Poker Players on Steroids?

A few days ago, I caught this article over at the L.A. Times. The article describes a study in which 198 pro, semi-pro, and recreational poker players were asked whether they used a variety of stimulants and drugs. Not surprisingly, a lot of poker players admitted to using caffeine and energy drinks for an edge. What is surprising, given the small study sample, is that some players admitted to using amphetamines, cocaine, and valium? I'm not entirely sure that would give you an edge...

Poker ≠ Baseball

I have a few problems with this article. First of all, in the world of sports, performance-enhancing substances refer to substances that give one a physical edge--Steroids for muscle mass, red blood cells for increased oxygen intake, and much more. My problem with the article is that it equates poker with sports like cycling, baseball, etc. by its use of jargon. Whereas steroid use has lead to insane home run numbers in Major League Baseball, the edge that caffeine or energy drinks would give, let alone other, more potent drugs, is marginal at best. Essentially, the performance-enhancing substances of the poker world are akin to the corked bat of baseball, i.e. the edge given would be purely psychological. In poker, there just isn't a substance one can take that will make one smarter, more alert, more skilled, etc. without having a profound negative effect on other aspects of that person's game.

It Isn't Performance-Enhancing if, Well, You're Losing

I also have a major problem with the study cited in this article. I found it curious that in a study on performance-enhancing substances in poker, they put pros and recreational players in the same study without any measurement of how successful they were at playing poker? A performance-enhancing substance has the connotation of improving one's skills or abilities, and this wouldn't be the case if some of the subjects were big poker losers. That would be something else entirely, like a drug problem. Furthermore, I do not know any other arena of competition where alcohol is considered a performance-enhancing substance.

Overall, I found the initial topic of the article to be of interest, but the article and the study it cites is flawed. The study featured a sample size that was too small and included way too many substances that would be of little performance-enhancing value. The author even seemed surprised when she wrote, "The study did not include the use of anabolic steroids." I am not sure how anabolic steroid use would be relevant to poker, other than to give someone a major tilt/'roid rage meltdown that would make Phil Hellmuth look like Phil Ivey. This is just a case of a journalist with little poker experience trying to dig up dirt.