It Helps to Think Like a Player—Poker, That Is—When You Take Your Case to Trial
Pot odds. Bluffing. Tells. Slow play.
Those are familiar terms to even the most casual poker player, but lawyers—even those who don’t know the difference between trips and a full boat—might be wise to learn how they can be applied effectively to litigation, as well.
That was the lesson imparted by the panelists at a program presented Saturday by the ABA Section of Litigation during the association’s annual meeting in San Francisco. And it must have been a message litigators want to hear, because the early-morning program drew, well, a full house.
The panel—including lawyer-turned-poker pro Mark Seif—used a combination of clips from poker tournament broadcasts and a hypothetical trial enactment to illustrate the similarities between poker and litigation, two endeavors that enjoy a measure of popularity with the American public.
“It’s important whether you’re a poker player or an attorney to know what you’re up against,” Seif said. “Attention to detail is crucial.” Phil Ivey, one of the most popular and successful current stars on the poker circuit, “looks wild at the table, but that’s because he’s taking so much in,” Seif said. Similarly, “The best lawyers I knew really knew their cases,” he said.
Seif, who stood out among the panelists in his all-black ensemble with an open-collar shirt, said the three keys to poker are knowing the likelihood of making your hand, knowing the size of the pot and knowing what it will cost to win that pot.
The same considerations come into play in assessing the merits of a case going to trial, said the lawyers on the panel, but their flowcharts for measuring the value of legal cases, while informative, weren’t quite as much fun to watch as the highlights from high-stakes Texas hold ‘em tournaments that were shown on a large screen at the front of the meeting room.
It’s crucial for lawyers to measure the value and chances at success of their cases, said Laura Besvinick, a partner at Hogan Lovells in Miami, who acknowledged that she personally prefers blackjack to poker. Just like in cards, she said, “The flip side of risk-aversion is overconfidence. You fall in love with your case, and you think it’s really, really valuable.”
Perhaps the greatest similarity between poker and litigation is that each case, like each hand in a poker game, tells its own story, and success ultimately hinges on how that story is told, whether it’s to a jury or other players around the table. “Two people will take the same facts and tell the story in a different way,” Besvinick said.
But there is one big difference, Seif cautioned his audience of lawyers, who must be mindful of evidence rules and ethics guidelines. As poker players, he said, “we tell untrue stories, for the most part.”
