The tragedy of the commons

Live Poker / Marcus Bateman / 09 December 2009 / Leave a Comment

The tragedy of the commons is a dilemma formulated by Garrett Hardin in an article first published in the journal Science in 1968. It refers to a situation where numerous individuals who share a resource, all make rational economic choices that end up destroying the very resource that they all benefit from.

He uses the analogy of a shared grazing space, where it is in each individual herder's interest to continue putting more of their own cows on shared grazing land, even though in the long run this will lead to the destruction of the land and all the parties suffering. As the profit from the extra animal is made solely by the individual herder, but the damage done to the land by this animal is shared by the group, it is in each individuals interest to continue adding animals, even if this ultimately leads to the destruction of the land.

So what does this have to do with poker? Well actually quite a lot, as the tragedy of the commons is a phenomenon that frequently crops up in poker games, and understanding what the effect of it is can have a major impact on keeping games going.

Although there are many examples of this phenomenon in action in poker, perhaps the best is games breaking when weak players leave. Imagine a game that consists of four solid regulars, and one wild fish. All the regulars have no real interest in playing each other, but a definite interest in playing with the fish. As a result, each of them individually has no interest in playing beyond the point that the fish is there, with the result that the minute the weak player leaves, the game stops.

Although this is clearly the best thing to happen purely in terms of each individuals hourly rate (each individual will not be wasting precious time in a break even game, just as the herder solely benefits from adding an extra animal), in the long run they actually hurt themselves, as this mechanism of play severely affects the fish over the long run (just as all the extra animals eventually make the grass useless to all).

As it becomes more and more obvious to the fish that not only does the game only tend to start when they sit down, but also that it breaks the second they leave, they will usually feel more and more marginalised and stupid, until eventually they decide not to play any more. Many people do not mind steadily losing money gambling, but very few like feeling like a complete moron - and this has to be thought about and adapted to when playing in certain games.

Although you are always looking for an edge at the poker table, some edges are not worth pursuing to their very end, as ultimately they destroy the very thing you need to even have an edge over in the first place, and this is obviously a huge negative for any profitable player.

More Marcus Bateman

Importance Of Creating A Good Atmosphere in Live Poker
Beating weak games
The Future of Poker