

Notice how I keep using the pronoun “we” when I should be using “I.”  I don’t presume to be speaking for anyone else.  I am so intimately acquainted with these anxieties, that I find it hard to believe I’m alone.  But these questions are mine alone to answer.

What did I become? What was I supposed to become? Did I live up to my potential? Did I live up to expectations? 

Now it is twenty years later and what are we?  What am I?  I know how I saw myself in high school.  I underachieved or rather, I fell short.  Socially, I felt always on the fringe, through no one’s fault but my own.  Academically, I was in the top group but not near the top of that group.  Athletically, I fought and uphill battle against inferior genetics to gain a modest level of success (sorry Mom and Dad, but come on, look at what I was working with).  And artistically, I had no real interest or talent (except poetry that in retrospect was pretty bad).  But I had high hopes, high expectations, high standards, I was going to be….. something.

So what am I now, as I go back home?  As I go back the place that so greatly influenced who I was and have become, I realize I am what I always was.  A teacher, a coach, a father, a friend, who still has a long way to go.  A boy, now a man that still has promise, that still has dreams, that certainly still has insecurities, but with a perspective that what we have accomplished is seen in the people around us that we affect.

I left South Carolina after graduating and it would be wrong to say that I never looked back, because I do look back.  I look back fondly.  I look back with a bit of melancholy.  I went off to Duke to pursue “bigger things”, then headed to Atlanta to experience the big city (albeit too afraid to leave the comfort of the southeast), and now I am living the suburban life in Plano, Texas (Dallas).  (I shuttle kids to and from soccer practice, but at least I avoided the mini-van.)

I am proud of where I came from.  It made me who I am today.  Though simple and slow, life in South Carolina in the 70’s and 80’s surrounded by the people in my life gave me something.  It gave me a belief in others.  It gave me a perspective that allows me today to give everyone a chance, to not judge too quickly, to show compassion, to help, to understand that hard work is rewarded.  It taught me the lessons, both good and bad that I have built on year after year. 

So who am I?  What did I become?  What great things did I do?  Nothing that will make the history books..

I will not cure cancer.  I will not ensure world peace.  I will not feed all the starving children.  I will not travel in space.  I will not play in the World Cup.  I will not write a best seller (though one day I may get around to trying).  But….one of my students might.  One of my children might.  I am a teacher and a father.  I strive only to be a good and thoughtful person. I strive to be honest, kind, and trustworthy.  At times I fail in even these modest goals. 

I have accomplished some things.  I was a collegiate wrestler but not a very successful one.  I received my degree in neuroscience from Duke, but have not really put that knowledge to use.  I married, have two great kids, got divorced, remarried and now have two great step-daughters.  I have coached state championship soccer teams and taught hundreds of eager minds in AP Biology and AP Psychology classes.  I have made great friends and recently lived a dream of playing cards against the best.  But I’m not done.  I think there is more in front of me. 

With all of the insecurities, with all of the self-doubt, with all of the expectations, I still have promise.  I don’t know what it is, but maybe when my 40^th high school reunion comes around I’ll have tales to tell.

I hope that anyone who reads this entry will leave a comment.  Maybe your thoughts on reunions, going home, living up to expectations, or redefining what is success.  Any and all are welcome.  Next week I hope to reflect on things post reunion event.  Thanks for reading.

Reflections on Poker and Las Vegas.

I’ll start by saying I thoroughly enjoy poker.  I have been playing for almost seven years.  I find it a fascinating mixture of mathematics and psychology.  When you study and employ the skills required to make this game of cards much more than about the cards, you begin to see layers upon layers of thought process.  Then you add the thrill of the gamble when skill must give way the randomness of the cards and it is a terribly interesting endeavor.  It’s like being engaged in mental warfare.  Beginning poker players focus on their own cards.  Then they learn to consider their opponent’s cards.  Intermediate players begin to consider what their opponent thinks their cards are.  Advanced players start to consider what their opponent thinks they think their opponents’ cards are.  I know that you know that I know that you know……

Poker is a game of personalities as much as it is a game of mathematical reality.  In a game of partial information, and intentional misinformation, the task is to find the right balance of aggressiveness, cunning, and discretion.  Making the big fold may not be as rewarding as making the big call, but in the long run of a major tournament, it is how you get deep.  Poker is a game of observations.  From the moment you sit down at the table you are sizing up your opponents and trying to get a feel for who they are and what they are doing.  You cannot go into a table with a set game plan.  You must go in with multiple game plans and then adjust to what your opponents are doing.  The optimal strategy changes by the moment.  The most successful players are those that most quickly adjust and most quickly realized when their opponents have adjusted and then readjust.  On many levels human behavior is relatively predictable.  You just have to know what to look for.

