Hobbies/Interests section - REALLY? Forum

[dixiecupdrinking]

Is poker legit to list under interests? I'm a strong player and have made a good amount of money playing both live and online, but feel there's still a stigma attached. Would a conservative employer see "poker" and just think "degenerate gambler"?

Yeah I'd stay away from gambling.

Honestly IMO, lawyers are such addicts that anything about booze, gambling, etc. is too likely to raise a red flag to be worth bringing up.

Edit: But maybe this is just my lawyerish risk adverse personality talking. Thinking more about it, I think wine-tasting is bougie enough to get away with. Homebrewing is still too "niche," I think. Wouldn't be surprised if some boomer partner thought it meant you were running moonshine or involved in some Smokey and the Bandit shit.

On the contrary. I have it on my resume, and in every interview it was talked about. Every interviewer either homebrewed themselves at one point or had someone close to them that had. FWIW, every interview I got an offer I talked about homebrewing, and every interview I didn't talk about it I didn't get a callback

Okay, but maybe some of those non-callbacks were in part because you listed it and the person disliked it. I'm not saying you will never get a job if you list something like this. It's a risk/reward thing. Sometimes the reward is that it actually helps you, but I think it's not worth it. Maybe I'm wrong.

[rinkrat19]

I think homebrewing is something that might depend on the market. West coast or Colorado? Definitely ok. The people there who don't personally think it's cool probably still recognize that it's a popular, legitimate hobby. Utah/the south/DC? Ehhhhh, I wouldn't.

Wine tasting I think is probably ok in most markets, unless you're worried about looking too coastal elitist for an insular flyover state market.

[Tiago Splitter]

Is there any good way of phrasing handicapping horses to make it not look degenerate?

Don't know if you're still reading this thread; I'd think you were awesome (and would ask for tips) but would steer well clear of this on the resume.

I'd just put horse racing. Pretty much anyone into horse racing will have at least a little degenerate gambler in their blood and the conversation could easily move towards betting, and anyone not into it won't think twice.

Also, wine tasting worked well for me in the 1L job search and will be going nowhere.

[20160810]

I think homebrewing is something that might depend on the market. West coast or Colorado? Definitely ok. The people there who don't personally think it's cool probably still recognize that it's a popular, legitimate hobby. Utah/the south/DC? Ehhhhh, I wouldn't.

Wine tasting I think is probably ok in most markets, unless you're worried about looking too coastal elitist for an insular flyover state market.

Again, is it going to stop you from getting a job? Probably not. Might even be cool. But you're taking a risk, and needlessly, because you can achieve the same benefit by listing completely uncontroversial hobbies. I'm not here to tell anyone what to do. If you want to list homebrewing, BDSM, and giving atomic wedgies as your hobbies, then let your freak flag fly. But inasmuch as anyone cares about my advice, it is to omit any mention of alcohol, gambling or drugs from your resume.

[Person1111]

I had poker on my resume for EIP (and was a winning and serious online and live player, at least back before law school ). I don't think it hurt me significantly, and I talked about it a lot with a couple of firms (including the one where I ended up accepting). That said, it's probably not an awesome idea from a risk-reward standpoint. I took it off when I was doing clerkship interviews and have since kept it off (just because I have other stuff on there that is more universally interesting and just as easy to talk about).

[Pufer]

homebrewing, BDSM, and giving atomic wedgies

There is no chance that I'm not interviewing that person. However, it would be the first time I'd have ever interviewed someone based at all on their interests section in my two years of selecting folks to interview.

-Pufer

[rinkrat19]

homebrewing, BDSM, and giving atomic wedgies

There is no chance that I'm not interviewing that person. However, it would be the first time I'd have ever interviewed someone based at all on their interests section in my two years of selecting folks to interview.

-Pufer

I don't think anyone's claiming that you get the interview with your interests lists, only that interests provide a lot of fodder for more natural conversations during the interview, thus making you look better to the interviewer.

[dr123]

friend of my friend literally got a job b/c in his interests he put "Squash" and the interviewing partner was an avid player. YNK. HTH.

