A Thought I Just Had (psych/theory)

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
This is basically waht gigabet said in his sucess/failure post. might want to reread it.

[/ QUOTE ]

jman studied in the analytic and continental traditions of philsophy, not that weird Eastern [censored], [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

Personally I think jman should reread his own posts, lol. Like fallacy of running bad and the others that are actually pretty spot on in terms how one's thinking towards poker needs to be solid.

Yugoslav

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is basically waht gigabet said in his sucess/failure post. might want to reread it.

[/ QUOTE ]

jman studied in the analytic and continental traditions of philsophy, not that weird Eastern [censored], [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

Personally I think jman should reread his own posts, lol. Like fallacy of running bad and the others that are actually pretty spot on in terms how one's thinking towards poker needs to be solid.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks yugo. I just went back and read some stuff. This post applied pretty well...

"My Thoughts on Goals and Poker Leads to a Lot of Rambling:


I've said this before, although I don't think here. Maybe I just said it to some friends: I think it is very important to identify your goals as a poker player so that you can act in a way to achieve them.

Do you just want to have fun playing? What’s fun for you? What would keep you from having fun? Do you want to make money? How much? When? In the next two weeks? For the next 10 years of your life? Can the big money wait? Do you want to keep getting better? At what game? Why?

People have all different kinds of motivations for playing, and nobody’s reason is more or less important than anyone else’s. What’s important is that you identify your motivation, and act in a way that puts you on the path to achieving your goals.

I’m mostly gonna be talking about myself here, but you can apply the thought process I use to whatever your personal goals are.

I have a few reasons for playing. I started playing because I enjoy it. Do I enjoy multi-tabling for many hours a week? No. So there are other reasons for why I do that. Firstly I want to make money. I would really like to be financially secure for the rest of my life. I don’t know how long poker will be as profitable as it is now, so I would like to make as much money in the near future as I can. That way I can save up and hopefully provide myself with a cushion for a long time. All the while, I’d like to be improving so that I can make money in the future. I’ve often bypassed some hourly rate in order to improve faster, and unless you have pressing financial needs, I suggest doing the same. This means playing less tables. Hiring coaches. Spending more time studying the game. Etc.

The main goal I have, which is just a personality trait I’ve always had, is to be the best at everything I try. I don’t mean the best I can possibly be. I mean better than everyone else. Unrealistic? Sure. But I will never be content or satisfied being anything less.

I have recently started playing primarily cash games. I haven’t given up on tournaments. I’m just focusing my energy in one place right now. I’ve played everything from 3/6nl to 50/100nl, all 6max, with the majority (95%) of my play at 5/10 and 10/20. I have learned enough at this point to be a winner at 5/10 and 10/20 consistently, but I think that I may be more profitable at 5/10 than 10/20 at this time.

The style of play, or one of the styles of play, that I was taught, is much more tight-passive than the strategy used by the majority of top NL players. I’m good with table selection, and I don’t tilt much. With all that, my numbers at 5/10 are very good. About as good as the top players at that level on Party Poker. In addition, I think that I play as many tables, or more tables, than most of the top players there. With that, I have a very solid hourly rate. So, as far as my money goals are concerned, I’m doing well there.

However, when I go to play 10/20, I notice a problem. I can still beat the game. But when I play against the top players at 10/20, it is very apparent that they are better than me. I know that I’ve been playing cash games for a few months, and that many of the top players have been at it for years, but that doesn’t help me much. I can’t stand knowing with certainty that I am outclassed by another player. I’m honest with myself, so I can admit that they’re better. I just don’t like it.

When looking at the styles of all of the top winners, I notice that all of them are significantly more aggressive than me. They play a style that puts a lot of their chips at risk all the time, and it scares their opponents into making mistakes. This is true for most of the top players at 5/10 and almost all of the top players at 10/20 and above. So, if I want to beat the bigger games consistently, I probably will have to adopt this playing style, or some variation of it. In order to be the best poker player, I have to be able to beat the top players in these games, right?

Well, yes and no. Mostly yes, but sorta no.

As you may know, I have hired multiple coaches in my poker career, because I care more about becoming a better player than I do about the money it costs to hire them. The last coach I hired, Tommy Angelo (www.tiltless.com), taught me a lot of things that I never thought had anything to do with being a good poker player. Since then, I’ve been rethinking some things.

Up to this point, I had been aiming to become the best, without ever considering what that meant. I guess if I had to quantify what it means to be the best poker player in the world, I would have said one who is a favorite over anyone else Heads Up. I’m not sure if there is anyone that actually is a favorite over everyone else because many players play best against a particular style of play. (To clarify, I’ve been talking about NLHE, because that’s the game I play. Obviously the best NLHE player doesn’t necessarily = the best poker player) So it could be like a rock, paper, scissors kinda thing, where Bob beats Joe, Joe beats Nancy, and Nancy beats Bob. Who’s the best then? I dunno. But let’s pretend that it was somehow quantifiable, like take the top 20 players and match them all HU against each other, and whoever has the highest total EV.