Poker is a social game, and in a social context there is much more information to gained by listening rather than talking.  I observed so much in the early stages of the tournament as there were many amateurs and quasi-pros in the field.  They talked too much.  They discussed hands after they played out.  They tried to show off how much they knew about the game.  The whole time I am taking notes.  How did they think about the hand?  What was their analysis?  I just nodded and agreed with them.  Later as the day went on I confirmed my mental notes with behaviors and decisions I saw them making.  Once I had a good read on them I knew how to exploit their thinking.  I was surprised by how much people were willing to give away.  Even some of the so-called Pros, seemed oblivious to how much information they were giving away. 

Poker is an everyman/woman “sport.”  There seem to be no boundaries to the types of people who like to play.  For me, one the most interesting things about playing poker is that often you are sitting around a table with eight other people that you would never have an excuse to sit down with.   And then you learn about them.  This is my laboratory for observing human behavior.  Here are some generalities I gleaned.  There are a LOT of very good, very young players.  These kids have studied the game at a mathematical level that I vaguely understand.  As they discuss these concepts I know enough to follow the conversation, but I haven’t done near the work they have in this type of analysis.  To hear them talk about hand ranges, equity, fold equity, implied odds and such is awesome.  I learned so much just by listening to them talk to each other during breaks.  Sometimes, however, they seemed to lose sight of the person they were playing against.  You could see their minds at work doing complex mathematical calculations when making their decisions.  Sometimes it was amazing how they “figured” out the best solution.  And most the time they were correct.  But when they were wrong it seemed to be because they failed to recognize that the player in the hand with them was not making decisions based on the mathematical realities, but instead were just playing.   They were not observing the human side of the game.

Some of these young players were very personable and down to earth.  Others were very arrogant.  The down to earth ones made it to day 5 and 6 (and further).  The arrogant ones seemed to find their way to the rail.  It takes a great deal of humility to be a good poker player.  You have to be willing to get outplayed from time to time.  You will get bluffed and you will make bad calls.  I felt like some of these kids felt they should win every hand.  Arrogance seemed to be punished over and over.  I think it gets in the way of the type of analysis that goes into playing each hand.

There were some pretty bad older dudes playing in this tournament.  (I say this as a 38 year old that was often one of the oldest players at my table)  Mostly these were guys older than 40 (usually nearer to 50 or older) who did not understand the math of the game and as a result were badly out played from time to time.  They seemed unable to adjust to the ebb and flow of the game.  They seemed to be offended by the aggressive play of the young players.  They felt they had to stand up to them and often did at just the wrong time. 

Most players were very nice, but those who did not seem very nice, didn’t seem to stay around very long.

Observation, Most people are not patient.  The WSOP main event has a very slow structure.  There is no need to be in a rush.  You cannot win the tournament on the first day, but you can lose it on the first day.    It is easy to feel you are in bad shape when others at your table have more chips than you, but there is so much time that you can be patient, establish an image, wait for cards, play in position and exploit your image.  This played into my strengths.

Playing live for 8-12 hours at a time takes an enormous amount of energy and focus.  My attention and skill set increased each day.  At the end of every day I was mentally exhausted. While mentally exhausting, the hours of relative physical inactivity are painful.  I lost five pounds while in Las Vegas because I was too nervous to eat.  I kept my energy level high with liquid meal supplements.  I worked out in the Rio Fitness center three times, but it was lame compared to the exercise I was used to getting.  Poker players need to combat this sedentary lifestyle with a disciplined workout routine.

It was very interesting talking to and listening to the “pros” discuss how they make their livelihood.  Most of these guys are not rolling in cash.  In fact, most of them are in what is called “make-up.”  They have backers who pay their entry fees and received percentages of their winnings.  If they fail to cash in the tournament they go into “make-up.”  Basically meaning they owe.  The next time they win, money goes towards make-up before they receive any payments.  Does any one else see a problem with this?  At my table late on day 5, the discussion was who was deepest in make up.  One guy said, “I have to get 90^th in this tournament just to get out of make-up.”  The next guy says, “that’s nothing; I am 150 deep” (that means 150,000 dollars).  Adam Levy (one of the top young pros) then laughed and then said, “I win, 250,” smiling the whole time.  I asked him.  “How does that work?  How do you make a living and pay your expenses?”  He said, “Oh, I have all of my own cash game action and all my endorsement money is separate from my backing deal.”  It still seems baffling to me.  These guys just seem to have very little regard for the value of a dollar.

