this post makes too much sense for this lol thread, gtfo

The fact that we lose 25% of the time when we check call the Q-10-2 flop to 7 high is somewhat important (I gave him a bdfd) and prob sky shouldn't be glanced over. Especially when we raise preflop and he folds the flop we are winning the 2.25 bet pot 100% of the time.

Hi Huskalator:

We looked at the kindle files today and unfortunately they need more work. So perhaps 7 to 10 days.

Best wishes,
Mason

If i might add...
Just winning the blinds when you open raise on the button and you win when BB fold , it is considered a good result because only the few best hands in limit have the same expectation.

We should be happy to content our self to raise pf in the BB with a good hand and wins OOP on the flop when button fold or cbet.

Thanks for the update and the commitment to quality.

Book review

Hello all,

I’d like to preface this review by saying the amount of poker I actually play these days is somewhat limited, however, I will dabble occasionally both online and live in various games at mid to high stakes. Initially it was Mason's strong background in probability theory and prior work as a statistician that had influenced me to buy Real Poker Psychology. Thus, it should be no surprise that I found the section in the book about why poker is counter intuitive to be of the most interest; at least for advancing my greater understanding of poker.

Indeed an extensive experimental literature has been devoted to the question of how people perceive, process, and evaluate the probabilities of uncertain events in the context of probability learning, intuitive statistics and decision making under risk. Although no systematic theory about psychology has emerged from this literature, several empirical generalizations have been established. Perhaps the most general conclusion is people do not follow principles of probability theory in judging the likelihood of uncertain events. Sometimes people replace the laws of chance by heuristics, which sometimes leads to reasonable estimates and quite often do not.

The heuristic of representativeness should be further investigated. In which a person that follows this, evaluates the probability of an uncertain event, or a sample, by degree to which its i) similar to essential properties of parent population ii) reflects the most notable features of the process by which its generated. One may suggest, that in many situations, Event A is judged more probable than Event B whenever A appears more representative than B. Further more, people consistently judge the more representative event to be the more likely, whether it is or not (kahneman). In addition, Peter Sedlmeier has written about such claims in Improving Statistical Reasoning. In one of his chapters titled, 'Are People Condemned to Remain Poor Probabilist's?’, he explores this topic in great depth. Now with this in mind, there seems to be a general lack of research of the heuristics that develop as it relates to poker which is why I was so excited to read Masons book.

For aspiring poker players, one should understand that probability theory is very important which is routinely a theme mentioned in Masons poker book. In one of the examples, Mason mentions the probability of getting dealt aces dealt in two consecutive hands and the biases one may develop when trying to make sense of this random event. It is this section where I think he can offer the most value to readers.Personally I’d have liked to read more examples, especially from a respected statistician, such as Mason, who is one of the few people to have deep knowledgeable in both fields (probability and poker). However, rest assured you will find lots of other suitable content in Real Poker Psychology to help one improve their general understanding of all things poker. So without any qualms, I would recommend for poker players of all various skills to pick up this book as any potential piece of information, could pay great dividends to your understanding and thus bottom line.

But as someone who is trying to improve my reasoning with intuitive statistics and further study the biases humans are naturally prone to, as it relates to poker, finance and other areas, I was thirsty for more. I believe Mason would be capable of exploring this topic even further, and think he could make great progress in the realm of statistical reasoning as it relates to poker or at least offer suggestions for further reading. Go buy the book everyone and good luck at the tables.

Thanks,

Muffled

Hi Muffled:

Thanks for he review, it's much appreciated.

What's interesting about much of this poker psychology stuff is how much can be explained by probability theory as well as the underlying statistical concepts.

Best wishes,
Mason

IMO,

What's interesting about much of life is how much can be explained by probability theory as well as the underlying statistical concepts.

How does this book solve a tilt problem based on selective and natural attention to bad beats or even to variance there? I am not a beginner anymore and well poker educated in strategy, including gto, and I am pretty good there and it does help me to keep a cool backbone based on strategy and variance from much part. But having seen so many bad beats, I have developed a sensitivity to them that tilts me, and the only spot where I have some rational room for reducing tilt statistically, is to better see horrible bad beats and a series of running bad as variance only and not take it too personally and based on the current run. I need something to deal with the natural psychological biases, that are not really biases but as I see and experience it. I might not be smart enough to overcome that logically, but there might be some way to get a thicker skin or a layer of some counter power to it.

