I've had many a student with MENSA-level IQ's. They are easy to train. They understand everything I throw at them in a snap. They come up with new things and end up teaching me more than I can ever teach them.
But they are not my most successful students. They all tilt harder than everyone else.
Nobody can bust a bankroll faster than a guy who is so smart, he can convince himself that he does not care. He cannot care about a game's results because he thinks of everyone else as an idiot. His ego will refuse to allow himself to be lumped in with all these idiots. So he will do things to separate himself from these lucky fucking donkey idiot losers.
Since genius-ego needs to be the best - better than everyone - it's not much of a stretch to play like the biggest idiot of them all.
What it all boils down to is self-flagellation.
It's very simple. The more I know, the more I hate myself for doing the wrong thing. Even when "I did everything right"... The more I understand that I am doing the right thing, the more distressed I am when the results are unrewarding.
Then confidence disappears: "Maybe I am not doing the right thing after all...?" (See this previous post about loss of confidence).
And then it's time to punish myself. Which is sad, because the real first step to being successful is to have fun. And I can't have fun if I'm not being nice to myself. Nice to my bankroll. Nice to my fellow (fucking idiot!) players.
(I posted previously about recovering the A-Game and having fun here)
I post all this today, because I ran into a post on a player's blog on the PilipinasPoker Forums. Now this player is someone I consider to be a definite inevitable game-crusher. He has all the tools - the passion, the ability to ask the right questions and get the right answers, a grasp of the math, an articulation of the game's concepts, and the vulnerability to put himself out there to be sculpted by the wisdom (or lack thereof) of others.
He plays well. He wins. But he plays NL10 with a bankroll of $1200+ And he confesses to tilting easily, as evidenced by a brief outburst:
Bankroll: 1263.21
And just like that, I'm down again. FU Stars!
The thread runs to a point where he confesses a loss of confidence, which is shocking to those of us who have seen him play.
On a serious note I know it's ridiculous, but my confidence level at
this site is at an all-time low. I've never been 15 buyins below all-in
EV before and also being rivered too often lately it just feels like
Pokerstars is cheating me out of my money. Of course I know it's not
true, it just feels that way.
I just need my confidence back.
Maybe win a few sessions in a row. Maybe win 15 buyins. Maybe suckout
on somebody 5 times in a row. I don't know. Playing at Donkroom and
winning doesn't help, so maybe this will do?
I'm even thinking
about playing and just shoving all hands at 2NL and see what happens and
maybe break this bad variance. After I lose like some 50 buyins then
maybe I can start winning again? Bad idea of course.
So after a few well-meaning but empty replies where it is suggested that he "control his emotions" or "develop composure" I thought I'd pay a big blind and throw in my two cents.
"There are many techniques to manage tilt yourself, detect early warning signs, etc... I am very sure someone with your passion and resourcefulness has already seen the materials. There may be almost nothing I can share with you that you haven't read somewhere.
Counting to ten is good (Tommy Angelo?) but I personally use it mainly as an indicator of my focus (i.e. if I can't make it to ten, I'm washed out). IMO it's only going to pipe you down a bit, but not completely reset you if you are the emotional type to begin with. Dusty suggests one can (and should) tough it out and "play through tilt" - but he's leatherass, and I'm not. So I have to take swim breaks, boxing breaks, xbox breaks...
The other devices are no guarantee - alarms that go off after an hour so I can cold-quit, monetary stop losses, going to a "quiet place" (internal or external) to re-center, sitting on a slow-fired water boiler so that I have to literally and physically get off my seat - the very nature of tilt means that I am predisposed to ignore all those devices at a time when I need them the most anyway.
It's unrealistic to expect rational actions during emotional stress. So if you are prone to emotional blackouts, you cannot save yourself. You can only hope the wave passes before you can destroy yourself.
So where does that leave this attempt at advice? Get a grindmate.
People of high intelligence tend to be overachievers who are very hard on themselves. Any error or failure or bad result triggers a desire to self-flagellate. The thing that makes it doubly harder is that we pride ourselves in figuring things out and lifting ourselves out of the funk. We know all too well what needs to be done, and we believe in our own ability to "buckle down and just fucking do it."
