positive poker vs mental game of poker
Tricia,
I too would love a copy of your dissertation! Email: cjvalade@gmail.com
AKoan,
How is focusing on the 'why' a problem?
I too would love a copy of your dissertation! Email: cjvalade@gmail.com
AKoan,
How is focusing on the 'why' a problem?
I would like to purchase this book and noticed that the ebook price on Ibooks store is different than the kindle store. Anyone know why there is always a price gap of the same ebook between platforms? Usually kindle/Amazon is cheaper. Perhaps a plan by Amazon to corner the market?
Holy **** this thread has a lot of good information in it. Glad you bumped it up.
Mason...the link you posted way back doesn't work any more...do you have another one for this..." A Mathematical Model of Tilt - Cause and Cure"
Mason...the link you posted way back doesn't work any more...do you have another one for this..." A Mathematical Model of Tilt - Cause and Cure"
Even better, I have the paper right here. Hope you enjoy it.
Best wishes,
Mason
The following is a paper that Mason gave at the 15th Annual Conference on Gambling and Risk Taking, jointly sponsored by the University Nevada Reno and the University Nevada Las Vegas, that was held at Caesars Palace Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas. It’s also similar to an article that appeared here a couple of years ago, but has been expanded for more clarity.
A Mathematical Model of “Tilt” — Cause and Cure
by Mason Malmuth
Many years ago, in 1975, I finally left my home at Virginia Tech and went to work as a Mathematical Statistician for the United Stated Census Bureau. Upon arrival, I found myself assigned to an office with several well educated statisticians. This meant that there was always a statistical journal around and an article to read.
After working for a few months, my supervisor brought over the latest journal article that others had already found quite interesting. Unfortunately, I don’t remember the name of the article, who the author was, or what particular journal it was in. So to this unknown author I apologize for not giving proper credit.
The article was about a mathematical definition of humor, and it’s my conviction that tilt follows the same pathways with one major difference. However, for those who don’t know, let’s describe tilt at a poker table:
Generally what happens is that a player, after sustaining a series of losses will begin to play in a sub-optimal manner, and sometimes this can appear to be, and is, quite irrational. Usually it manifests itself by the tilted player playing far too many hands, meaning many hands for which the expectation would be negative. Thus this player will tend to have results much worse than what he would normally expect.
However, by playing too many hands, the tilted player can occasionally get lucky and actually do quite well in the short run. When this happens, the tilting will almost always stop and the steamer will return to their normal game.
Other characteristics can also be seen. This can include yelling at the dealer, demanding that new cards be brought to the table, getting upset at other players, and playing in an extremely aggressive manner.
In addition, I have even noticed that on occasion tilt can carry over from one day to another. On several occasions I have observed a new player sitting down in my game, and after announcing that he was a big loser from the day before, immediately begin to play in a tilted fashion. So it’s clear to me that tilt can last a long time.
Now that we have a definition of tilt out of the way, to understand what is to follow, we need to define a continuous function and a point of discontinuity. And we’ll use this very simple definition:
A continuous function is a line or curve that you can draw across a piece of paper from left to right without lifting up your pen or pencil.
In other words, it will just look like a line, not necessarily straight, that starts on the left side of the paper and finishes on the right. On the other hand, if it’s necessary to lift your pen or pencil up and then set it down at another point producing a gap in what you are drawing, this is a point of discontinuity, and your function is no longer continuous at that point.
Continuing with the article I read many years ago, it then argued that humor was simply points of discontinuity in the logic presented that your brain had to process. And it gave this example which to the best of my ability is repeated below:
There was a young lady who wanted to have a boyfriend. But she had some requirements. She told her friends that her future man needed to be short but well dressed. So her friends introduced her to a penguin.
First off, notice that this little joke is funny. It also contains a logic discontinuity. While a penguin is certainly short, and they do appear to be well dressed, this is obviously not an appropriate boyfriend. But the brain processes this discontinuity, understands it, and finds it funny. And it’s my contention that the fact that the brain can understand what has happened is what causes it to be funny.