So, would that person be the best player in the world? Probably, by my definition. However some might argue otherwise. I mean, what’s the point? You aren’t gonna make much money playing against the other top players. Why do you need to be able to beat them?

I made a realization today. Being the best poker player in the world and being the best professional poker player in the world are not the same thing.

Poker (gambling in general) is unique in that it’s a game of skill that absolutely revolves around money. Most games have other focuses. In chess, your ‘weapons’ are the pieces; your pawns, your knights, etc. In Scrabble, you use your letter square thingies. In poker, in addition to your cards, money is your weapon. That fact completely changes the nature of the game, because you are using something that you can also use in the real world. I’ve never been playing Scrabble and been like, “Oh man. I could use this Z on that triple letter score space, but I need it to take my friend to the zoo later.” (That’s the best analogy I could come up with)

So, what does it mean then, to be the best professional poker player in the world? Well, take any other job. What factors make a job desirable to you? What are some of the attributes of a great job? Good pay. Good hours. A job you enjoy. Low levels of stress. There are planty. (That was supposed to be ‘plenty’ but I’m gonna keep it, because I like that typo)

I realize now, that whether he knew it or not, Tommy was teaching me to be a professional poker player more than he was teaching me to be a poker player. So many of the things I learned will help me make more money, enjoy playing, not get stressed out, and most of these were things not really related to the game of poker. But even the style of play I was taught, I realize now, is best for making consistent money while reducing swings and stress.

So let’s go back to the question of where I want to be in regards to cash games. If I were to learn to play 10/20nl with the style of many of the top players there, I would have enormous swings. My hourly rate would be better than my current one, but I wouldn’t be able to put in the same number of hours. I would have too many losing days, and I’d get stressed out and have to quit for a day or two. It might affect my life outside poker. I probably wouldn’t find playing as relaxing and fun. I might not even make as much money per year if the swings cause me to take too much time off, or worse, if they cause me to tilt away money.

Do I still want to be able to do this? Yes. I will learn how to crush the 10/20 game, and how to play a super LAG style. If nothing else, I’ll be able to see whether I like it better or not, and I’ll have the style in my arsenal for when a game situation dictates I play that way. I’ll continue learning new styles and find out how to beat the 25/50 game, and the 50/100 game. That’s just the way I am. I wouldn’t stay content forever with just making a great living at 5/10. It took me about one and a half years to be comfortable playing against any player in the world in a single table tourney. Maybe in a little over a year I’ll be able to say the same thing about cash games. Maybe it’ll be longer. Maybe it won’t happen.

But I don’t mind waiting. In the meantime, while I’m achieving my goals of enjoying the game and making good money, when I find myself in a 10/20 game, and notice a top super-aggressive player running over the table, I won’t be discouraged anymore by knowing that he’s a better poker player than me. Hey, I still might be the best professional poker player at that table."

[IRICHeyes]

I never read that before. Super post(s) J

[Go_Blue88]

ha real cool post. your OP was kinda boring and almost generic (ya, wanna fight about it), but this one is fun.

[aejones]

[ QUOTE ]
I’ve never been playing Scrabble and been like, “Oh man. I could use this Z on that triple letter score space, but I need it to take my friend to the zoo later.” (That’s the best analogy I could come up with)

[/ QUOTE ]

gold

[Pudge714]

jman,
I remember reading that post this summer as as soon as TC made his post. I instantly thought of this post, nice to reread again.

[ QUOTE ]

Poker (gambling in general) is unique in that it’s a game of skill that absolutely revolves around money. Most games have other focuses. In chess, your ‘weapons’ are the pieces; your pawns, your knights, etc. In Scrabble, you use your letter square thingies. In poker, in addition to your cards, money is your weapon. That fact completely changes the nature of the game, because you are using something that you can also use in the real world. I’ve never been playing Scrabble and been like, “Oh man. I could use this Z on that triple letter score space, but I need it to take my friend to the zoo later.” (That’s the best analogy I could come up with)

[/ QUOTE ]
Awesome.

[blainestar]

[ QUOTE ]
This is basically waht gigabet said in his sucess/failure post. might want to reread it.

[/ QUOTE ]

link?

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is basically waht gigabet said in his sucess/failure post. might want to reread it.

[/ QUOTE ]

link?

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, I think I'm saying something different, but this is a great post nonetheless:

Almost There with Success and Failure

[recallme]

[ QUOTE ]
This is basically waht gigabet said in his sucess/failure post. might want to reread it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Could you give a link?

[JMa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is basically waht gigabet said in his sucess/failure post. might want to reread it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Could you give a link?

[/ QUOTE ]

seriously...you cant be for real