Yes, I've switched pronouns, so that you can hopefully believe me when I say I know how it feels.
The bad news is that the more I know, the less likely I am going to seek help. It gets to a point where the help I need isn't someone who will give me more tips and ideas, but just someone who will cuss me out, embarrass me, squash my ego, and remind me that I am imperfect.
I once asked a student to think hard and name someone that she would allow to pull her off the table when she starts to act tilty. She couldn't name anyone.
And you? Is there a person who can say "tsk tsk" and make you say "sorry, I'm being stupid"...?
Is this person realistically nearby? You could sync your grind with someone like that. It could be someone from these forums, who will sit with you and threaten to take screenshots of your bad play for posting. (I am sure many will volunteer. Harsh reality: people are always waiting to knock you down a peg or two.)
In lieu of a grindmate, you could clear up some drivespace and camtasia all your sessions. Make sure you post them online unedited. That's not a lot of work if you have the machine for it (it all just runs in the background). That creates a virtual grindmate. If you know the lot of us are going to see you do dumb things, it might help."
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Saturday, September 8, 2012
Old Student, New Student
This is a tale about two old students.
This morning I got a call from one of my first Poker Trainees - and possibly one of my favorite converts. Let's call him Excitaboy.
Excitaboy was the biggest fish around. He had no respect for the game. While everyone tried to play well, he would laugh and say "you all are trying to win, I'm the only one having fun!"
This line best delivered after laying a bad beat on somebody.
He was always first out of a tourney, and he would cover up the shame by saying he had to go leave anyway. But we knew he wanted to keep playing. And I knew that deep inside, he wanted to win.
Long story short, I changed his way of thinking by bombarding him with sports analogies. As a very competitive athlete, Excitaboy could never again look at poker and willingly lose because "it was more fun." Playing well was more fun. Winning was more fun.
Cut to many years later, and Excitaboy is known as one of the tightest guys around, although still tilty when his wife calls and he is at a poker table (he is, after all, a guy). I introduce him to the online cash game grind and sell the idea to him that it made way more sense than a tourney grind - especially for the casual amounts of time he spared - about a couple of hours on some nights of the week.
But Excitaboy - like many casual players - wanted to just play tourneys. His money, his business, we left it at that. After all, half of everyone else was just playing tourneys. And logging on and jumping into a Sit and Go was so easy.
So this morning he calls me and wants to share a realization. It took him this long, he started to confess, to realize that he was wasting his time and money with Sit and Go grinding. We broke down the math in the most simplistic manner, just to share the point he was making:
Sit and Go's pay the top three players. Since they are ten seaters, if all things are equal, all he needs to do is finish in the top three. Basically, if everyone gets their fair share of luck and skill, if he plays ten games, he will finish once in every position. So let's say he plays $10+1 buyin SNG's...
--> Buyins = $110
--> Finishes paid = $20 + $30 + $50 = $100
--> Net Loss $10
Now Excitaboy is tight and loves the game and is always learning, but he has no illusions about being the best player at the table. He can appreciate when something might be bad business. He's Chinese after all. And he knows Kung Fu.
We move on from the simplistic math and he talks about the investment of time. We talk about the feeling that once you buy into a tourney, that money is a sunk cost. That money is gone, and you are pressured to play hard for a full 45 minutes to two hours just to see some of it back. He talks about the stress of having to ebat every-fucking-body at the table. Worst of all, as a nitty player, he talks about the inevitable coin flips - half the time behind, and nothing he can do about it because, well, "you gotta make a stand because the blinds are too high."
So he tried playing a few cash games again some days ago and finally got the idea I was selling him years ago when he first started training. You control how long you play, you can leave anytime, you don't have to go into coinflips, you can wait for a hand, and, most of all, your buyin is NOT a sunk cost. As long as it is in your stack, you can leave with it.
In a Sit and Go, he spends $11, and either leaves with $20, $30, $50, or a big fat zero and two hours of his life gone. In a cash game, he can buyin for $10 and leave as soon as he is up one cent if he wants to. And believe me, Excitaboy is the kind of player who can leave with any kind of small profit.