Put another way, the brain has figured it out or solved the puzzle, and we’ll come back to this idea below. But as long as the puzzle is solved, humor appears and we find the experience enjoyable.
Three other examples of humorous discontinuities are when Groucho Marx, aka Captain Spalding, stated:
“One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I'll never know.”
Or when Mae West commented:
“When I'm good, I'm very, very good, but when I'm bad, I'm better.”
Or when W. C. Fields said:
“There is not a man in America who has not had a secret ambition to boot an infant.”
It should be obvious, as in the penguin example that was in the original article I read many years ago, what the logic discontinuities are. We see the logic discontinuity and also understand the error of the logic. Thus we laugh.
But what happens when a logic discontinuity happens and we don’t understand the error in the logic. That is, our brain is unable to solve the puzzle that has been presented to it. Do we still find it funny?
It’s my contention, that instead of humor, the brain sort of shorts out, or perhaps gets caught in an infinite logic loop similar to what can be caused by some sort of bad computer programming. This leads to frustration, and in extreme cases, irrational decisions.
Recently, I was sent a paper titled “‘This is just so unfair!’: A qualitative analysis of loss-induced emotions and tilting in on-line poker” by Jussi Paloma, Michael Laakasuoa, and Mikko Salmela from the University of Helsinski in Finland. One of the things that they pointed out is tilted players often don’t sleep well. Could this disruption in sleep be caused by the infinite logic loop that our brain is stuck in still being active?
When playing poker, despite what some others have claimed, I virtually never go on tilt. But there is something I do all the time where tilt occasionally gets the best of me. It’s playing tennis, and this is an activity that has been part of my life since I was a kid, and that was a long time ago.
What will occasionally happen is that I’ll miss an easy shot which is simply impossible to miss, or perhaps miss several shots in a row where I shouldn’t miss any of them, or my service toss isn’t straight when trying to serve, etc. And my mind will view these things as simply being impossible. That is there is no logical way that any of this can happen. I’ve been playing too long and have too much skill for these events to occur. But they do occur and a logical point of discontinuity is manifested.
But unlike the humorous examples given above. There is no solution. I’m not able to realize that a penguin is not a potential boyfriend for a young lady even though he seems to meet some of the criteria, that an elephant was not really in Captain Spalding’s pajamas, that Mae West wasn’t referring to being polite and well behaved, and that we’re not suppose to be kicking little kids across the room. My logic just fails because, again, there is no solution. Or at least it seems that way.
This brings us to poker. Here it’s my opinion the same problem occurs for many people. When they lose several hands in a row, or can’t understand how their aces are cracked, or have trouble dealing with running bad, it’s again a logic disconnect. To the person on tilt, in their mind, the events that just occurred are simply impossible, and thus their logical circuitry, so to speak, gets locked up as the information that their brain needs to process enters some sort of infinite loop.
So what’s the solution to this? It’s very simple. Understand poker and the probabilistic events that govern it better. Once you get a better grasp of the facts that your aces can be beat, it’s very possible, and eventually quite likely, to lose several hands in a row, and running bad for sustained periods of time can and will happen, tilt goes away.
In fact, when you see good players who are known not to tilt suffer a horrendous beat, they usually chuckle. Their minds have the solution at the end of the discontinuity. So instead of processing it as frustration, they process all the chips going the wrong way as an “elephant in my pajamas.” That is, they see these events as being funny, not frustrating.
On the other hand, you’ll occasionally hear about a player, usually because he has won a tournament or two, who claims to have never read a poker book. While this may be literally true, it’s also my observation that many of these people are steamers and do poorly in the cash games. I also don’t think their poor results here and lack of studying is coincidental, and suspect that their constant tilting is from an incomplete knowledge of poker.
