On Making Mistakes (Theoretical)

[Sherman]

Sometimes I feel like this forum needs more theoretical posts. Here is an effort towards that.

In this post, I am going to make some assumptions which may or may not be true, but I think reasonable people will find them...reasonable. Note that this post discusses differences between players based on the mistakes they make. It does NOT attempt to address differences between players in making their opponents make mistakes.

Assumption 1 - All poker players make mistakes.
Assumption 2 - Not all mistakes are created equally (i.e. Some mistakes cost more $ than others).

Given these assumptions, I have two hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1 - The major difference between Good players and Bad players is the sheer amount of mistakes made. Bad players make far more mistakes than good players.

Hypothesis 2 - The major difference between Good players and Great players is the amount cost for making mistakes.

If these assumptions and hypotheses are true, it follows that part of being a Great player is recognizing that you will make mistakes, but make mistakes which are less costly than others.

So how does this apply to this forum? I think the above assumptions and hypotheses are most relevant for a tournament format. In a regular freezeout MTT situations change such that a mistake at one time point is more costly than the same mistake at a different time point. Specifically, in MTTs, mistakes which are made early cost less than mistakes late. By cost I am referring to $EV and not cEV. Thus, Great poker players are willing to make mistakes early in MTTs but less willing to make mistakes late in MTTs.

What I am basically suggesting is that in Tournament Poker, one should be more willing to gamble and make mistakes early than late. Several posters have asked questions today regarding hands in the first few levels of MTTs. While these questions are important, I am suggesting that on balance if one is put to a tough decision, can often look to the time-point in the tournament to decide. If it is early in the MTT with no payout implications, one should be willing to err on the side of aggression and gabooling.

It is only late in MTTs (and by late, I mean significant prize differences typically only seen at the FT) where should consider erring on the side of caution. This is because an aggressive/gambooling mistake at FTs can often cost serious $EV. This is opposed to early where an aggressive mistake often has little bearing on $EV.

When stuck with a tough decision, examine the tournament situation. Is it late? Are there any serious prize money implications? If not, err on the side of aggression.

R. Sherman

[JoseGonzlez]

I dont know. I think it just pays to make good decisions situationally. Players not wanting to make mistakes late often causes weak tight play. One thing to consider on "making a mistake late" is there is still a huge prize difference between third and first. So stepping up and making a call that gave you a shot at the win is not the worst thing in the world.

I was going to post something similar about making mistakes (and bold calls preflop) versus making them postflop but alot of it is a product of my own weaknesses rather than anything theorectical.


I just think you have to be careful and not let a fear of making mistakes lead you to playing weak tight.

[Jay S]

[ QUOTE ]
What I am basically suggesting is that in Tournament Poker, one should be more willing to gamble and make mistakes early than late. Several posters have asked questions today regarding hands in the first few levels of MTTs. While these questions are important, I am suggesting that on balance if one is put to a tough decision, can often look to the time-point in the tournament to decide. If it is early in the MTT with no payout implications, one should be willing to err on the side of aggression and gabooling.

It is only late in MTTs (and by late, I mean significant prize differences typically only seen at the FT) where should consider erring on the side of caution. This is because an aggressive/gambooling mistake at FTs can often cost serious $EV. This is opposed to early where an aggressive mistake often has little bearing on $EV.

When stuck with a tough decision, examine the tournament situation. Is it late? Are there any serious prize money implications? If not, err on the side of aggression.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to only be considering a particular type of mistake: the "take a gamble with slightly -EV rather than fold" mistake. Passing up a gamble with slightly +EV is an equally important mistake. IMO (at least at the $10-20 buyin levels), this second type of mistake is FAR more common at final tables.

If you're a better player than the field, I would also disagree with the claim that you should err on the side of risk early in tournaments. If you'll take a 0 cEV gamble on the first hand of a tournament, you're basically admitting to yourself that your $EV for the tournament is negative. And if you can think about tournaments and hands this way, it probably isn't.

Thank you for the theoretical post, I enjoy these types of threads.

[sledghammer]

[ QUOTE ]

Hypothesis 1 - The major difference between Good players and Bad players is the sheer amount of mistakes made. Bad players make far more mistakes than good players.

Hypothesis 2 - The major difference between Good players and Great players is the amount cost for making mistakes.


[/ QUOTE ]

These are not necessarily true. A bad player can make huge mistakes rarely (think 15/10 cash player that never folds top pair) and vice ver

[ QUOTE ]

If these assumptions and hypotheses are true, it follows that part of being a Great player is recognizing that you will make mistakes, but make mistakes which are less costly than others.


[/ QUOTE ]

You want to minimize your $EV losses due to mistakes.

[ QUOTE ]

Specifically, in MTTs, mistakes which are made early cost less than mistakes late. By cost I am referring to $EV and not cEV. Thus, Great poker players are willing to make mistakes early in MTTs but less willing to make mistakes late in MTTs.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't follow. You want to minimize your mistakes all along. Great players aren't lazy, and only concentrate when the big money is on the line.

[ QUOTE ]

It is only late in MTTs (and by late, I mean significant prize differences typically only seen at the FT) where should consider erring on the side of caution. This is because an aggressive/gambooling mistake at FTs can often cost serious $EV. This is opposed to early where an aggressive mistake often has little bearing on $EV.


[/ QUOTE ]

Remember that cEV = $EV early in a tournament.

[Foucault]

What's a mistake?

[JoseGonzlez]

yeah you really need to define mistake.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]
What's a mistake?

[/ QUOTE ]

One way of defining a mistake is to use the Fundamental Theorem of Poker's definition. If you play differently than you would if you would if you could see your opponents' cards you have made a mistake.

Not sure if this applies or not.

I appreciate the insightful comments by everyone by the way.

R. Sherman

[holdemft]

So, would the difference between great players and world class players be how often each induces their opponents to make more (and more costly) mistakes?

[Cornell Fiji]

[ QUOTE ]
So, would the difference between great players and world class players be how often each induces their opponents to make more (and more costly) mistakes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very good point.

The difference between good and average players is not just not making mistakes but it is also the degree to which good players make their opponents make mistakes.

[DiscipleAA]

Ok, So then the ? I have for this is...

If a mistake is considered -EV, but is made for the RIGHT reasons, is the play even -EV at all? or doesn't the play become +EV BECAUSE of those reasons...

Side Note - The reason a great player can play looser preflop in the begining of a tournament isnt simply because it is the begining of a tournament, but because of things like depth of stacks in relation to the blinds and the weakness of the field...

Side Note 2 - I believe that the difference in each group you are comparing is... that each stronger group is willing to make what the weaker group would consider to be a mistake for reasons that are beyond the grasp of that weaker group...

Random Example to Side Note 2 - Do you think that, for example, the player who thought up the c-bet, was considered to be a good player by a group of his peers, or do you think that it is more likely that most poker players thought he played well preflop but played far to aggressively after the flop... (You can actually insert random poker theory here and apply this to that theory just as easy, I was just using the c-bet because I thought it was something easy that every1 could understand, I obviously have no Idea when the c-bet was invented, it could have been a very very long time ago, you could also take these thoughts much father then this and apply them to a player, for example some players cant understand the range of Daniel Negreanu preflop or why he does things like raise to 2.5x the BB rather then 3x, this is an argument for that player being weaker then Daniel in regards to those situations...

Side Note 3 - So according to my theory, you could never determine who the best player in the world is... because the only person with the potential to recognize the best player in the world... is the best player in the world himself...