And Excitaboy does not have to be the best player - nor the luckiest - to win money playing cash games. He does nto have to beat everybody - which is great because he doesn't have an ego that needs to beat everybody. He can just be an above-average slightly-more-informed poker player and get paid by the one or two worse players at the table.
I tell you all this to get to what he says towards the tail end of his sharing: "I know you told me all this before, but I was never going to know it without personally seeing for myself."
Which is funny, that the world works that way.
My father - in his forty years or so of conducting workshops, training, teambuilding, and shifting paradigms - almost always ended his speeched with this disclaimer: "...but don't take my word for it, see for yourself."
He would reveal the secrets of life, the power of prayer, the keys to love and happiness, and the pitfalls of conventional programming. Then after all that he would recommend that he not be believed. because, well, some things in life (most, I think) are just not believable.
I can tell you all about getting wet, and you're going to know about it. But you don't understand till you fall into the pool.
I once asked my father where the line was. I mean, some things you tell people, and they had better believe, right? I mean, you don't tell someone that cyanide will kill you and then say "but go see for yourself"...or do you?
I think women have the line closer to safe, while men have our lines closer to cyanide. We will stick our finger in the socket. We will lick a 9-volt battery. We will eat red meat till the day we die.
We can mismanage our bankroll despite everything we've read. We can tilt till we are busto even after seeing and hearing about a hundred cautionary tales.
We will see for ourselves what the red button does, and no amount of information will stop us from ordering chicharon bulaklak. We will make disastrous choices (but never let it be labelled as "wrong choices").
I think for most men, anal sex is the line. But I digress.
Elsie is reading a poker book. I think it might be more than intermediate stuff. He asks me about the book, and I tell him "don't worry about it, you're going to have to read it again anyway."
I think most of my poker books I read at least twice. The first reading is strictly informational, and it's an aphrodisiac. Then I play a few thousand hands for a few hundred hours. Then the bulbs in my head go off - "Oh, I think THAT's what the book was talking about!"
So I read it again.
Never forget: We are allowed to make mistakes. Yes, even after reading the fucking manual. We are allowed to change our minds. We are allowed to keep learning. we are allowed to start from the beginning if we must.
Which brings me to the tale of an even older student.
This one learned the game around 2004 or 2005, I forget exactly. This one had a natural knack for it and finally trained formally in 2009. This one became a full-time poker pro. This one lived off Limit Holdem. Then he lived off Full-Ring No Limit Holdem. Then he trained to coach the game and teach others.
This one became great at helping other players improve their game. This one spent more time coaching and less time playing.
One by one, the Full-Ring tables were closing. This one had to learn to play the 6-max game. But the game had quite possibly already left him behind. This one felt...well, that something was up. I finally I found the word I was looking for a few days ago:
I felt antiquated.
So I had to make an effort to become a new student again. I spent years studying to be of service to other players, but nobody was servicing me. I tried to find leaks in my own game, but my efforts all seemed myopic: I could see small flaws here and there, but I was too close to the picture to see the big flaws.
I didn't want to be one of those guys who slowly run out of people to look up to. I promised myself that I would always always always have mentors. I haven't had one in a while. Outside of saying "I read it in a book" or "I saw a great video about it," I haven't really had the chance to learn from someone else in direct fashion. I haven't taken a tongue-lashng and been called a nitty numbnut for too long. I haven't had many chances to say the words "Thanks for pointing that out man, I never would have thought of that."
I wanted to be coached again. An opportunity knocked, so I took it.
I am now some three or four weeks into a training program designed for beginners. One of the trainers is an abrasive drill sergeant. Seriously, if R. Lee Ermey taught poker, he would be this guy. At the beginning, I find myself struggling to constantly keep my cup empty - as my ego constantly threatens to flare up: "Dude, you've been there, done that!"
Well, ego, I haven't been here and done this in a long long time. Maybe I can't just take your word for it anymore. Maybe I have to see for myself.
Ego says "Dude, my game ain't broken, these guys are going to dismantle it!"
