This had the potential to be an excellent book. It's at the intersection of two very interesting things - poker and statistics. Poker is a game of strategy and involves gambling, and statistics, probability and stochastic reasoning can be made very interesting as we've seen from authors like Nassim Taleb. It was to my great disappointment then to find that this book is about neither of those two things.
The book begins with a 10-page introduction about a poker anecdote. Very interesting. Then part one of the book, which spans as far as page 70, does not talk about poker in the slightest. Here are some topics covered instead: Carl Sagan, astronomy, the moon landing, artificial intelligence, climate change, Fox News, Italy's invasion of Greece during WWII, the Bolsheviks, Sadam Hussein and statistics about how many messages were sent on Whatsapp, Facebook etc.
At about page 30, I got the sense that the author was aiming to emulate "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman, and I smiled to myself when she mentions "system 1 thinking" and "system 2 thinking" on page 40, though she doesn't actually mention Kahneman afterwards, which I felt was unfair. Give the man his due. Part one was a stream of consciousness where the author gives her political opinions in a cringe, Reddit-esque sort of way about instances ranging from atheism, to Trump to the moon landing. Really bizarre. But also, a short word on this. Her points were hypocritical in some areas. She says "... whether Neil Armstrong really landed on the moon (he did)." This type of certainty would be fine normally, but to then go on to say things like "Do you know this to be true or do you think you know?" makes it quite hypocritical. Of course it's probable that Neil Armstrong landed on the moon, but her whole point is to be open to new evidence, and she doesn't seem to be by adding "he did" in parentheses.
The same is seen when she says "Those who [...] had lower cognitive abilities were more likely to see bullshit as profound", but then cites religious beliefs as an example of bullshit. It's a controversial opinion to say the least, but it's a fair opinion for her to have. What's bizarre and hypocritical is that she then proceeds to say "in order to face those who do not believe that all humans are equal", which, not to argue semantics, is a distinctly religious viewpoint, espoused in the book of Genesis, earliest scholarly dating being the Yahwist (J source) at circa 950 BC, Judaism, Christianity and also in Chinese Mohism in the 5th Century BC and a few others. In fact, William Wilberforce's success in ending the trans-Atlantic slave trade via the Slave Trade Act of 1807 was due solely to his Christian faith. It's not the end of the world but it's something that grinds my gears. Say whatever you want but be consistent.
I was hoping that if I trudged through the first part, the author would finally turn her attention to poker, the alleged topic of the book. I got to part two and here's what I saw: Lady Gaga, Charles Darwin, Bernie Madoff, Tinder, sex versus gender, the Uktu tribe of northern Canada and German beer. If I have to read about the bat and the ball costing $1.10 and the bat being $1 more than the ball again I think I might give up reading forever. It's surely just plagiarism at this point. The objects are always a bat and a ball and the price is always $1.10. Why not be creative? A trap house and a speedboat full of fentanyl cost $1.1 million. Now get this! The trap house costs a milly more than the fent. But seriously though what relevance does any of this have? The whole book is irrelevant. It reads as a college student trying to meet a required word count. It seems as though the author intended to write a book for the sake of writing a book, and spent a considerable amount of time hoarding miscellaneous anecdotes and factoids to attain that goal. Disappointed.
My big takeaway from this book? I need to be more selective in the book shop.