Developing a 100% Rational Approach to Poker
Posted by João Guimarães
Posted by
João Guimarães
posted in
Poker Journals
Developing a 100% Rational Approach to Poker
Hey folks, so I already have two dead blogs here on this forum. I do not want to give too much thought to it, as I have quite a few things to write here and I prefer to save some mental energy, but I believe the main, short version of the why I let them die is because I did not have a real vision on why I should really have a blog to begin with.
I always struggled with the usual human biases and psychological traps, as I believe most or all of you also do, while knowing deep inside that they were holding me back, in life and in poker. Everything, from the unconscious attention whoring, to the also unconscious (sometimes not) seeking of validation, to the common confirmation bias. And an ego problem that would, fortunately very rarely, begin flame wars (in another forum) because I could not just let it go, or DGAF about some troll criticizing my and others game in harsher terms.
Well, so what do I want to do differently, and why do I think this will be better? First of all, I do not think anyone here would argue against me saying that rationality is a better approach than an emotional driven one, even though it involves fighting against all our inner human urges.
As I posted before in my old blogs, I view poker nowadays as an investment operation, where we are looking to grow our capital by constantly making good decisions, improving how we play and moving up (we do not see the compounding effect in poker, unfortunately, as we do not move up instantly and, also, there should be always some winrate decreasing the further we go. With that said, there is still some incomplete compounding as winrates do not necessarily halve for each double in stakes). Thus, my vision to what successful poker should be is improving my skills aiming to be among the best, technically speaking, and then, allowing the bankroll to grow so I can play the highest possible stakes. Since I do not know my skill ceiling, I do not know what stake will be my highest one, but this will not, ever, block me from keep pushing.
My initial principles to achieve that (that I may refine or even discard if they are flawed):
1) I should play only when I am feeling my best.
2) I should have an improvement plan that I will keep doing consistently.
3) I should have a good financial approach to the game, with definite targets for moving up and/or down, that is good enough so I will not question it or try to change along the way due to emotions, other peoples opinions etc.
4) My approach to the forums and community should be a negative one. Allow me to explain this:
If I post a HH here, people saying that I played it good, did not make any mistake and, if I lost, it was just variance, is a very good emotional boost. I get validation. I feel better about myself. My ego feels better. And I do not improve one bit.
Worse, as happened with me, I get so addicted to this boost that I almost never post any problematic hands, but just the ones I am almost certain were good plays, as doing this, my ego does not get hurt.
No, I need people to criticize my play, to offer better points of view, to expose me to a better thought process, to speak candidly when they do not agree with something I said. And to do this, I have to be very careful, and very deliberate, with what HHs I post, to do it with the really problematic ones, the ones I did not really know what I was doing. This is how I think I will learn from other peoples advice, while at the same time improving my mental apporach to the game, and who knows, to life in general.
This is also how I would like to approach future coaching lessons.
Anyway, this is my strategical view of how I would like to approach poker from now on. Post is getting too big and I am getting hungry. Next post, I will detail my tactical approach.
Cheers
Loading 3 Comments...
Well fed, so let´s start with the first tactical aspect of poker: Bankroll Management.
In my opinion, while playing poker for a living is not exactly a requirement for success, and it might not necessarily be the most financially rewarding investment, improving at poker, especially at a faster rate, seems so energy/time consuming that I think not playing for a living while still attempting it is a great way to burn out very quickly.
Assuming we are playing for a living, I can see two strategies (let's say for example 1 we are already at a limit we beat and we can realistically live off):
1) Withdrawing constantly, maybe once a month or so, to cover living expenses.
2) Having maybe 6 months, 1 year of living expenses, or more, and not touching the roll till the 6 months/1 year etc timeframe, and allowing the roll to grow in the meantime.
I do not need to be a genius to know 1) would require a bigger, way bigger roll. With the obvious consequence that our move ups will happen very slowly, especially if the winrate is not good enough or we face bad variance. No mathematical proof here, but assuming you already have the 1 year live roll, from your previous job you quit last week :) , 2) is the most profitable way to go, simply because we can be more aggressive with the buy-in requirement for each stake.
But, why do we need a bankroll management plan to begin with? Well, because we do not want to go broke. But is going broke always a problem? It really depends, but I would say that, if we are playing a low stake we know, from previous experience, that we beat, and if redepositing is not a big hassle, and if the values are so low for our current situation that redepositing once or, worst case, twice, will not be a problem, then beginning the journey on a tight roll and allowing us to go broke if needed seems the most efficient approach.
Ofcourse, the time will come when we cannot do this anymore. It is a limit we do not really know whether we are profitable or not (in my case 50nl). No bankroll management will save us from going broke if we are a loser at the stake, right? Or, the value of the money is too big. In this case, we need a strategy to moving up and to moving down.
Again, I can see two ways here: Tight stops, and loose stops. The tighter the stop, the less of a roll we need before moving up, but we will be moving up and down very, very often. The looser the stop, the more buy-ins we will need before moving up, but the move downs will not be that frequent, even if we end up being net losers at the limit. To me, this is really important. If we end up failing at our shots, with the looser stop loss, three times, we probably will have a relatively big sample, enough to look for a coach and have something to work on. We can also be more detached about our cashier while playing. The most obvious negative is that the rebuilding will take more time. Overall, I think a looser stop is the more efficient approach, both to give us the best chance of sticking to the new limits, and also for overall improvement.
How will I approach BRM then? I will follow what I call the Demondoink approach, because I think he was the one who said to me in one old thread that, when playing really low, moving up should be our biggest concern, and it is better to take risks even if we end up having to redeposit, when the value of the money is still low.
I will work with 20 buy-ins for 25NL, redepositing any time it gets lower than 10 BIs. I want to move up anytime I get at least 35 BIs for the new limit, using 10 buy-in stop losses. If I fail at any shot more than 3 times, I will stop moving up and look for a coach I can work with. Rinse and repeat for any new limit I go.
Cheers
GL!
Are you the cute dog on 2+2? :)
Yes :)
Be the first to add a comment