Well ego, I'm going to let these top-notch coaches go ahead and dismantle your crushing "unbroken" 1bb/100 6max game. What do you say to that?
Yesterday I hit paydirt big time, but I will tell you about it tomorrow, because that is another story.
This one is about an Old Student who is now a New Student.
This morning I got a call from one of my first Poker Trainees - and possibly one of my favorite converts. Let's call him Excitaboy.
Excitaboy was the biggest fish around. He had no respect for the game. While everyone tried to play well, he would laugh and say "you all are trying to win, I'm the only one having fun!"
This line best delivered after laying a bad beat on somebody.
He was always first out of a tourney, and he would cover up the shame by saying he had to go leave anyway. But we knew he wanted to keep playing. And I knew that deep inside, he wanted to win.
Long story short, I changed his way of thinking by bombarding him with sports analogies. As a very competitive athlete, Excitaboy could never again look at poker and willingly lose because "it was more fun." Playing well was more fun. Winning was more fun.
Cut to many years later, and Excitaboy is known as one of the tightest guys around, although still tilty when his wife calls and he is at a poker table (he is, after all, a guy). I introduce him to the online cash game grind and sell the idea to him that it made way more sense than a tourney grind - especially for the casual amounts of time he spared - about a couple of hours on some nights of the week.
But Excitaboy - like many casual players - wanted to just play tourneys. His money, his business, we left it at that. After all, half of everyone else was just playing tourneys. And logging on and jumping into a Sit and Go was so easy.
So this morning he calls me and wants to share a realization. It took him this long, he started to confess, to realize that he was wasting his time and money with Sit and Go grinding. We broke down the math in the most simplistic manner, just to share the point he was making:
Sit and Go's pay the top three players. Since they are ten seaters, if all things are equal, all he needs to do is finish in the top three. Basically, if everyone gets their fair share of luck and skill, if he plays ten games, he will finish once in every position. So let's say he plays $10+1 buyin SNG's...
--> Buyins = $110
--> Finishes paid = $20 + $30 + $50 = $100
--> Net Loss $10
Now Excitaboy is tight and loves the game and is always learning, but he has no illusions about being the best player at the table. He can appreciate when something might be bad business. He's Chinese after all. And he knows Kung Fu.
We move on from the simplistic math and he talks about the investment of time. We talk about the feeling that once you buy into a tourney, that money is a sunk cost. That money is gone, and you are pressured to play hard for a full 45 minutes to two hours just to see some of it back. He talks about the stress of having to ebat every-fucking-body at the table. Worst of all, as a nitty player, he talks about the inevitable coin flips - half the time behind, and nothing he can do about it because, well, "you gotta make a stand because the blinds are too high."
So he tried playing a few cash games again some days ago and finally got the idea I was selling him years ago when he first started training. You control how long you play, you can leave anytime, you don't have to go into coinflips, you can wait for a hand, and, most of all, your buyin is NOT a sunk cost. As long as it is in your stack, you can leave with it.
In a Sit and Go, he spends $11, and either leaves with $20, $30, $50, or a big fat zero and two hours of his life gone. In a cash game, he can buyin for $10 and leave as soon as he is up one cent if he wants to. And believe me, Excitaboy is the kind of player who can leave with any kind of small profit.
And Excitaboy does not have to be the best player - nor the luckiest - to win money playing cash games. He does nto have to beat everybody - which is great because he doesn't have an ego that needs to beat everybody. He can just be an above-average slightly-more-informed poker player and get paid by the one or two worse players at the table.
I tell you all this to get to what he says towards the tail end of his sharing: "I know you told me all this before, but I was never going to know it without personally seeing for myself."
Which is funny, that the world works that way.
My father - in his forty years or so of conducting workshops, training, teambuilding, and shifting paradigms - almost always ended his speeched with this disclaimer: "...but don't take my word for it, see for yourself."
He would reveal the secrets of life, the power of prayer, the keys to love and happiness, and the pitfalls of conventional programming. Then after all that he would recommend that he not be believed. because, well, some things in life (most, I think) are just not believable.