On our forums at www.twoplustwo.com, I have written many times that understanding the game of poker well is the best cure for tilt. Now most of you can understand my reasoning behind this. Tilt is not a “flight or fight” experience as some people have proposed. (If it were, we would see lots of fights in the poker room, and a poker room fight is something that only happens on very rare occasions.) It’s actually something humorous where the logic that your mind requires gets hung up. And once you acquire enough information that your mind won’t get hung up in an infinite logic loop, tilt should be a thing of the past.
I really like this thread. So much good thoughts in it. And thanks to you, Mason, for sharing this article. I guess, there is so much more truth in it for me, than I prefer.
[QUOTE=Mason Malmuth;44510841]understanding the game of poker well is the best cure for tilt. QUOTE]
1. Founders of LTCM understand the trading game better than 99.99% of their competitors, but when one trade went against them, what did they do?
2. Couple usually understand one another quite well, but when their partner yells , what they usually feel?
3. Suppose Gus hansen understand the game better than 90% of the players on earth, he is not stupid, why did he choose to play against the top 0.1%?
Its all emotion, and I don't think knowledge correlate with emotional quotient.
Just my 2 cents
1. Founders of LTCM understand the trading game better than 99.99% of their competitors, but when one trade went against them, what did they do?
2. Couple usually understand one another quite well, but when their partner yells , what they usually feel?
3. Suppose Gus hansen understand the game better than 90% of the players on earth, he is not stupid, why did he choose to play against the top 0.1%?
Its all emotion, and I don't think knowledge correlate with emotional quotient.
Just my 2 cents
Mason,
While I agree with you that a gap in logic, or a logical discontinuity, is part of the equation for what causes tilt, what’s missing in your analysis is a clear identification of the byproduct of a logical discontinuity within poker. You identify humor as the byproduct of a joke, so naturally there would be a byproduct for poker too. I think it can be seen from the description you give of players who are tilting: getting upset, playing in aggressive manner, demanding, yelling, and steaming. In other words, they’re angry. Anger is the byproduct of a logical discontinuity in poker.
Being angry doesn’t automatically mean a player will play suboptimally. For example, a player who gets pissed off for having made a few mistakes early into a session/tournament and uses that anger as motivation to perform at a high level thereafter. Most often, however, anger leads to suboptimal play. Why anger sometimes leads to bad play can be explained by the Yerkes-Dodson Law, which shows the relationship between emotion and performance.
When any emotion rise too high —anger, fear, excitement, etc—higher brain functions, like thinking, are compromised. The brain “shorts out” as you say. As emotions continue to rise on the right side of the curve, performance drops because a greater degree of thinking is lost. (On the other side of the curve performance suffers when a player is lacking enough energy to think—tired, bored, depressed.) This shutting down of higher level thinking when the emotional system is overactive is often called the “fight or flight mechanism.” I think you take this term too literally; it’s doesn’t have to mean a physical fight. A player who becomes much more aggressive with their play while on tilt, is fighting, just with chips not fists. No matter what the mechanism is called, the organization of the brain dictates that the emotional system has the power to shut down thinking. If it didn’t, a player could be rage tilting and they would retain the ability to think and thus they wouldn’t play suboptimally. The loss of thinking is what causes poor decision making, and excessive emotions is what causes the loss of thinking.
A logical discontinuity is what causes anger in the first place. So I agree with you that understanding the reality of poker is critical. However, I disagree that all of the causes of tilt can be cured with this one solution. Players tilt for a variety of reasons: They hate making mistakes, they hate other players (for reasons such as being arrogant, talking too much, their playing style, and how they treat the dealer), they’re super competitive and hate to lose, they think their better than everyone else and that entitles them to win (ex. Phil Hellmuth). These reasons to tilt are far more personal in nature, but they influence the way many players approach and play the game. The discontinuity in logic that leads to these types of tilt need to be fixed, just as it does for tilt caused by gaps in knowledge of poker. Through a deeper analysis of a player’s reasons for tilt, we can identify and break down flaws and gaps in their logic, and correcting that logic over time cures their tilt.