This literally happened to me. Another +1 for the interests section.

How can you possibly know this?

[Pufer]

homebrewing, BDSM, and giving atomic wedgies

There is no chance that I'm not interviewing that person. However, it would be the first time I'd have ever interviewed someone based at all on their interests section in my two years of selecting folks to interview.

-Pufer

I don't think anyone's claiming that you get the interview with your interests lists, only that interests provide a lot of fodder for more natural conversations during the interview, thus making you look better to the interviewer.

I don't think that's correct. If you are getting the interview based purely on the merits of your application and the interests section is mere surplusage that may or may not be relevant at all to a particular employer, why take away space on your resume that might be better used to help get you the interview in the first place? I tend to think that a number of folks—my career services office back in the day included—believe that an interests section can and will help you get an interview, and that's why they advocate so strongly for it to be on the resume.

To be clear, I think you're almost certainly correct that, if having an interests section will help you at all, it would be during an interview. However, I'd be more interested in putting stuff in my resume that will get me an interview rather than coming up with a totally-inoffensive list of generic interests that might facilitate some uncertain future conversation. Of course, if I couldn't fill up a page with stuff that is actually applicable to a particular job, I might throw an interests line in as filler, but it would be silly to drop a list of relevant publications you have, or a couple lines of relevant job experience solely to set up a conversation that may never happen (even if you get the interview if you happen to be interviewing with me).

Of course, none of this is to say that anyone should pay any attention to anything I say.

-Pufer

[A. Nony Mouse]

Of course, if you're talking about OCI, and you're at a school where OCI is all lottery, the interests section really isn't getting you the interview, is it? (It also seems to me that no one has said, include interests over substance; it's about whether you should have one on top of the exact same substance.)

[RodneyRuxin]

Has an OCI interview ever picked the person they interview?

ie if there are 4 interviewers for a firm, has someone ever said "let me grab that guy, I like his interest section"

[Anonymous User]

I'm a big fan of scotch and poker, and I'm trying to decide if I should add these. There are some firms that have weekly receptions with scotch, and others where they try to have monthly poker games. I think this could give me a bump with those firms, but we have to use the same resume for all of OCI (can't be firm-specific).

Drop them?

[Anonymous User]

If I play chess should I include my Elo (1100) or is this douchey? I don't want people to think I'm a grandmaster or anything, but I do enjoy playing and I could hold a conversation on the topic. (I also think it demonstrates analytic thinking, but this is super pretentious of me)

[Anonymous User]

If I play chess should I include my Elo (1100) or is this douchey? I don't want people to think I'm a grandmaster or anything, but I do enjoy playing and I could hold a conversation on the topic. (I also think it demonstrates analytic thinking, but this is super pretentious of me)

I personally would find that really cool and wouldn't come across as douche.

[Anonymous User]

If I play chess should I include my Elo (1100) or is this douchey? I don't want people to think I'm a grandmaster or anything, but I do enjoy playing and I could hold a conversation on the topic. (I also think it demonstrates analytic thinking, but this is super pretentious of me)

As a fellow chessplayer, I would find that not douchey, but pretty nerdy (in a bad way).

[A. Nony Mouse]

See, I have no idea what the Elo thing is. Not sure how I'd react seeing it, but probably confusion. It might signal to me your seriousness about chess, which could be good, but if I asked about it and it's some kind of ranking or skill level, I might see it as boasting. (Like, I would put golf down as an interest, but I wouldn't put my handicap.) But I'm not saying you shouldn't - just adding a data point from the chess-clueless.

[Anonymous User]

See, I have no idea what the Elo thing is. Not sure how I'd react seeing it, but probably confusion. It might signal to me your seriousness about chess, which could be good, but if I asked about it and it's some kind of ranking or skill level, I might see it as boasting. (Like, I would put golf down as an interest, but I wouldn't put my handicap.) But I'm not saying you shouldn't - just adding a data point from the chess-clueless.