I can tell you all about getting wet, and you're going to know about it. But you don't understand till you fall into the pool.
I once asked my father where the line was. I mean, some things you tell people, and they had better believe, right? I mean, you don't tell someone that cyanide will kill you and then say "but go see for yourself"...or do you?
I think women have the line closer to safe, while men have our lines closer to cyanide. We will stick our finger in the socket. We will lick a 9-volt battery. We will eat red meat till the day we die.
We can mismanage our bankroll despite everything we've read. We can tilt till we are busto even after seeing and hearing about a hundred cautionary tales.
We will see for ourselves what the red button does, and no amount of information will stop us from ordering chicharon bulaklak. We will make disastrous choices (but never let it be labelled as "wrong choices").
I think for most men, anal sex is the line. But I digress.
Elsie is reading a poker book. I think it might be more than intermediate stuff. He asks me about the book, and I tell him "don't worry about it, you're going to have to read it again anyway."
I think most of my poker books I read at least twice. The first reading is strictly informational, and it's an aphrodisiac. Then I play a few thousand hands for a few hundred hours. Then the bulbs in my head go off - "Oh, I think THAT's what the book was talking about!"
So I read it again.
Never forget: We are allowed to make mistakes. Yes, even after reading the fucking manual. We are allowed to change our minds. We are allowed to keep learning. we are allowed to start from the beginning if we must.
Which brings me to the tale of an even older student.
This one learned the game around 2004 or 2005, I forget exactly. This one had a natural knack for it and finally trained formally in 2009. This one became a full-time poker pro. This one lived off Limit Holdem. Then he lived off Full-Ring No Limit Holdem. Then he trained to coach the game and teach others.
This one became great at helping other players improve their game. This one spent more time coaching and less time playing.
One by one, the Full-Ring tables were closing. This one had to learn to play the 6-max game. But the game had quite possibly already left him behind. This one felt...well, that something was up. I finally I found the word I was looking for a few days ago:
I felt antiquated.
So I had to make an effort to become a new student again. I spent years studying to be of service to other players, but nobody was servicing me. I tried to find leaks in my own game, but my efforts all seemed myopic: I could see small flaws here and there, but I was too close to the picture to see the big flaws.
I didn't want to be one of those guys who slowly run out of people to look up to. I promised myself that I would always always always have mentors. I haven't had one in a while. Outside of saying "I read it in a book" or "I saw a great video about it," I haven't really had the chance to learn from someone else in direct fashion. I haven't taken a tongue-lashng and been called a nitty numbnut for too long. I haven't had many chances to say the words "Thanks for pointing that out man, I never would have thought of that."
I wanted to be coached again. An opportunity knocked, so I took it.
I am now some three or four weeks into a training program designed for beginners. One of the trainers is an abrasive drill sergeant. Seriously, if R. Lee Ermey taught poker, he would be this guy. At the beginning, I find myself struggling to constantly keep my cup empty - as my ego constantly threatens to flare up: "Dude, you've been there, done that!"
Well, ego, I haven't been here and done this in a long long time. Maybe I can't just take your word for it anymore. Maybe I have to see for myself.
Ego says "Dude, my game ain't broken, these guys are going to dismantle it!"
Well ego, I'm going to let these top-notch coaches go ahead and dismantle your crushing "unbroken" 1bb/100 6max game. What do you say to that?
Yesterday I hit paydirt big time, but I will tell you about it tomorrow, because that is another story.
This one is about an Old Student who is now a New Student.
Monday, September 3, 2012
Decision Script - Be a man with a plan!
This week, after two weeks of mastering The Rules of Engagement, we do a module designed to round out our students' preflop tools: The Decision Script.
The concept is simple: Decisions come from information. Good information, good decision. So the key is to have an efficient way to gather this information. We have to ask the right questions to get the right answers. But since not all information is useful, we can't waste thought-energy asking too many questions.
Hence, a Decision Script. A Players' customized thought-process for gathering the information he needs.
I first heard this idea listening to Phil Gordon audiobooks. Phil liked to ask a bunch of questions as a checklist that he went through when it was his turn to act:
Should I bet or raise?