I got a little temporary help from a martial arts movie, the grandmaster, as it is technique in a fight and a cool attitude as so, but I could not keep that head for longer. But I do give value to strategy and understanding variance as something that reduces tilting also, but it hasnt so far got far enough in my case. Trying to stay positive could be a counter power but I cant pull it out of thin air like on permanent bases.

It looks like I just need to work my way through this by getting a larger variance view, and accept and digest it, and learn to deal with bad beats and bad runs, just that i doubt I can do the latter statistically only, and understanding variance needs more work in my head. I think there is more to it than just strategy and knowing what variance is, that is not given enough value and importance here.

With respect to tilt, the book stresses the need to have a thorough knowledge of poker, as well as a sufficient knowledge of probability and statistics, as factors that will prevent you from going on tilt (the book is more than just that). The reason is that you will understand what's happening when those bad beats happen, and will actually welcome the behavior (bad play on the part of your opponents) when you see it.

You state that you're educated in strategy, including gto. If I was you, I'd familiarize myself with the statistics of poker. This includes things like standard deviations, and how it relates to calculating win rates, risk of going broke, and bankroll requirements. You might find that your win rate is not as good as it should be, exposing problems in your strategies, etc. You might also realize that the bad beats that you're recalling are happening at the frequencies they're supposed to--in the long run. Also, statistically speaking, there will be periods of time that bad beats happen more often (and visa versa). And if you truly understand that, why would it bother you when it happens?

Hi Mason, i think this small segment starting at 1m30s to 2min 35, by i would say a decent player (...Matt Hawrilenko ), might give you some pleasing validation of your main argumentation from your book !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRVrtZJz23I

ps: I know it is old but still

Hi Montrealcorp:

Thanks, and I think Matt Hawrilenko has it right. And while I may be the first person to write down and publish some of these different ideas relative to tilt and other mental problems at the poker table, I'm certainly not the only person who understood this stuff.

Best wishes,
Mason

Being There by Peter Sellers and Stanley Kubrick

Loved that movie. But it was directed by Hal Ashby, not Kubrick.

Sadly, Sellers died about six months after it was released.

Here is another interesting comment made by Hoss_TBF (Hawrilenko) that support the idea in Mason book that the sleeping/rest is not really an issue and the idea of knowing to play the game well just make it even easier .

From 29m30s to 30m20s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...rcee6gNk#t=227

What tells me from these 2 clips is Mason probably made a great book.

IsThisRealLife?.jpg

6:45 'As the strength of your read grows....
'As you become super sure...'

I agree with all those bits that he's saying. Which makes me disinclined to accept your main point, a point that others made before you.
So you learn all this stuff as well as you can and you sit down and play and what matters not so much at all is the state of your mind (you do at least admit that the state of your mind fluctuates according to whether you're tired/tilted/emotional?) but rather the extent of your knowledge, that's what you're saying.
What is the psychology research behind these assertions?

The research is this player played poker has well as anybody and he does tell you that once you attain a certain degree of expertise, certain solution for tilt issue proposed by some book might not be has needed has some think.

It is like driving a car, someone who drives a car for living ( having an expertise in this ) like a trucker, will not be affected has much from tiilt ( or if you prefer anger made by countless reasons on the road) or tireness ( it will affected much less than a normal person) which he would still affect him to some degree but not enough to actually stop driving after 10 hours while a normal person would probable stop ....

I mean this is common sense .

Did you realy focus on the last 20 sec of the last clip ?
Pretty amazing stuff like knowing down your strategy effectively reduce fatigue compare to someone who do not know the game as well because the mental effort would be bigger for him over long period of play !
So even sleeping more would not prevent you from getting tirrd over long session of play while playing better will .

Hi Montrealcorp:

Thanks for putting this up. I think what's important is that as more information like this that gets out, it will turn away many marginal poker players from the fairly worthless mental stuff that is currently actively being promoted and direct them to improve their understanding of all things poker.

