"Don't wait for it to happen. Don't even want it to happen. Just see what does happen."

lol nice

The thing is winning HSNL players are obviously better at poker than winning ssnl players but they are not necessarily better at controlling their emotions etc.

exactly.
try losing a $30k pot then come back to us

jman's post is excellent for those of us who have strayed off this course. when i was winning consistently i played the game as he describes. now im all over the place lol

jman,

i think that ideally, there's one situation where you should be upset by your opponent's actions, and that is when you have in some way forced them, tricked them, or enticed them in to "outplaying" you.

i here want to definte what i mean by "outplaying." i don't mean the normal "he played better than you," i mean to convey that you've done something yourself that in some way compelled your opponent to put you in a spot that you are uncomfortable with, that you could have avoided.

in all other spots, when we're thinking "oh come on check behind" it's because, basically, we don't want to have to face the decision of what to do if they bet, we just want to see the showdown (or frequently we feel that if they check we win the vast majority). this is basically to me just a version of pot control. you don't want to have to face big bets on the end with 3rd pair because well, you have 3rd pair. though the big bet gives you an opportunity to make a good call or throw away the worst hand, or raise him, or whatever, hard decisions are hard, and so you sometimes play in order to keep the decisions hard.

i guess what i'm trying to say is that when you have chosen a line against a particular opponent (and this must be more extreme in heads up games) that causes your opponent to make a play that switches your decision from easy to hard (bad bet sizes that then get raised on the turn or river does this a lot), then i get upset, but with myself, not with my opponent.

my opponents are "allowed" to play decently, and i don't get upset when they make me make decisions. i just try to choose not to play against the ones who consistently find ways to make me make very hard decisions, even on smallish pots.

/end rambly semi-nonsensical post.

c

I agree with the getting upset at yourself part. Nothing makes me more angry than when I make a big mistake, including monster suckouts or hitnrunners. (Although it's close)

But just as an expert logician loves a nearly impossible logic problem, shouldn't an expert poker player love an extremely difficult spot?

Expert logician doesn't go on tilt if he can't solve a logic problem (or makes the wrong decision) and even if he does, he doesn't have to worry about losing his moneys that might set him back when he is grinding low-stakes to move up again.

FWIW, poker is a high complicated game with psychological warfare blah blah blah. I enjoy snapping a bluff with A high as the next guy, but I know for sure the level of excitement (at least for me in the game of poker) isn't as satisfying as calling a shove with the nuts.

i play bettwe when underrolled, much better. probably because i am way too rowdy and reckless when i have 75 buyins.

If you love the challenge Jman, I can see why you play so high underolled.

I never play my A game unless I am playing underolled. There's just no pressure to focus.

have you thought about why you play nosebleed stakes underrolled? i mean really sat down and thought about it and asked if the risk you take every day is really worth you not playing optimally (although you are probably learning faster because you are literally sweating out every hand).

you seem like a smart enough guy and a good player, why put yourself through the stress and risk of ruin? i guess i'm just not like i'm most players but i'm completely rolled for these games but still don't play the nosebleed stakes.

s

I'm working on this now too. There are many things in poker that we care about, but that we have no control over at all. For example, the cards that we get, the cards that fall on flop, turn and river, the cards that our opponents get, and the actions of our opponents. We care about these things, while we have no control over them, which causes a needless emotional rollercoaster.

The only thing that matters is your action. It's obvious, yet we all care so much about how much we're up or down and to how many two outers we lost. It doesn't even matter if you win or lose; it's all variance in the short term, and in the long term it only matters that you do the right thing. So what we all should do is become totally detached of results, money, etc. But that's harder than it sounds I think.

No, the perfect player wouldn't even have to shrug it off. The outcome of the hand doesn't matter. He would just keep playing his A-game.

Yeah, posts like this are surreal to me.

I remember when (I think) johnnybeef made a post just like this saying "I just realized I shouldn't get mad and berate the guys who call my pushes with bad hands -- if I knew that hand was in their calling range, then it's my own fault, and if I didn't, then maybe I need to adjust."

And I think, isn't this fundamental to the foundation of winning poker?

Clearly these guys realize they are playing against a range of players based on incomplete knowledge of the player, and a range of hands, and clearly they know not to be results oriented. But somehow they are involved in a constant results-oriented discussion in their heads about which player their opponent turned out to be, and even about which hand he turned out to have?

When you hope your opponent will shove if he has a flush, you're focusing on results. And if he doesn't have a flush, and you're disappointed, that's results oriented. But if he does have a flush and doesn't shove, that's also results-oriented. You had incomplete information about who he was, and you got it wrong, and if it isn't because you guessed badly, then it's just because that's the way the dice rolled.

I think this is because we only really tend to discourage results-oriented thinking in terms of which cards our opponents held or which cards came on the board. But our culture is so ready to call our opponents donks and idiots and ******s that it may be hard for some people to break out of that mold and to acknowledge in their inner dialogue that their opponents are just another random element to which they need to respond in a non-results-oriented manner.

Thank you for the post Taylor. I haven't ever really thought about it. I'll do so today and get back to you.

no prob. i'm interested to know your answer and it could be helpful for a lot of people.

tc

Taylor is completely rolled for any game.

Taylor has a "substantial position in the stock market" yes thats a quote hahahahahaha

Taylor has turned down huge hedge fund offers hahahahahaha

Taylor plays "in the biggest games in the world and beats them" hahahahahahaha


I'm sure you're a nice kid, but do you have any idea what you sound like ? You come across as a suburban frat boy who needs approval and attention for being a very good 10-20 player.

The long run never comes. Think about that for a while.

Good discussion. The problem is: I doubt anyone of us isn't smart enough to realize that playing without anger and having a very solid emotional control at the tables is one of the key elements for success in poker.
Nonetheless it's easier to understand the facts than using them...
I think for Jman it seems the stakes he plays are way to high for him to take the optimal approach to the game. There is mathematically no difference between losing 100bb on 1/2$ or 100/200$ when it comes to the amount within the limit. Problem is, this is the real world and 100k pots hurt way more and longer than 10$ones.. You might be one of the up and coming high stake players but I think you might be better off changing limits and playing lower. Reevaluate your thinking about why you play this high and if it is really because of earnrate or more because your ego want to mess with the best? Of course you will learn quicker and improve faster that way but is it worth the stress and emotional rollercoster you'd have to fight with ?
If I was you, I would step down a little, build a solid roll for those stakes and take life a little more relaxed.. Poker is gonna be around a long long time, it doesn't matter if you play those stakes now or at the end of the year. The only difference is your ego might not want to wait that long but by the end of the year you won't have that pain in your stomach after losing that big pot as a huge fav because you are way better used to it and sufficent rolled.. You already earn more money than 99% of the worlds population and you archived a freedom within your "work" that barely any of this remaining 1% have access to.
On one hand beeing hungry for more is why the human race archived and invented astonishing things but on the other hand having a too huge ego is what keeping us from reaching further goals and not only that but we might even fail because we trip over ourselfs.. Don't risk it if it's unneccessary. Taylors approach looks a lot more relaxed while the EV in the longrun might not be as much of a difference as one might expect..

Name one thing among these that isn't true. Also lol @ 10-20, and at Taylor being the bragging type.

Jealousy is a bitch ain't it. It must eat you alive day after day. Now someone ban this assclown.

99.9% of the people who go through a significant cold streak are unable to maintain this logic.

So no, it's not as simplistic as you are trying to make it.

completely agree considering all the dick waving contests go on among HSNL players Taylor never says anything.

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."

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

lol, this post A++++