Should I fold?
Can I call?
Naturally, given the target audience and the era that poker was in at the time, this was a very general decision script.
Harrington introduced me to a script that I ran for a long time and found to be quite efficient. he just looked at three things - and in this order (I'm paraphrasing, btw, since he spends a chapter on this):
1. STACKS - what (how deep) are the stacks involved?
2. POSITION - who is where? how is this hand going to play out towards/from me
3. HAND - what have I got anyway?
Just going through #1 and #2 often made #3 automatic. The first two items are great because almost all that information is available if you care to be aware! It is not hidden. The only hidden part of the information concerns the "who" part of the "who is where" question. But even that, you can consistently solve with a HUD in due time.
So let's say I am in a hand. I can start my Harrington-style Decision Script as soon as the dealer shuffles!
1. STACKS - hmm, I have 120BB at the CO, a shortie is UTG, the small blind is deep, the button is also a shortie with 30BB. every one else is 100BB-ish. If the shortie opens for a raise, calling is out, set-mining is out, speculating with SC's is out. If i somehow open and the BU 3bets, it's shove or fold for me.
2. POSITION - action gets to me unopened. the guy on the big blind folds to steals 90%. the small blind is also a nit. both have a very high fold to Fcbet. the BU is unpredictable - could be steaming - god knows he has had chances to reload, but hasn't. If I open from here, with anything less than the top of my range, I want him (the BU) gone. With the rest of my range, I am willing to fold to a 3bet. If the BU drops out and either of the blinds see a flop with me and check, I am going to Fcbet a little more than usual (even rag flops). What about my PF bet size? I standardize at 3bb, but since the big blind is just mostly going to fold, 2.5bb serves. However, since I want to discourage a light 3bet from the BU (and I want to buy his button), perhaps 3.5bb this time? Since both blinds give up a lot post-flop, 3.5bb is the choice.
3. HAND - even before I've seen my hand, I have actually already sort of constructed the range I am going to play, and how I am going to play it. Time to look at my hand...
72o, not in the range, fold
Okay, okay, sometimes if you have 72o you can save a lot of brain cells and just fold. The exercise of this whole concept however, has to do with organizing our thoughts and getting to know how we go about them.
Elsie's assignment is to create a video with him thinking out loud. Then we will listen to it and fine tune his thought processes. he must write his script down. That is the discipline of the exercise. Nothing becomes automatic without practice. And nothing can be practiced without the intention of fine-tuning.
For those of you thinking of creating your own decision script (I think you must!) here are some of the questions you always want to work into your script in some way shape or form:
1. Where is the money going to come from? is it coming from folding out most of villain's range? Is it coming from value? This is most important when we make plays like 3bet stealing or set-mining.
2. What is the plan? (and post-flop: has the plan changed?) let's say your plan was to capitalize on the big blind's folding range by raising 94o from the BU. he folds 80%, so that is outright profit with any two cards. Once he resists, we shut down. That's the plan. It does NOT change when the Flop comes 937r. The money comes from the outright profit of his likelihood to fold preflop. The plan changes when the Flop comes 944. Now the money comes from getting called by a worse hand to the showdown.
Listening to thinkaloud videos is both rewarding and extremely tiring. Some students have such an inarticulatable thought process, it is a nightmare to fine tune. Their thought processes can be filled with statements like "coz I am feeling this hand" or "because i think he is on tilt"...
Other times, they are articulate, but the thought process is somewhat flawed - as in: "I bet to see where I am"
Because, well, you can also see where you are by checking.
To close out the week's module, here is a link to a great video on preflop planning.
(credit dnb118 for finding this and sharing!)
My final reminder for this module has always been this: if you cannot run a decision script - If you fail to gather the info, or gather info and fail to follow what the info suggests - then your mind is mush. Time to rest and play some xbox!
The concept is simple: Decisions come from information. Good information, good decision. So the key is to have an efficient way to gather this information. We have to ask the right questions to get the right answers. But since not all information is useful, we can't waste thought-energy asking too many questions.
Hence, a Decision Script. A Players' customized thought-process for gathering the information he needs.
