How Do Non-Rational Players Succeed in Poker?

[dodgybob]

<3 VV.

[Squareview]

[ QUOTE ]
ZJ,

This is one of the best posts this year imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

not really but a good read.

[DeMaci]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good post, I thought about some of the same things when Paul Phillips mentioned this book in his blog

[/ QUOTE ]

El Diablo mentioned the same book to me. Unfortunately I haven't heard of it until today, but I'll put it right atop my list of books to read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since this thread got bumped, besides this book, does anyone else have any recomendations about books of this nature to read?

[Abra Kadabra]

Being intelligent and logical are characteristics of a great player.

What makes someone "intelligent". If someone is bad at math, does that mean they are not intelligent.

[shootaa]

they multiaccount?

[gball]

[ QUOTE ]
fwiw, pattern recognition is subsumed under the heading 'logic'. pure intellectual problem solving is inductive reasoning and nothing else.

the 'pattern recognition' used at the tables, however, isn't done by the prefrontal cortex and isn't purely intellectual. you're making decisions involving risk and your personal well-being. how you evaluate success and failure isn't determined entirely by your assessment of EV - it is your EV interpeted within the value schema of your serotonergic and dopaminergic systems (and a bunch of other emotional circuits). successful players aren't simply better at analysing poker or finding patterns or estimating EV or any of that. a cursory perusal of the forums would dispell that supposition (most posts w/articulated analysis are awful). what they do seem to be able to do is understand the fundamentals of the game to avoid saliently exploitable errors AND, more importantly, their emotional circuits give them feedback conducive to success within the current environment. behavioral economics covers topics pertaining to this.

anywho, the gist of my post is that the line of demarcation should be b/n analytic thought and emotional evaluations, not 'conscious' and 'unconscious' (arbitrary distinction if ever there was one w/no basis in reality). many of the donkeys who are losing money are in fact quite a lot better than most professionals at thinking analytically. that DOES NOT mean they'll make better decisions as measured by an objective metric like EV. risk assessment isn't mediated by the intellect.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had to look up 10 words in a dictionary (yes, I counted) to read this post, so I am impressed. Also, please update your blog [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[timex]

[ QUOTE ]


I had to look up 10 words in a dictionary (yes, I counted)

[/ QUOTE ]

Thinly veiled brag much?
Not only is your vocabulary much better than mine, so are your counting skills.

[allingator]

[ QUOTE ]
Being intelligent and logical are characteristics of a great player.

What makes someone "intelligent". If someone is bad at math, does that mean they are not intelligent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mathematical intelligence is simply one form of intelligence, it is not to say someone is generally intelligent or not because they are particularly adept or insufficient at one particular area of study. Different people will have different types of intelligence and be exercising different parts of their brain, be it more analytical and practical areas of thought or more emotional and sensory higher levels of thinking.

[recallme]

"Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking"
Is this book still a good read or are better books around now?

[btmagnetw]

[ QUOTE ]
"Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking"
Is this book still a good read or are better books around now?

[/ QUOTE ]stumbling onto happiness was better imo.