I do not endorse anyone trying to play poker for a living.  These young kids who are using poker as their sole source of income are in a unique position.  They have no other responsibilities.  They can afford to go broke and often do.  When they do go broke, they borrow some money and start over again.  I had a long discussion with a 23 year-old college graduate who was a fulltime poker player.  I asked him how this happens.  He says he and most of his friends are terrible at bankroll management.  The variance in tournament poker is huge.  In cash games the income is more consistent, but most payers play above their bankroll.  If they run bad for a while they get into trouble.  Furthermore, he said they often have what he called “life leaks.”  They over spend away from the tables.  Living life in and around casinos gets expensive.  Travel expenses and bar tabs add up.  He said he was having a good year after getting out of make up.  I asked him if was siphoning off any of his poker money into other investments or savings; if he was building a non-poker side of his personal finances? He looked at me and asked, “Have you been talking to my father?” 

“No,” I replied, “but I am a father.”  Anyway these kids are very intelligent and most have a solid idea of what they are doing and what mistakes they are making.  They are not terribly careless and they are certainly not delusional.  They understand their strengths and weaknesses.  It is not that glamorous of a lifestyle.  With that said, I am certain I could make a living playing poker if I wanted to put in the work.  I am very conservative with my bankroll and I keep my poker economy separate from my real economy.  But for now I see this a pastime that can supplement my income. 

I do not endorse or suggest that anyone should gamble.  I always say you can only play with money you can afford to lose.  I do think however, card games are healthy pastimes.  I grew up playing cards games like hearts, spades, gin rummy and occasionally poker.  These are fun family times and I believe they help develop certain strategic thinking.  In his book, Cowboys Full: The Story of Poker,  Jim McManus discusses the history of poker and how poker has played a role in the history and politics of America.

For those who want to geek it up and follow me through my thinking on some specific hands and at specific spots during the tournament click here.  I also give some background on how I started playing poker.

Non- Poker Vegas Observations

Slots seem really boring and somewhat depressing.  I did not see one person playing slots who looked happy. 

Too many people still smoke.

There are a lot of low paying jobs in Las Vegas.

There are a lot of talented people in Las Vegas.  We saw two shows and I was impressed with both the talent on stage and the talent behind the scenes to produce these shows.

Red Rock Canyon is very interesting but very very hot mid-day in July.  Mt Charleston would have been better hiking (next year).

Vegas must one of the top ten places in the world for “people watching.”  The clientele downtown is very different than the clientele on the strip.

Too many people bring their kids to Vegas.  I know the big corporations who own Vegas try to sell Vegas as family friendly, but I don’t think it is.  Vegas is a huge money suck.  It is hedonistic, capitalistic, hot, not pedestrian friendly, and ….

Vegas is a place where adults who know what they are in for can go and spend their money.  Period.  It exists for no other reason than to entertain.  The shows are great, they tell me the food is good (I not much of a fine food connoisseur), the gambling is fun, the sights are interesting, but it is not quality family time.  Building sand castles at the beach is family fun.  Covering your kids’ eyes from the trucks on the strip advertizing “Girls in 15 minutes” and “all nude” is not family fun.  Yet everywhere I turned I saw people with their kids (and late at night too – what are they thinking?)  I think the Freemont street light show, the pools, and possibly some shows are the only thing my kids would enjoy in Las Vegas. (We saw the Cirque du Soliel – Beetles Love at the Mirage and they would like all the acrobatics – it was an awesome show).  Outside of Vegas, Red Rock Canyon and Mt Charleston are nice outings if it is not too hot. And I think the Hoover Dam and Grand Canyon excursions would be cool for kids. 

When we set out for Vegas, Lori wasn’t very interested in gambling.  She had never played blackjack, craps, or any of the other games.  And believe it or not, I am not what I would consider a big risk taker. (I know that sounds weird coming from a poker player)  But I like to play blackjack and I like to play craps.  I feel if you understand the basic strategies you can lose your money to the casino slowly thus stretching your entertainment dollar.  Well I am happy to report (maybe I shouldn’t be), that Lori likes to roll the dice and we did very well at the craps table (enough to go to two shows and pay for more than a few meals).  Even though we kept the bets small.  I broke even playing Blackjack.  We found one slots type machine that we liked (it was “deal or no deal” where you picked your suitcase and then played the game).

I lost a bit in my first and most likely last foray into sports betting.  We were in Vegas for the finale of the World Cup.  As a soccer coach it was very cool to be somewhere with a big crowd to watch the biggest single sporting event.  My son Declan had been doing a great job of predicting the winners of the games during the month long tournament.  So I called him and asked him who would win and what the score would be.  Now, I believe Declan went with his heart over his brain on this pick, but his coach is a Dutchman, so he was pulling for Holland.  So we went to Caesar’s Palace Sunday morning to watch the game.  I went to the Sports Book and made my first ever sports bet.  I put a whopping $20 on Holland and another $10 on the score 2-1.  The guy at the ticket counter said, “You are really picking against the octopus?  You know the Octopus has moved the line?” 