I first heard this idea listening to Phil Gordon audiobooks. Phil liked to ask a bunch of questions as a checklist that he went through when it was his turn to act:
Should I bet or raise?
Should I fold?
Can I call?
Naturally, given the target audience and the era that poker was in at the time, this was a very general decision script.
Harrington introduced me to a script that I ran for a long time and found to be quite efficient. he just looked at three things - and in this order (I'm paraphrasing, btw, since he spends a chapter on this):
1. STACKS - what (how deep) are the stacks involved?
2. POSITION - who is where? how is this hand going to play out towards/from me
3. HAND - what have I got anyway?
Just going through #1 and #2 often made #3 automatic. The first two items are great because almost all that information is available if you care to be aware! It is not hidden. The only hidden part of the information concerns the "who" part of the "who is where" question. But even that, you can consistently solve with a HUD in due time.
So let's say I am in a hand. I can start my Harrington-style Decision Script as soon as the dealer shuffles!
1. STACKS - hmm, I have 120BB at the CO, a shortie is UTG, the small blind is deep, the button is also a shortie with 30BB. every one else is 100BB-ish. If the shortie opens for a raise, calling is out, set-mining is out, speculating with SC's is out. If i somehow open and the BU 3bets, it's shove or fold for me.
2. POSITION - action gets to me unopened. the guy on the big blind folds to steals 90%. the small blind is also a nit. both have a very high fold to Fcbet. the BU is unpredictable - could be steaming - god knows he has had chances to reload, but hasn't. If I open from here, with anything less than the top of my range, I want him (the BU) gone. With the rest of my range, I am willing to fold to a 3bet. If the BU drops out and either of the blinds see a flop with me and check, I am going to Fcbet a little more than usual (even rag flops). What about my PF bet size? I standardize at 3bb, but since the big blind is just mostly going to fold, 2.5bb serves. However, since I want to discourage a light 3bet from the BU (and I want to buy his button), perhaps 3.5bb this time? Since both blinds give up a lot post-flop, 3.5bb is the choice.
3. HAND - even before I've seen my hand, I have actually already sort of constructed the range I am going to play, and how I am going to play it. Time to look at my hand...
72o, not in the range, fold
Okay, okay, sometimes if you have 72o you can save a lot of brain cells and just fold. The exercise of this whole concept however, has to do with organizing our thoughts and getting to know how we go about them.
Elsie's assignment is to create a video with him thinking out loud. Then we will listen to it and fine tune his thought processes. he must write his script down. That is the discipline of the exercise. Nothing becomes automatic without practice. And nothing can be practiced without the intention of fine-tuning.
For those of you thinking of creating your own decision script (I think you must!) here are some of the questions you always want to work into your script in some way shape or form:
1. Where is the money going to come from? is it coming from folding out most of villain's range? Is it coming from value? This is most important when we make plays like 3bet stealing or set-mining.
2. What is the plan? (and post-flop: has the plan changed?) let's say your plan was to capitalize on the big blind's folding range by raising 94o from the BU. he folds 80%, so that is outright profit with any two cards. Once he resists, we shut down. That's the plan. It does NOT change when the Flop comes 937r. The money comes from the outright profit of his likelihood to fold preflop. The plan changes when the Flop comes 944. Now the money comes from getting called by a worse hand to the showdown.
Listening to thinkaloud videos is both rewarding and extremely tiring. Some students have such an inarticulatable thought process, it is a nightmare to fine tune. Their thought processes can be filled with statements like "coz I am feeling this hand" or "because i think he is on tilt"...
Other times, they are articulate, but the thought process is somewhat flawed - as in: "I bet to see where I am"
Because, well, you can also see where you are by checking.
To close out the week's module, here is a link to a great video on preflop planning.
(credit dnb118 for finding this and sharing!)
My final reminder for this module has always been this: if you cannot run a decision script - If you fail to gather the info, or gather info and fail to follow what the info suggests - then your mind is mush. Time to rest and play some xbox!
The Rules of Engagement
Missed an update on Elsie and Me the last couple of weeks as I nowadays split my time between the poker tables and the........ fruit farm. That's another story.