Also, 2+2 is well aware of Matt Hawrilenko. In fact, in one of our books, The Intellgent Poker Player by Philip Newall, Matt is referenced in several spots and much of his work is also reviewed.

Best wishes,
Mason

I think I have to get this book, just based on all the passionate discussion it has incited.

Hi chrisshiherlis:

A post like yours above seems to imply that the on the side of mental coaches there are lots of studies that support their position while there are none that support mine. First, you need to understand that as far as I know, there are no studies that support the position of the poker mental coaches, and this includes Tendler. What they do, as far as I can tell, is to go to studies that are about various sports where things like speed, timing, and coordination are required and this has, at best, little to do with poker. So when they reference some of these studies, not only do I consider it worthless, but I also believe that any good statistician would consider it worthless.

Now on my side, there are no studies that I know about and even if there were I wouldn't care. That's because my arguments are based on simple mathematical modeling and the underlying statistical theory. If you were to read Real Poker Psychology you would quickly see that's this is the case.

When I first announced this book I stressed the idea that I knew little about psychology and that this would be an advantage for me when writing about this subject relative to poker. And in the paragraph above is the reason why.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hey,
I'm amazed you should make the first point about mental game coaches and research support for that, given the overwhelming support that guy has in the poker community. But I'm in agreement with you. There's an obligation for guys like Tendler to get right into threads like this and clearly and straightforwardly expound their position and tie it explicitly to research evidence. They do say it is based on research evidence. Some of which is his own.
The mental game is important and tilt is one of the most important features of poker. If this were not the case there would be no market for poker mental game books/coaching. Some people (like Gripsed, for example), say 'just get over it/forget it'. This is a disaster. For mental game books. Dude, that could have been 3 chapters. But there could well be some good psychology behind his idea. What I'm saying is, expect some mental game 'gurus' to amplify the whole thing for their own ends. I'm not leveling that criticism at Cardner, I'm going through her stuff to answer your other question, and from the little I've read, she seems a pretty straightforward woman. I have to read the rest of the book.
Tendler does seem to approach poker pretty heavily from sports psychology principles. So I agree with what you say about that. In 90%+ of what he says, you could replace the word 'poker' with 'golf' and it would still flow. You're overlooking the obvious similarities between poker and golf however. They both have clubs. Leaderboards. Women are crap at both. You need balls....
I think 'the mental game' has a place, but I'd probably take a different approach from his, and I don't weigh up the mental game's relationship with poker by using his definitions/paradigm.
I look forward to reading your book and seeing your ideas on this, sounds quite ground-breaking. Maybe I won't need all that mental game stuff. It didn't really work for me. When I'm playing poker, I'm playing poker, that's enough space taken in my head already. I don't want to sit there and figure out what type of tilt I'm on.

Yeah his point is good and I agree with you that many 'issues' disappear when your decisions become more automatic and when you know more.
This is certainly true of tilt. For me, the 'mental game' has a lot more to it than classic 'tilt' and the importance of tilt has really been overblown in the literature, probably because it is the easiest to handle.
I do remember pretty well my early days playing poker, it was pretty hard going. You're being thrown around all over the place, so much explicit thought required. Lack of sleep would definitely make it worse. I'm about 16 years on and lack of sleep not so bad for me but definitely still dangerous for my game. Maybe it's just an individual difference. I don't know how much I could ever overcome this by continually developing my knowledge of the game.

This is all in Real Poker Psychologyso I won't get into it much here but sport games, and this includes golf, have an execution component where things like speed, timing, and coordination are important, as well as a knowledge component. In poker, the execution component has to be very small and the knowledge component is quite large. Thus, drawing from sports studies has little value. But I will say the work of Tendler is far better than Cardner. However, now that I have gotten into this stuff more, my recommendation of Tendler's first book is withdrawn. However, I am still reevaluating and this withdrawal is not final.

As for Cardner, keep this in mind. To play poker better it means that you must play some of your hands differently and this new way of playing must be superior than your former way of playing. It's my opinion that there is nothing in the Cardner/Little book that accomplishes this but much that does the opposite. Again, see my book for more discussion.

Best wishes,
Mason

Again, this is all addressed in Real Poker Psychology and you'll see that tilt is a processing problem that produces emotion and not an emotion problem that produces tilt.

Best wishes,
Mason