I don’t think we’re far apart on our analysis of the cause and cure of tilt. The role of emotion was missing from your analysis, and in my view that factor is too critical to omit. Correcting tilt, just like acquiring knowledge, doesn’t happen instantaneously. While a player is in the process of learning the correct logic they need to take steps to prevent their emotions from getting too high. Otherwise the loss of thinking prevents them from consciously applying logic that could be used to correct their tilt while playing. This active application of logic dramatically increases the pace of learning and the pace in which a player can cure their tilt problem. Plus it can also save them a lot of money.
There are more details and theory surrounding my points here—including theories about learning that are in my book. If you’re interested, I’m happy to send you a copy with sections highlighted for you that most pertain to this discussion.
All the best,
Jared
While I agree with you that a gap in logic, or a logical discontinuity, is part of the equation for what causes tilt, what’s missing in your analysis is a clear identification of the byproduct of a logical discontinuity within poker. You identify humor as the byproduct of a joke, so naturally there would be a byproduct for poker too. I think it can be seen from the description you give of players who are tilting: getting upset, playing in aggressive manner, demanding, yelling, and steaming. In other words, they’re angry. Anger is the byproduct of a logical discontinuity in poker.
Being angry doesn’t automatically mean a player will play suboptimally. For example, a player who gets pissed off for having made a few mistakes early into a session/tournament and uses that anger as motivation to perform at a high level thereafter. Most often, however, anger leads to suboptimal play. Why anger sometimes leads to bad play can be explained by the Yerkes-Dodson Law, which shows the relationship between emotion and performance.
When any emotion rise too high —anger, fear, excitement, etc—higher brain functions, like thinking, are compromised. The brain “shorts out” as you say. As emotions continue to rise on the right side of the curve, performance drops because a greater degree of thinking is lost. (On the other side of the curve performance suffers when a player is lacking enough energy to think—tired, bored, depressed.) This shutting down of higher level thinking when the emotional system is overactive is often called the “fight or flight mechanism.” I think you take this term too literally; it’s doesn’t have to mean a physical fight. A player who becomes much more aggressive with their play while on tilt, is fighting, just with chips not fists. No matter what the mechanism is called, the organization of the brain dictates that the emotional system has the power to shut down thinking. If it didn’t, a player could be rage tilting and they would retain the ability to think and thus they wouldn’t play suboptimally. The loss of thinking is what causes poor decision making, and excessive emotions is what causes the loss of thinking.
A logical discontinuity is what causes anger in the first place. So I agree with you that understanding the reality of poker is critical. However, I disagree that all of the causes of tilt can be cured with this one solution. Players tilt for a variety of reasons: They hate making mistakes, they hate other players (for reasons such as being arrogant, talking too much, their playing style, and how they treat the dealer), they’re super competitive and hate to lose, they think their better than everyone else and that entitles them to win (ex. Phil Hellmuth). These reasons to tilt are far more personal in nature, but they influence the way many players approach and play the game. The discontinuity in logic that leads to these types of tilt need to be fixed, just as it does for tilt caused by gaps in knowledge of poker. Through a deeper analysis of a player’s reasons for tilt, we can identify and break down flaws and gaps in their logic, and correcting that logic over time cures their tilt.
I don’t think we’re far apart on our analysis of the cause and cure of tilt. The role of emotion was missing from your analysis, and in my view that factor is too critical to omit. Correcting tilt, just like acquiring knowledge, doesn’t happen instantaneously. While a player is in the process of learning the correct logic they need to take steps to prevent their emotions from getting too high. Otherwise the loss of thinking prevents them from consciously applying logic that could be used to correct their tilt while playing. This active application of logic dramatically increases the pace of learning and the pace in which a player can cure their tilt problem. Plus it can also save them a lot of money.
There are more details and theory surrounding my points here—including theories about learning that are in my book. If you’re interested, I’m happy to send you a copy with sections highlighted for you that most pertain to this discussion.