It's more of a signal that I'm not terrible, but I'm surely not good. 1100 is pretty average for someone interested in the sport (inb4 rage about calling it a "sport").

If it helps, I'm pretty social/boys club-ish, so I think this would be a good way to show my softer side. Perhaps say "playing chess in the park" which I occasionally do with old people

[lolwat]

For me personally (someone that has an idea about that kind of stuff, though not chess specifically), I'd think you were more serious about it and could actually hold a conversation about it if you included the additional description... to me, it's no different than the difference between "Travel" and "Travel (went to every country in Europe!@!$@)" or something. For nerdy stuff, it'd be easier for me to hold a conversation with some dude that puts "(Grandmaster League)" after a SC2 entry (well, kinda, I don't play/watch it that much anymore) than to ask them about a generic "Starcraft II" entry and find out that they play 4v4 a couple times a week with friends are in Bronze.

[Mista Bojangles]

If I play chess should I include my Elo (1100) or is this douchey? I don't want people to think I'm a grandmaster or anything, but I do enjoy playing and I could hold a conversation on the topic. (I also think it demonstrates analytic thinking, but this is super pretentious of me)

1100 is fantastically mediocre, so I wouldn't. It means you're still learning the game and that's fine, but listing 1100 would be like listing "biking (with training wheels)". Sorry to be super frank but I'm about 1650 and consider myself an average enough player that I wouldn't put the ranking on my resume (I do plan to put simply "chess", though).

[Anonymous User]

If I play chess should I include my Elo (1100) or is this douchey? I don't want people to think I'm a grandmaster or anything, but I do enjoy playing and I could hold a conversation on the topic. (I also think it demonstrates analytic thinking, but this is super pretentious of me)

1100 is fantastically mediocre, so I wouldn't. It means you're still learning the game and that's fine, but listing 1100 would be like listing "biking (with training wheels)". Sorry to be super frank but I'm about 1650 and consider myself an average enough player that I wouldn't put the ranking on my resume (I do plan to put simply "chess", though).

I agree that I'm mediocre, and that's why I want to list the ranking. I don't want someone thinking I'm going around joining tournaments, etc. I enjoy the game, and I've been playing for around a year (moved up from my initial placement at 700).

[sap]

I agree that I'm mediocre, and that's why I want to list the ranking. I don't want someone thinking I'm going around joining tournaments, etc. I enjoy the game, and I've been playing for around a year (moved up from my initial placement at 700).

I mean, but it seems like anyone who knows chess will certainly ask you about your ranking if they want to talk chess, so it gives you a place to actually start your conversation, and if they don't know about chess, then it'll be meaningless and may sound like bragging.

[Samara]

I agree that I'm mediocre, and that's why I want to list the ranking. I don't want someone thinking I'm going around joining tournaments, etc. I enjoy the game, and I've been playing for around a year (moved up from my initial placement at 700).

I mean, but it seems like anyone who knows chess will certainly ask you about your ranking if they want to talk chess, so it gives you a place to actually start your conversation, and if they don't know about chess, then it'll be meaningless and may sound like bragging.

This. If you put chess, no one is going to presume that you are a competitive player or goin to tournaments. They are just going to presume that you like chess.

[rinkrat19]

I agree that I'm mediocre, and that's why I want to list the ranking. I don't want someone thinking I'm going around joining tournaments, etc. I enjoy the game, and I've been playing for around a year (moved up from my initial placement at 700).

I mean, but it seems like anyone who knows chess will certainly ask you about your ranking if they want to talk chess, so it gives you a place to actually start your conversation, and if they don't know about chess, then it'll be meaningless and may sound like bragging.

This. If you put chess, no one is going to presume that you are a competitive player or goin to tournaments. They are just going to presume that you like chess.

Which is why they should list "competitive chess."

[Randomnumbers]

Which is why they should list "competitive chess."

Not with an 1100.

[rinkrat19]

Which is why they should list "competitive chess."

Not with an 1100.

It's still competing. As opposed to playing at home with your mom.