I replied, “that makes this a better odds bet, and besides, I have a monkey at home that said Holland would win.”

He said, “You have a monkey?”

“Yes, his name is Declan.”  Bye bye $30. Oh well the best team won.

I did fit in one short session of poker outside of the WSOP.  I sat for two hours in the Rio poker room and played in a $1/2 cash game and made a quick $230 (sometimes poker is easy).

Gambling is fun when losing money doesn’t hurt.  What makes gambling fun is the prospect of winning.  But it should be pretty obvious that Vegas wouldn’t exist if the house didn’t win.  So you have to treat the gambling money as an entertainment expense.  You have to be willing to lose the money.  If you win a bit then that’s great, take it and use it to go see a show.  That’s what Lori and I did.  In the long run the house always wins. 

Last observation - Some people should never gamble. 

The Perils of Praise

A colleague of mine sent me a very interesting article from the New York Magazine entitled

"How Not to Talk to Your Kids - The inverse power of praise."  By Po Bronson.  

I read it and had the following reaction; Oh Great! So now I am not allowed to tell my kids they are smart!  I already had to stop telling my daughter she was pretty.  Now this. Uhhggg!!!!  Actually that was only part of my response because on the other hand I was fascinated.  How can praise be a bad thing?  What is the psychology behind this phenomenon?

So here is the back-story of why I stopped telling Raye she was pretty.

On my daughter Raye's first day of Kindergarten I was a typical nervous dad.  The moment I picked her up from school, I wanted to hear how everything went.  The conversation went something like this, "So Raye how was it?"

"Fine."

"Did you make any friends?"

"Not really."

"Well, did you play on the play ground?"

"Yes."

"Well, who did you play with?"

"No one really."

At this point, I worried.  What is wrong?  Why isn't she making friends?  Is she going to be the kid with no friends?  Remember, this is day one, and this is my first baby.  My sweet baby girl.

"Raye why didn't you play with anyone?"

"I couldn't decide who was prettiest."

"Ahhh...... What?!!!"

"I couldn't decide who was prettiest."

Explosions are going off inside my head.  What is going on here? How is it that my sweet thoughtful daughter is so shallow on her first day of school?  Isn't this kind of shallow thinking supposed to develop in middle school and crystallize in high school only to be reconciled in adulthood?  How has my sweet innocent daughter already been socialized to value looks over substance? This must be television's fault?  Did I miss the Wiggles episode where you only play with good-looking people?   Did Arthur the aardvark avoid the awkward aardvark?  (Sorry for the unnecessary alliteration)  Or have I been teaching my daughter to value people's attractiveness?  Is this my fault?  I had a lot to think about.

And here is what I came up with.  First of all, my daughter is beautiful.  (Of course she is…look at me)  From the day she was born she has been told how pretty she is.  Strangers would stop me in the mall to tell me how pretty my daughter was.  I would start most every day saying something like, “Raye you look so pretty today.”  Raye heard the word “pretty” and equated it with “good.”  As a psychology teacher I should know better.  Words are powerful.  And to a very young child the meanings of words are learned through context.  In her mind “pretty” equals “good.” 

From that day forward I stopped telling my daughter that she was pretty.  That sounds harsh doesn’t it?  Instead I would say, “Raye, you look so ‘nice’ today.”  See what I did there?  And that evening Raye and I had a discussion about beauty.  We talked about what makes a person beautiful.  We talked about kindness.  And while I felt like I was teaching her a very important life lesson, it turns out she already understood; as children inherently do. 

Her best little friend in her kindergarten class was the girl who was kind to her.  To Raye, this little girl was beautiful.  Now, I am going to be a little mean in order to make my point.  The little girl who Raye was best friends with, who she would describe as beautiful, was an awkward looking child.  By shallow, physical appearance standards, she was unusual looking.  But to Raye she was pretty.  I didn’t have to explain to Raye this young girl’s beauty.  She understood.  And she wasn’t being shallow that first day.  She was using language, as she understood it.  But I did worry that if we didn’t start to use different words, if we didn’t have some conversations, that as she grew older and understood that society does value outward appearance, that she might develop some misconceptions.  So every night I tuck her into bed I ask her, “Raye, what is beauty?” 

And she replies, “Beauty is kindness.”

If you walk up to Raye now as an 11-year old and ask her what beauty is she will tell you, “Beauty is Kindness.”  And she knows because she is beautiful.  And pretty too, just don’t tell her that, but wow, she sure did look nice when she left the house this morning.

This article, about the inverse power of praise, specifically talks about praising intelligence.  I came to understand the danger of telling my daughter she was pretty, but I thought I was safe telling both of my kids how smart they are.  I want to them to know they are capable and competent. Shouldn’t that be okay?   We try to build our kids up.  We have to build their self-esteem, right? (That’s why everybody gets a trophy at the end of the season – a whole other rant). 

