I will briefly throw in my two cents (Marky take notes and get motivated to be more concise :-)). I think this applies to most endeavors, golf being my area of 'expertise' I will use that as an example. For as long as I can remember we have argued the merits of in game mindset, technique, preparatory mindset, strategy etc etc. Applied strategy without the technique to back it up will fail. Strategy without an understanding of your limitations will fail. Motivation without strategy or technique will fail. Tiger Woods decimated the field at Hoylake by understanding his limitations (yes the best player in the World at the time) His strategy was to leave driver in the bag and effectively play a longer course than the rest of the field, without total confidence in his technique and his ability to hit greens with longer approaches, this would have failed. I can scream at the mirror until I am blue in the face and motivate the **** out of myself, but unless I learn how, I am not able to consume as many kebabs as Hhy........ So the takeaway (pun intended) is that everything counts..... :-). Now wheres my fence? Posted by HENDRIK62
Jez(misty4me) Tilson used to be a pro golfer, until his stomach outgrew his arms and he couldnt swing a club any more.
In Response to Re: poker the good the bad and the average : Yeah I remember my dad saying after he was chatting to you that you had switched from backing the horses to playing poker. I would never try to say that having a sound understanding of strategy is not a massively important factor in poker. I just feel that the motivational or psychological aspects and the more quantitative strategic aspects of the game are completely seperate variables which influence one another and our results, but that can be tackled in unison. To give a practical example which addresses the points you mention... I think if you took 100 erratic losing players with ROIs of -10% and worked on their all round psychological approach to the game you would see a positive influence on their results. Maybe it would only take their roi to -5%, but I think there would be an overall positive difference. If you took 100 highly successful players with ROIs of +75% and worked on their all round psychological approach then again I would expect to see a positive influence on results. Basically I would agree there is no substitute for sound strategy but feel that you could see a general improvement in any group of players if their overall psychological approach to poker was improved. Alas IMO the psychological aspects matter to all players regarless of level and the strategic side matters to all levels of player if the desire is to improve results. The improvement would of course only be relative to how they were currently performing. So I am not saying that you can make a 'terrible player' start to own Matt, Timmy or Tommy etc on the felt because you have 'motivated them'. I have no doubt however that, on average, such players would at the very least be a less 'terrible player' and show improvement in relation to how they were performing previously. Posted by markycash
I am not sure if it is my scepticism, or that you have picked out a couple of bad examples.
I cant help thinking that your erratic losing players that were grumpy, because they are losing money, would still be erratic losing players after the motivation, but a little happier because they were losing a bit less money. Also would they not be back to square one when the motivation wore off.
And that if you were looking for a group of the most motivated players it would be those with rois of 75% plus. These players would undoubtably already be highly motivated, but not only that I think it would be difficult to improve so much on such a high roi.
All you can do is honestly look at how you have played and review hands with an unbiased view. you also need to ensure your in the right frame of mind before playing. dont put too much pressure on yoruself, no one plays A game all the time. impossible Posted by rancid
In Response to Re: poker the good the bad and the average : Jez(misty4me) Tilson used to be a pro golfer, until his stomach outgrew his arms and he couldnt swing a club any more. Posted by HAYSIE
Talk about mean. He used to drive to Sheffield from West Wales, because some bloke he was in school with became a dentist and would do his teeth for free.
In Response to Re: poker the good the bad and the average : Talk about mean. He used to drive to Sheffield from West Wales, because some bloke he was in school with became a dentist and would do his teeth for free. Posted by HAYSIE
Really good thread this one, some great posts and even a bluff/slowroll from Marky "I could ramble on forever about this side to poker but I will spare you all from a massive wall of text for now "
I think there is two things here. Ability and trying to play to the best oif your ability. You want to try and play to the best of your ability but you also want to improve your ability.
Some peoples A game might mean they breakeven, some can feel they played their C game but still won an MTT.
Really good thread this one, some great posts and even a bluff/slowroll from Marky " I could ramble on forever about this side to poker but I will spare you all from a massive wall of text for now" I think there is two things here. Ability and trying to play to the best oif your ability. You want to try and play to the best of your ability but you also want to improve your ability. Some peoples A game might mean they breakeven, some can feel they played their C game but still won an MTT. Posted by MattBates
Really good thread this one, some great posts and even a bluff/slowroll from Marky " I could ramble on forever about this side to poker but I will spare you all from a massive wall of text for now " I think there is two things here. Ability and trying to play to the best oif your ability. You want to try and play to the best of your ability but you also want to improve your ability. Some peoples A game might mean they breakeven, some can feel they played their C game but still won an MTT. Posted by MattBates
Do you think that your own perception of how you have played can be very much affected by how well you have run.
For example if you are running really well, winning every flip, hitting every flop, and so on, you feel you have played really well. Whereas on another day, when you are running really badly, cant win a flip, cant hit a flop for love or money, and pulled all your hair out, you may just feel you havent played so well.
When on both occasions, in reality, you may have played equally well.
In Response to Re: poker the good the bad and the average : Do you think that your own perception of how you have played can be very much affected by how well you have run. For example if you are running really well, winning every flip, hitting every flop, and so on, you feel you have played really well. Whereas on another day, when you are running really badly, cant win a flip, cant hit a flop for love or money, and pulled all your hair out, you may just feel you havent played so well. When on both occasions, in reality, you may have played equally well. Posted by HAYSIE
Some of the time yes but a good example is a couple of nights ago I won two MTTs but felt I played bad that session.
I think when you have played a lot it is easier to analyse how well you have played and to try and be impartial but I do think it can be easy to blame bad sessions on running bad and to run well and think it is because you are the best player ever!
In Response to Re: poker the good the bad and the average : Some of the time yes but a good example is a couple of nights ago I won two MTTs but felt I played bad that session. I think when you have played a lot it is easier to analyse how well you have played and to try and be impartial but I do think it can be easy to blame bad sessions on running bad and to run well and think it is because you are the best player ever! Posted by MattBates
In Response to Re: poker the good the bad and the average : Of course I could, if I can make 3p a game I only need to play 267 games an hour to make £8 an hour. Posted by MattBates
Firstly you need ability you must be in the right frame of mind plus bankroll is important if your playing off a smallish bank roll your immediately under pressure large bankroll you play with confidence and can take greater risks. I've played for 12 years on numerous sites made money every year without using a set strategy for mtts for me that becomes too predictable u need to adapt quickly to all situations I have numerous ways of playing each hand dependent on previous action prior to my turn plus the player involved too play each one differently mental notes or written notes on as many players as possible big help too just an opinion .
In Response to Re: poker the good the bad and the average : Of course I could, if I can make 3p a game I only need to play 267 games an hour to make £8 an hour. Posted by MattBates
Another bluff, surely you don't aim to make minimum wage?
Another really good topic, related to the other one about how serious to take your poker IMO.
To add a little twist, I remember talking to someone online long while ago about how mood affects your play. I remember noting that poker also affects your mood, so it's sometimes rather circular as a process!
Comments