All the best,
Jared
Mason,
While I agree with you that a gap in logic, or a logical discontinuity, is part of the equation for what causes tilt, what’s missing in your analysis is a clear identification of the byproduct of a logical discontinuity within poker. You identify humor as the byproduct of a joke, so naturally there would be a byproduct for poker too. I think it can be seen from the description you give of players who are tilting: getting upset, playing in aggressive manner, demanding, yelling, and steaming. In other words, they’re angry. Anger is the byproduct of a logical discontinuity in poker.
While I agree with you that a gap in logic, or a logical discontinuity, is part of the equation for what causes tilt, what’s missing in your analysis is a clear identification of the byproduct of a logical discontinuity within poker. You identify humor as the byproduct of a joke, so naturally there would be a byproduct for poker too. I think it can be seen from the description you give of players who are tilting: getting upset, playing in aggressive manner, demanding, yelling, and steaming. In other words, they’re angry. Anger is the byproduct of a logical discontinuity in poker.
Being angry doesn’t automatically mean a player will play suboptimally. For example, a player who gets pissed off for having made a few mistakes early into a session/tournament and uses that anger as motivation to perform at a high level thereafter. Most often, however, anger leads to suboptimal play. Why anger sometimes leads to bad play can be explained by the Yerkes-Dodson Law, which shows the relationship between emotion and performance.
When any emotion rise too high —anger, fear, excitement, etc—higher brain functions, like thinking, are compromised. The brain “shorts out” as you say. As emotions continue to rise on the right side of the curve, performance drops because a greater degree of thinking is lost. (On the other side of the curve performance suffers when a player is lacking enough energy to think—tired, bored, depressed.) This shutting down of higher level thinking when the emotional system is overactive is often called the “fight or flight mechanism.”
I think you take this term too literally; it’s doesn’t have to mean a physical fight.
A player who becomes much more aggressive with their play while on tilt, is fighting, just with chips not fists.
No matter what the mechanism is called, the organization of the brain dictates that the emotional system has the power to shut down thinking.
If it didn’t, a player could be rage tilting and they would retain the ability to think and thus they wouldn’t play suboptimally. The loss of thinking is what causes poor decision making, and excessive emotions is what causes the loss of thinking.
A logical discontinuity is what causes anger in the first place. So I agree with you that understanding the reality of poker is critical.
However, I disagree that all of the causes of tilt can be cured with this one solution.
Players tilt for a variety of reasons: They hate making mistakes, they hate other players (for reasons such as being arrogant, talking too much, their playing style, and how they treat the dealer), they’re super competitive and hate to lose, they think their better than everyone else and that entitles them to win (ex. Phil Hellmuth). These reasons to tilt are far more personal in nature, but they influence the way many players approach and play the game.
I really don't think we're that far apart. You're looking at specific subsets of tilt, and my paper is looking at a general overview of tilt. But they all fit together.
The discontinuity in logic that leads to these types of tilt need to be fixed, just as it does for tilt caused by gaps in knowledge of poker. Through a deeper analysis of a player’s reasons for tilt, we can identify and break down flaws and gaps in their logic, and correcting that logic over time cures their tilt.
I don’t think we’re far apart on our analysis of the cause and cure of tilt.
The role of emotion was missing from your analysis, and in my view that factor is too critical to omit.
Correcting tilt, just like acquiring knowledge, doesn’t happen instantaneously. While a player is in the process of learning the correct logic they need to take steps to prevent their emotions from getting too high.
Otherwise the loss of thinking prevents them from consciously applying logic that could be used to correct their tilt while playing. This active application of logic dramatically increases the pace of learning and the pace in which a player can cure their tilt problem. Plus it can also save them a lot of money.
There are more details and theory surrounding my points here—including theories about learning that are in my book. If you’re interested, I’m happy to send you a copy with sections highlighted for you that most pertain to this discussion.