From the article:

“Giving kids the label of “smart” does not prevent them from underperforming. It might actually be causing it.”

No!!!!  How have I managed to mess this up?  Being a parent is hard.  Being a parent who also teaches psychology is enough to create constant worry that everything I do is going to cause life-long psychological damage.  I know just enough to be dangerous.

The article reports on studies done by Carol Dweck of Columbia University (now at Stanford) that examine the effects of telling kids they are smart, on their persistence and performance on difficult tasks. 

It turns out students, who have been told they are smart, shy away from tasks where they might fail.  They fear taking risks.  They have learned the reinforcing power of praise:  “I do well - the teacher (or parent) is pleased - tells me I am smart - smart = good.”  However, these children have also learned to fear opening themselves up to any ridicule or doubt of that inherent intellect.  They don’t want to risk losing that label of “smart.” So when my son stresses over a word problem and I try to be reassuring by saying, “You can do it Declan, you’re so smart”;  I am creating a situation which in his mind sounds like this, “If people are smart then they can do this.  I am having trouble with this, therefore, I must not be smart. If I’m not smart then I must be dumb.  Dumb = bad”

Dweck’s study, referenced in the article, explains how a group of students are given a test of puzzles on which they all should perform well.  The students are then given a single line of praise for their strong performance.  They are either told, “You must be very intelligent” or “You must have worked very hard on this.”  That’s it.  Just that one line of praise was enough to produce very significant differences.

Subsequently, the students are given a choice for the next round of tests.  They can choose a test that will be harder but from which they are told they will learn a lot, or they can take a test as easy as the first one.  90% of the students who had been praised for their effort choose the harder test.  A majority of the kids praised for their intellect wimped out and opted for the easy test.  They want nothing to do with jeopardizing their “smart” status. 

In a second version of the experiment the students were not given a choice for the second set of tests.  They were all given a much more difficult test.  A test they were all sure to struggle with.  The two different praise groups responded differently.  The “effort” praise group explained their failure to be the result of not trying hard enough.  They were more persistent and remarked that they liked the test.  The “intellect” praise group attributed their failure to the fact that they weren’t that smart after all.  They gave up and experienced more distress. 

They followed this second round of tests (this forced failure) with a third round of tests that were on the same level as the original test.  And now comes the most profound effect; the “effort” praise group showed a marked improvement from their original test (approx. 30%), while the “intellect” praise group underperformed by nearly 20%.

So what is going on here?  What is the basis of this difference?  What are we praising when we praise “smarts?”  We are inferring that intellect is something you possess, something you inherently are.  It is not something you can control.  Whereas, with “effort” you are giving the kids something that is in their control.  When faced with failure the “effort” group sees a solution – harder work.

Dweck remarks, and I can confirm, that smart kids discount effort. I get to teach the “smart” kids – as I only teach the Advanced Placement courses.  All of my students are above average.  They feel if they are smart then they don’t have to put forth effort.  They eschew studying.  They avoid real thinking.  They want to know what they need to know and then they want to give that back to me.  My task is to challenge them to figure out what they need to know.  It is my challenge to make them uncomfortable so that they have to employ effort and not rely on their innate giftedness.  Otherwise they will not develop the skills to cope when things are truly difficult.

I have “smart” students who won’t admit to studying.  It is almost as if they see it as a sign of weakness to admit that they had to put in the effort and struggle.  I am making some progress, and I have some students who are great workers.  They are grinders who have experienced success and failure in very difficult and fast paced courses through brute force of effort.  I know that they are not always successful in the immediate endeavor, but I am confident that they will be successful in the endeavors they will face in their future.

Which brings me back to how I have adversely affected my own children by telling them they were smart.  After I read this article, I panicked and worried how to undo the damage.  So I went into over-reaction mode.  As I picked Raye and Declan up from school that day the conversation went like this, “So Raye, how was school today?”

“Fine.  We had a test in math.”

“Oh? How did you do?”

“Good.  It was easy.”

“Was it easy because you are so naturally gifted in math or because you worked hard?  You know it is always important to work hard.”

At this moment my daughter quickly understands what I am after and says with a knowing sigh, “Because I worked hard.”

Translation – “If I answer what you want to hear will this interrogation stop?”

So I move onto Declan.  “Declan how was your day?”

“Good.”

“Did you learn anything new?”

“No.”

“Why not?  A whole day at school and you didn’t learn anything?’

“I already knew it all.” 

This one is going to be my problem kid.

“Did you know it all because you are just ‘smart’ or because you studied hard?”

“I’m just smart.”

