When Intellectuals Talk About Lowbrow Things
The result is a brilliant paragraph about Vegas:
[ESPN coumnist Bill] Simmons: Can you explain in one paragraph why you're against Vegas?
[Bestselling Author Malcom] Gladwell: Where to start? You get there. You can't get a cab. Last time I waited 30 minutes in line at the airport. You get to your hotel, you wait another 45 minutes to check in. It's 120 degrees outside, and inside it's 45 degrees and all you can think about is there's about to be a epidemic of Legionnaires Disease. The food is terrible. Everyone loses money -- everyone. The amount of plastic surgery is terrifying. There are large packs of enormous, glassy-eyed people in stretch pants, pulling the levers on slot machines. (By the way, greatest and most under-appreciated gambling story ever: William Bennett, he of one best seller after another lecturing Americans on moral values and virtue and the bankruptcy of our culture, turns out not only to be a degenerate gambler, but a gambler who only played the slots. The slots! Had he been a great poker player -- even a decent poker player -- I'm in his corner. But the slots?) I digress. Back to Vegas: Why would I want to see Celine Dion, ever (and I'm Canadian)? Or white mutant tigers? Or the Village People? Or Tony Orlando and Dawn? I have more fun walking to the laundromat from my apartment in New York than I do in Vegas.
Casinos suck. It's depressing seeing all the mindless zombies sitting at the slot machines. I hate it.
But there are some good shows -- Cirque du Soleil has several, for example. And there's some great shopping, and non-casino entertainment like the Star Trek Experience and amusement park attractions. And there are good restaurants. Plus some of the hotels are BEAUTIFUL -- there's lots of eye candy.
You can also head out to Lake Powell, Hoover Dam, or make a day trip out to the Grand Canyon.
So it's not a TOTAL loss. Just the casinos.
Posted by: Steve Meister on March 3, 2006 4:24 PM | permalinkAs one who has taken a probability and statistics course, I fully understand why I want to stay out of casinos and not play the lottery.
Posted by: Od-ll on March 4, 2006 6:50 PM | permalinkO'dell:
It's not about profitability; it's about entertainment. And blackjack is almost 50/50 anyway.
Posted by: Joe Grossberg on March 4, 2006 6:54 PM | permalinkI feel like I should comment, but don't know what to say.
It's more toward 45%, from what I remember, so you will still lose, just over a long period of time. The odds go up when you are able to properly count cards. However, I think the use multiple decks and shuffle often to discourage that.
Anyway, I thought were were talking about intellect. My point is that more intellectual people are too smart to lose money like that.
By the way, if anyone ever stays in Vegas for the casinos or some kind of convention, when you go to your hotel room, be sure to lift the matress and look at the box springs. It's kind of a common thing for someone to be murdered and then be stuffed into the hollowed box springs in hotels in that city.
Posted by: Od-ll on March 5, 2006 2:43 AM | permalinkO'dell:
About the blackjack, I'm saying that if you're smart, the rate of losing any money will be slow enough that it's fine -- it's an acceptable price for the entertainment value.
And, about the box springs, ... WTF?
Posted by: Joe Grossberg on March 5, 2006 9:16 AM | permalinkOh, smart people go to Vegas all the time. Some very smart people enjoy gambling -- but the truly smart gamblers also know to practice restraint, and set a specific budgeted amount that they're willing to spend. If their losses reach that point -- stop gambling. Not everyone's able to do that, and those are the people with serious problems.
Yeah, what I'm saying is, if you're willing to "lose" $X to attend a big-deal concert or go on a ski trip, why is it so inconceivable that smart people would knowingly consent to "losing" $X in exchange for several hours' of gambling fun?
I agree that if you're gambling and expecting to come out ahead, odds are you're a moron. But there are other ways for gambling to be worth the expense (not "investment") of time and money.
Posted by: Joe Grossberg on March 5, 2006 1:44 PM | permalinkI recently had my very first and hopefully last visit to a casino. I was with a crowd that really wanted to go, so there you have it. Figured if I lost $20 bucks it wouldn't be so bad. The first thing that hit me was the noise. Then all the flashing lights had their dizzying impact. I tried to play a slot machine for all of two minutes, then quit realizing how mindless it was. Just walked around after that until everybody had had enough. I'm not anti gambling, so if it's your thing have at it. If I could play poker, that seems like a game you'd have a puncher's chance with. As it is, I'd rather study a racing form and play the ponies. This takes a little bit of effort but you can make logical picks and when you do win you can chalk it up to some gray matter as well as luck.
Posted by: Catherine Smith on May 28, 2007 4:05 PM | permalinkNo more comments! Either someone has violated Godwin's Law, I'm tired of the discussion or, most likely, the ten-week window has closed. You can, however, contact me through email.