Elsie is doing fine, hovering around break even as we enter the actual training. Everything is installed, time to work.
First order of business is to clarify the MINDSET we are supposed to be in as poker professionals. So here it is, the first thing I have all my APA VIP Trainees read:
My job is to make sure Elsie understands this and shifts his paradigm. To stop trying to take peoples' money, because they are going to be giving it to him. Instead of trying to be better than them, he just needs to be the best he can be. The spoils go NOT to the most-talented, but to the one who makes the fewest mistakes.
Like Tim Duncan, we are going to take high-percentage shots, while the crowd chants "Booo-ring!!!"
Got the mindset down - or at least the foundation. We will be going back to spot-check this mindset many many many times over the next few weeks. Any bad beat, burst of good luck, bad luck, or ego can seriously challenge a player's will to keep this mindset.
So on week 2, I gave Elsie a Starting Hand Chart. The SHC is there to serve as a default. With no information, go to the SHC. with tons of hands, a HUD filled with stats, and notes filled with observations, the SHC takes a backseat and we can have what I like to call a more Dynamic Hand Range.
94o is not on any SHC, but if OTB and the BB folds to steals 100% after 700 hands...well, that's a raise.
We combine the SHC with The APA Rules of Engagement - first passed on to me by Dr.Eldoradon in 2009. Although I hardly ever hear of it anymore, it is still one of the foundations of my training program.
1. I will never accept a proposition where I will be out of position, UNLESS I am the preflop raiser.
2. I choose not to be involved in unraised pots.
And of course, the disclaimer: This is not how we are going to be playing forever, but since this is a training program, these are the goddam training wheels. They do NOT come off till we say so.
Elsie is doing fine, hovering around break even as we enter the actual training. Everything is installed, time to work.
First order of business is to clarify the MINDSET we are supposed to be in as poker professionals. So here it is, the first thing I have all my APA VIP Trainees read:
POKER is NOT about making money. Yes, we measure ourselves by that bottom
line, BUT Poker is all about making the right decisions - the best possible
decision with regards to that bottom line.
It's about making a decision with the best long-term outcome. It's about making this decision EVERY TIME,
at EVERY MOMENT, and at EVERY CROSSROAD.
The money we make is just the result that REWARDS
the decisions we make. We are not here
"to make money" - if you play that way, you will inevitably make the
wrong decisions...even when you do get lucky.
DO THE RIGHT THING.
Drop your ego and fold to the outrageous bluff-raise. Make that positive EV call even if it means
you could get stacked. Use your best
judgment with the available information every time.
Do the right thing, and the rewards will follow.
This is how we play.
This is how we live.
My job is to make sure Elsie understands this and shifts his paradigm. To stop trying to take peoples' money, because they are going to be giving it to him. Instead of trying to be better than them, he just needs to be the best he can be. The spoils go NOT to the most-talented, but to the one who makes the fewest mistakes.
Like Tim Duncan, we are going to take high-percentage shots, while the crowd chants "Booo-ring!!!"
Got the mindset down - or at least the foundation. We will be going back to spot-check this mindset many many many times over the next few weeks. Any bad beat, burst of good luck, bad luck, or ego can seriously challenge a player's will to keep this mindset.
So on week 2, I gave Elsie a Starting Hand Chart. The SHC is there to serve as a default. With no information, go to the SHC. with tons of hands, a HUD filled with stats, and notes filled with observations, the SHC takes a backseat and we can have what I like to call a more Dynamic Hand Range.
94o is not on any SHC, but if OTB and the BB folds to steals 100% after 700 hands...well, that's a raise.
We combine the SHC with The APA Rules of Engagement - first passed on to me by Dr.Eldoradon in 2009. Although I hardly ever hear of it anymore, it is still one of the foundations of my training program.
1. I will never accept a proposition where I will be out of position, UNLESS I am the preflop raiser.
2. I choose not to be involved in unraised pots.
And of course, the disclaimer: This is not how we are going to be playing forever, but since this is a training program, these are the goddam training wheels. They do NOT come off till we say so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)