I have my work cut out for me. 

But I will say that I have been working hard to discuss what happens when things do get hard.  And my kids have struggled at times with various things.  We have developed a script where I ask them, “What do we do when it gets hard?”

And they reply, “We work harder.”

It’s the Savage way.

One last thing- I have given a bit of the details of the article, but I strongly encourage you to read it for yourself.  There is so much great information here.  How Not To Talk To Your Kids

And please leave me feedback in the comments.

What Can Adults Learn From Kids?

A while back I received a Twitter from our Head of School recommending A TED talk titled "What adults can learn from kids" given by Adora Svitak.  As you can tell I love these TED talks, but before I rushed to watch it I thought I would take a stab at answering the question.  So I looked into my past to try to remember things from my own childhood, but I also looked to my own children and their friends.

I realized that I could come up with a long list but decided to mention just a few and hope that you will add to my list by writing a comment below.

I think adults can learn the following things from kids.

To be INQUISITIVE - anyone who has been around kids much can tell you one of a kid's favorite words is "Why?  For example:

"Daddy, why do mushrooms grow up from this dead log?'
Well, the mushroom is feeding off of the log.
"Why?"
Because mushrooms can't make their own food.
"Why?"
Because mushrooms are not photosynthetic like plants.  They have to feed like animals?
"Why?"
Because they are heterotrophic.
"Dad, why do you have to always use big science words like hedaroo bofic?"


To be PLAYFUL - Children play and children are playful.  Adults would be well served to observe.  Here's the recipe to create play.  Put a group of kids in a room together then leave them alone.  They will be silly, they will pretend, they won't be shy. 

To be AUTHENTIC - real, open with their feelings.  Kids don't hide how they feel.  They don't put up walls.  What you see is what you get for better or for worse.  I know that as a teacher in order for me to be effective I have to be authentic.  I have to be myself and let my students see my faults as well as my strengths.  For adults this is often difficult. For kids its the default setting

To be ACCEPTING (but not tolerant) - my fifteen year old step-daughter Emily recently started a facebook group called "Please stop using the word retarded."(please visit and become a fan)  She is taking a stand against the use of the "R-word" as an insult because of the insensitivity to people with differences.  She has worked with special needs students at her school and has developed a great understanding of the value of all types of people. At the same time she's become more and more aware of the way words can hurt when people forget the impact of those words.  She has decided it's not right and she isn't going to tolerate it.  For the last few years I have been on mission to eliminate the phrase "that's so gay" from the  lexicon of the teenagers I work with.  

I do not accept them using this phrase or any other that is derogatory towards people with different sexual orientation.  However, I have a sister who is classified as mildly retarded, and a cousin who is severely retarded and I was using the word retarded in the same derogatory way.  I have been known to say, "that's so retarded."  Until, Emily called me out on it and demanded that I stop.  She was right.  And I am now much more aware.  I am so proud that she is taking the initiative to teach others acceptance and that she refuses to stand by and tolerate other's insensitivity.  Adults can learn a lot from kids.  We just have to listen. 

To be FEARLESS - while we as humans seem predisposed to some fears, many fears are learned.  And while some of these are useful (as they keep us safe), many of our fears as adults paralyze us.  We fear failure most of all.  This is the fear I most want my kids to avoid.  Children, and at least young children have no fear of failure.  They will stay at a task that they have failed at if it is intrinsically motivating.  They take risks.


Well, there's my short list.  Now let's watch the video from TED and please leave a comment to add to my list,  What can adults learn from kids?

WOW!  I was not expecting that.  WOW! I hadn't watched the video until I had written the blog.  I had no Idea that the speaker was a child.  I figured it was going to be an educator or child psychologist telling us what children had to offer.  Instead I just witnessed the most articulate twelve-year-old on the planet.

I think the most important thing Miss. Svitak tells us is not to under estimate children.  Comments?

Class Derailed - An Impromptu Sex Ed Discussion

Often times in my AP Psychology class, we talk about some heavy themes. It is one of the reasons the course is open to seniors only. And often times we get a bit off topic; however if the participation is lively and we are thinking and learning it is okay if we go “off script.” Here is a paraphrasing of a class derailed.


We were discussing motivation and the primary drives that direct human behavior. We had talked extensively about the physiology and psychology of hunger in a prior class that got side tracked into a valuable discussion on eating disorders. So on tap for this particular class were other big issues that motivate human behavior: Sex, Belonging, and Achievement. Once I said “sex” I noticed students sitting up a bit straighter, more pens in hand, and a general increase in interest. Wow! With one magic word, I had “motivated” my students to engage in the learning process.


