Targets Versus Goals, revisited

I am a big fan of Tommy Angelo.

Of all the efforts one should put in studying the game of poker, I believe most of it should be in creating and honing the proper mindset.  Once you've read the basics of strategy (hand charts, concepts like pot odds, SPR, etc) I believe in skipping the more advanced technical material (potential game destroyers like "Exploiting Regulars" and "Let There Be Range") and just focusing on the management aspects of the game - Mental, and Business.

So yes, I am also a fan of Dusty Schmidt.

If I could only offer two things to a poker student (for whatever reason) it would be "The Eightfold Path to Poker Enlightenment" and "Treat Your Poker Like A Business."


To illustrate a bit more:  Once you know how to be at least a break-even player, the learning curve steepens A LOT.  You can exert a huge amount of study effort to get that one extra bb/100.  But without a strong mental game, you can easily tilt off everything.

So which aspect matters more, if you think long-term?  A skill that gains you more money when you are focused, or a mindset that gains little but keeps you focused?

First things first, in my honest opinion.  Put that huge amount of study effort in your mental game!


To further represent this idea and revisit the value of "targets versus goals", here is an excerpt from a thread on the Asia Poker Academy Forums where a new player has set for himself a goal of having $1k after a month:

"I am planning to make a deposit of $100 and make 1k in 1month, starting from Nov 1st. The goal might be far fetched, but I want to make sure I take the right path, which obviously sooner or later will take me there."

My immediate thought was this:  the "right path" is to NOT set such a goal.

But I of course could not just reply so succinctly.

"i wish you luck, but i also wish to offer perspective:

i've seen players race to $1k as a goal and hit it (and subsequently lose it). but to do it in a month? might be too much pressure on yourself? if you play really well but only have $600 with a few days to go, would you be happy or would you double your efforts to reach your goal? what is more important to you - the medal after one month, or honing skills that you can use for the long-term?

i know goals are a motivator, but i advocate setting smaller measurable targets. (a Tommy Angelo nugget i'll never forget). a result-based goal might set you up to feel like a failure, even when you do very well.

how about a discipline-based target? like, "i will only play NL4 for one month solid" or "i will play at least twenty $1 SNG's a day for one month." or "i will learn and strictly follow a BR management strategy."

so why not define an aspect of your game that you feel is "not your best" and work on that instead?

i know that stuff is boring and not something you can post a brag about, but at least that is something that is directly under your control. having $1k at the end is a bonus, but it is not really something you have direct power over. all you can do is play your best, budget your time well, and play a lot.

if my goal was to have 1k in my BR at month-end, i can just keep loading $50 and joining big MTT's till i bink one...or i can save myself the trouble and just deposit 1k.

imagine if a new basketball player sets a goal to "make 10 three-point shots" in one game, it will be an awful sight to watch him try. the fundamental issue is that he is craving the result, and not the skill.

but he can set a target to shoot 500 threes (not make, just shoot) every day at practice. and one day, he may or may not make ten threes in one game, but he probably can make a few consistently, and do it every game.

i hope this is not a downer. i mean it as a motivational redirect. when we have the passion and the energy to want to be better, it is our duty to ourselves to use that passion and energy where it is most efficient and rewarding."