First things first; I don't think this thread belongs in the "Psychology" forum despite the title, as the kind of psychology I'm interested in investigating is more in the field of philosophy of psychology and has nothing to do with actual psychology in poker.

I'm a philosophy student in my final year and have recently completed a module on self-deception. Gambling in general, poker and especially the phenomenon of "rigtards" are in my opinion genuinely fascinating examples of self-deception and denial. I'm interested in investigating the actual mental state of gamblers in denial and in particular (which is why i'm posting it here) "rigtards". Obviously rigtard threads tend to be dominated by mockery and silliness (understandable) and occasionally attempts to argue against their supposedly genuine beliefs with mathematics and statistics.

What I'm interested in however is rigtardedness and losing gamblers as examples of the potential of human psychology.

There are two widely regarded types of self-deception.

The gifted child - type 1

Alex's parents know that he regularly misbehaves at school, performs poorly and does not display any sort of remarkable intelligence. Yet despite his disruptive nature and contrary to all evidence presented to them, they believe he is a gifted child.

Ron Atkinson - type 2

Ron regularly displays racial bias when evaluating the abilities of black footballers and uses racist and unacceptable language when describing them. However, because he believes that being a racist is unfavourable and a negative quality, he denies to himself that he harbours any kind of racist thoughts.

These two types have one major thing in common - in both circumstances there is an underlying motivating desire which is affecting the agent attempting to deceive themselves.

Yet how is self-deception even possible?

The static paradox: its impossible to believe a and not a.

The dynamic paradox: if one engages in self-deception by strategically trying to subject themselves to biased evidence towards a favourable conclusion - how can they possibly be genuinely unaware that their belief is flawed?

It seems as if most of our beliefs are utterly uncontrollable. If you are presented with adequete evidence for something in most cases you will helplessly believe it. If I offered you $1k to believe the moon is made of green cheese you couldn't do it etc.etc.

There are two types of models for self-deception. The intentionalist and non-intentionalist. The former basically says that all self-deception is intentional - stemming from some sort of an autonomous inner self that demands that our rational side seeks out and finds things that fulfill our desires. Thus we find ourselves intentionally seeking to fulfill the desire to see our children as gifted etc. However - this runs into the two paradoxes above.

The latter basically claims self-deception to essentially be a mistake influenced by motivating desires - yet that too seems to be implausible - simply because even the capability to attempt to deceive oneself alone seems to disprove this. If we're capable of trying to deceive ourselves, then self-deception is no accident. Its not a mere mistake.

Anyway - hopefully I've given an informative/decent/non-patronising description of the general idea.

So how does this all relate to poker?

Stupid sub-title I know but I'm in a rush.

How on earth DOES a losing gambler convince himself he's winning or that its the right thing to do and even more importantly - what does a "rigtard" actually THINK and BELIEVE? The potential for cognitive dissonance really is astounding.

Now in my opinion I think that many rigtards its a case of simply a outcry/swear word reaction. "**** this rigged ****" etc. But I think that there are several who genuinely believe it and yet still deposit. One thing I think a lot of them might do is perhaps rationalize it to themselves in the same way as fruit machine players: "The machine pays out eventually and it'll be my "turn" to get lucky as thats all it is".

But yet...how can anyone really believe that sort of thing? How can someone keep depositing whilst believing the games rigged...to what extent DO they believe the game is rigged? How do they rationalize trying to play good poker whilst believing the game is based on luck? How do intelligent people vapourise hundreds of dollars at expensive slot machines in Vegas KNOWING deep down they can't be profitable whilst they're fully capable of analysing profitability and expected value at length in their banking jobs?

AND WHY IS THE HUMAN BRAIN CAPABLE OF AND/OR BENEFIT FROM THIS CAPABILITY FOR SUCH RAW IRRATIONALITY!?

interesting;
for starters no "live pokertracker"; I guess a lot of losing players just don't know how much they really lost over time + memory biais; they just remember that one time when they won big?

as far as online rigtard; I guess for them the fact they lose is the proof of riggedness? they're like gambling addicts or sth and their goal is actually to lose?

Incidentally I didn't make any sort of analysis, I just described the module outline and asked for other people's thoughts on the subject.

What do you do for a living character?

Other Other Topics Discussion of arts & entertainment, pop culture, food & drink, health and exercise, fashion, relationships, work, and just about anything else in life except poker, sports, religion and politics.

Hm. Well I'm not really talking about poker to be honest, or even psychology in relation to self-management as an aspect of poker strategy.

I'm talking about philosophy of psychology and about the power of the human mind with respect to cognitive dissonance. Triggered of course by my own interests in philosophy, psychology, poker and general gambling.

Seems a fairly difficult thread to categorise.

Any moderators available to move this thread to a more appropriate forum if they feel it is necessary? If indeed the psychology page would have been more appropriate?

Moved from OOT- ignore all the gifs

Two Plus Two Poker Forums > General Gambling > Psychology

You're welcome.

The psychology section is littered with nonsense and moved badbeat and tilt stories.

The general legitimate purpose of that section of the forum seems to me to be psychology in terms of self-management and discipline that one can add to their poker game.

This thread really doesn't have anything to do with that.