Human sexuality is a very complex issue. Not one that we can tackle in one class period. Furthermore, not all aspects of human sexuality are appropriate for a high school psychology course (even one that is delivering a college curriculum). That is why there are courses in human sexuality offered in college and a plethora of books written on the subject. Besides, that wasn't our goal for the day. We all agreed that humans engage in a great deal of behaviors that are directly or indirectly motivated by sex (or the possibility of sex - like buying flowers and lighting candles). In order to understand how sex motivates human behavior we needed to illuminate a few basic things about sex in humans. The first thing we did was make a comparison between humans and other animals. In many species of animals sexual behavior is dictated by changes in hormones levels. Meaning the animals won't even engage in sexually receptive or initiative behavior unless their hormone levels are in a certain range. These hormones cycles are influenced by environmental cues that give the animal accurate information about the time of the year. This ensures that offspring will be born in times of plenty - when there will be enough resources to sustain them. These animals "come into season" and engage in sexual behavior only to reproduce. To engage in sexual behavior at other times would be a waste of time and energy resources. So these animals are not "making the decision" to engage in sexual behavior, they are just playing out the role that their biology is dictating.


Throughout our study of human psychology we like to take an evolutionary approach to understanding a behavior. In other words, what evolutionary value does the behavior have? In many cases it is obvious that a behavior has evolutionary value. For example any behavior that allows you to gain nutrition makes sense. Any behavior that allows you not to be someone else's nutrition is valuable. Having fear of heights, snakes, and other dangerous things is adaptive. It aids in your survival and therefore is evolutionarily sound. But often this view of thinking does not so easily explain human behavior. (Example – Skydiving – it takes a pretty convoluted explanation to see the evolutionary value of risk taking). But what about sex?

How does sex benefit the individual? How does it aid in your survival? In the Darwinian understanding of fitness, surviving is only useful if it allows you to reproduce and pass along your genes. Therefore it is very obvious why sexual behavior is valuable to our species. But what about sexual behavior that is engaged in without the intent of reproduction? Is it valuable from an evolutionary standpoint? Since we are talking about the evolution of behavior we have to think of man in a more primitive time and place. In many ways it can be argued that as an individual is isn't advantageous. In fact, as an individual, sexual behavior not for reproduction is mal-adaptive. It costs energy and can be dangerous. The energy you spend engaging in sexual behavior could be spent finding food or building shelter. Furthermore while you are engaged in sex you are vulnerable to predators. You might not be on alert and ready to run from danger as you are somewhat preoccupied. And the possible result of engaging in sex can be detrimental to your own survival – more for females than males of course. The result may be a parasite that grows inside of you for 40 weeks robbing you of nutrients and making you slower and less likely to avoid predation. Then there are risks involved with the birth event itself. And then there is the child that you must spend time and resources feeding. And let's not forget sexually transmitted diseases. Sex is dangerous and decreases "your" chance of survival. Yet we engage in sexual behavior as humans for many reasons other than reproduction. Sex is still a primary motivator of behavior.


"So class, what can we learn from this?"


And here's where it came up.... the first inkling that this class was going to morph into a sex ed/ life lesson class and veer drastically from the plan. Had I gone too far?


A witty forward thinking female student answered, “What we can learn is that when that guy is pressuring you to have sex, saying he'll just die if he doesn't get it, he's misinformed. He won't die without sex, in fact his individual chances of survival may increase without sex.” Bravo!


An exasperated male student says, "But what about our species, our species depends upon sex for our survival! You have to appeal to her sense of duty to the human race!"

True. But it doesn't have to be you, and it doesn't have to be her and doesn't have to be at that moment. This is not some post apocalyptic movie where you are the last two humans on Earth. To which student replies, "At that moment it feels like it." Touche.

But sex is a very important human motive. We are driven to pursue it. It does energize us to act. We are driven to reproduce as are all living things. But even when we are not trying to reproduce, sex acts as a very strong motivator of behavior.


Trying to get back on track with psychology class:

Humans are not under the same hormonal control as other animals. They can (and do) engage in sexual behavior for other reasons rather than to reproduce. We engage in sexual behavior for pleasure, for recreation, to curry favor, to make amends, to gain power….(Turns out humans are not the only animals who do this. See: Dolphins and Bonobos.) It is true that sexual desire awakens at the onset of puberty as our hormones change and we go through the physical changes of adolescence. Our biology is telling us we are ready. We have the ability to cause or become pregnant. But are we really ready?

Here again is where class takes a turn. This time it was me that steered off track.

Are we 18 years plus of responsibility ready? Are we sexually transmitted disease ready? If not, why do we take the risk?

Anonymous student #1, "duh, because if feels good."

Anonymous student #2, "because we want to fit in and everyone else is doing it."

Great! a good segue way back to the topic of motivation - We are motivated to belong. Get this class back on track now!

Anonymous student #3, "Because we are curious teenagers that have been exposed to hyper sexualized imagery in the media since we saw Disney’s Aladdin and Little Mermaid, - Jasmine and Ariel - those babes were hot!"


We do live in a society and culture that has this strange dichotomy. On one hand we have hyper-sexualized our media. We use sex to sell everything. We are constantly bombarded with sexual imagery. On the other hand we have a culture that makes sex taboo. We don’t talk openly about it and it remains mysterious. Even more reason for teens to be curious and take risks.

At this point I knew the road we were going down and so I embraced it.

Teens are going to take risks, so we need to arm them with as much knowledge as possible. I know these students have had sex-ed before, but now, as seniors in high school with college looming, I need to talk to them seriously. Let me start with the obligatory statement - there is only one completely full proof form of safe sex - ABSTINIENCE. So I said abstinence a few times. “Abstinence, abstinence, abstinence.”

BTW - Abstinence ONLY education programs don't work. Ellen Goodman, a national columnist, offered this assessment of the entire abstinence-only education movement. Statistics say that this age demographic is not going to abstain.

If you chose to not abstain, then you need to understand that you are taking a risk. You are risking your life (slight hyperbole) and you are risking creating a life.


Anonymous student #4, "don't we risk our lives every time we get into a car?"


YES! And what do you do to decrease that risk? Seat belt!! Yes. So let's talk about birth control and disease prevention.


So I got out my soap-box (I had to explain the soap box reference to my class - where have all the street preachers gone?).


My single most important piece of advice on the subject, Never, ever, ever, let someone else be responsible for your birth control. Ever. That is not a responsibility you want to let fall to someone else. Why? Because people are irresponsible.


Situation #1 (for the boys) - You finally convinced a girl to have sex with you and she's ready and you are fumbling trying to get to the condom and she says, "It's okay, I'm on the pill." You say, “That's great we can be extra safe because I have a condom.” The reality is that while birth control pills are fairly effective they are not 100% and there is also the chance of user error. Let's be honest, this young lady is with you, can she really be all that smart? - Come on it’s a joke. But, I know guys who were told that she was on the pill who are now fathers.


Situation #2 (for the girls) - You decide he's the one and you are going to have sex with him and while you are waiting for him to get a condom he says, "But I thought you were on the pill." And you say, "I am, but do you trust me to have taken it regularly? Put on the condom before I change my mind." And he says, “Are you scared of catching something from me? I'm clean." To which you say, "Cool, but I wouldn't want you to catch anything from me. I would feel bad. Put on the condom."


Oh and by the way, how about this one? Guy says, "You know baby, it just doesn't feel as good with a condom." Well here is a useful mathematical reality about the pleasurability of sex.

without condom > with condom > no sex


With condom and no sex are on the menu - you choose.


You see, it is easy and my students know this. The reality is in a class of seventeen eighteen-year-olds many of them have already made the decision to have sex. And all of them will be faced with the decision more and more as they go through college and I just want them to be safe and emotionally ready to handle it. At least one of these kids will get a sexually transmitted disease and at least one will have an unplanned pregnancy before age 25. (I am being very conservative here based on the statistics.)


Check out these sobering statistics on STD's from the Centers of Disease Control (in Texas ages 15-24 by county). Here is anonther interesting link though I'm not sure about their sources and here is a more current article out of Wisconsin. And finally some more scare tactic stats.


So armed with this knowledge why won't my students heed my advice. When will they not think about the risks? I posed this question directly to my students. "When will you choose not to follow this sound advice? Ok not you in particular, but you as the hypothetical?"


Anonymous student #5- "When they have been drinking." BINGO!


-Sixty percent of college women diagnosed with a sexually transmitted disease were drunk at the time of infection. (Advocacy Institute, 1992)


And I don't want to turn this blog into a discussion of date rape - we have had that talk in psych class too. But most victims and most perpetrators of date rape are under the influence at the time of the assault.


So my second bit of sage advice re: "I know you are going to eventually engage in sexual behavior so please be aware" is:

The first time you are ever intimate with someone be sober. Avoid the casual hook-up. If you are in a relationship, once you decide you may want to be intimate make sure you are both sober. There are three important reasons for this. 1. You will make safer choices 2. It lessens the chance of misunderstandings about consent and free will and 3. It will be more enjoyable and meaningful.

Back to the lesson plan and now we are short on time.  We hadn't talked about the other topics I had on the schedule for that day. We still need to talk about society, media and cultures and how they impact sexual motivation. And we were going to discuss the biological basis of homosexuality and how gender identity disorders work, and how gender roles are learned, and how this all relates to the psychology of motivation.....


Oh well, another day where learning something got in the way of curriculum, or a typical Savage AP Psychology class.