All the best,
Jared
Jared
Mason
Mason,
While I agree with you that a gap in logic, or a logical discontinuity, is part of the equation for what causes tilt, what’s missing in your analysis is a clear identification of the byproduct of a logical discontinuity within poker. You identify humor as the byproduct of a joke, so naturally there would be a byproduct for poker too. I think it can be seen from the description you give of players who are tilting: getting upset, playing in aggressive manner, demanding, yelling, and steaming. In other words, they’re angry. Anger is the byproduct of a logical discontinuity in poker.
While I agree with you that a gap in logic, or a logical discontinuity, is part of the equation for what causes tilt, what’s missing in your analysis is a clear identification of the byproduct of a logical discontinuity within poker. You identify humor as the byproduct of a joke, so naturally there would be a byproduct for poker too. I think it can be seen from the description you give of players who are tilting: getting upset, playing in aggressive manner, demanding, yelling, and steaming. In other words, they’re angry. Anger is the byproduct of a logical discontinuity in poker.
When any emotion rise too high —anger, fear, excitement, etc—higher brain functions, like thinking, are compromised. The brain “shorts out” as you say. As emotions continue to rise on the right side of the curve, performance drops because a greater degree of thinking is lost. (On the other side of the curve performance suffers when a player is lacking enough energy to think—tired, bored, depressed.) This shutting down of higher level thinking when the emotional system is overactive is often called the “fight or flight mechanism.”
Players tilt for a variety of reasons: They hate making mistakes, they hate other players (for reasons such as being arrogant, talking too much, their playing style, and how they treat the dealer), they’re super competitive and hate to lose, they think their better than everyone else and that entitles them to win (ex. Phil Hellmuth). These reasons to tilt are far more personal in nature, but they influence the way many players approach and play the game.
Let's just take your first example, "They hate making mistakes." Couldn't it be that the mind tries solve the problem of why they make mistakes and can't, thus the result is the mind getting hung up in tilt.
I really don't think we're that far apart. You're looking at specific subsets of tilt, and my paper is looking at a general overview of tilt. But they all fit together.
I really don't think we're that far apart. You're looking at specific subsets of tilt, and my paper is looking at a general overview of tilt. But they all fit together.
This is the only part of your post I'm going to address. I've been playing poker in public cardrooms since 1980 starting in the old cardrooms of Gardena California, and my statement of virtually never seeing a fight goes back to this time period.
Also, these places were not like the places where we play live poker today. Specifically, it was really difficult to get thrown out for more than a day, no one got thrown in jail, and I never heard of a law suit of any kind among the players. Of course today, these comments would not be accurate.
By the way, I do know something from my reading of poker games in the Old West, and there are no famous poker game fights that I'm aware of. Probably one of the reasons for this was that guns were often around, and they would likely be a deterrent to fighting.
Mason
Positive Poker gives out a lot of advice to me that anyone with a clue should already know or advice that to me is silly
for example, Positive Poker suggests getting enough sleep, eating a healthy diet & exercising to improve your mental state to play poker
that to me is about as obvious as 1+1=2
for example, Positive Poker suggests getting enough sleep, eating a healthy diet & exercising to improve your mental state to play poker
that to me is about as obvious as 1+1=2
I'm sure glad you didn't say "is as obvious as 2+2 = 4."
Also, it's my opinion that
getting enough sleep, eating a healthy diet & exercising to improve your mental state to play poker
Best wishes,
Mason
Hi Furious:
I'm sure glad you didn't say "is as obvious as 2+2 = 4."
Also, it's my opinion that
has no value. If it did, it would mean that you would play your hands differently than if you were not doing these things, and a good poker player will play his hands exactly the same.
Best wishes,
Mason
I'm sure glad you didn't say "is as obvious as 2+2 = 4."
Also, it's my opinion that
has no value. If it did, it would mean that you would play your hands differently than if you were not doing these things, and a good poker player will play his hands exactly the same.
Best wishes,
Mason
We don't all play one table of 10 handed limit hold'em at the casino anymore. No limit hold'em or this crazy game called "pot limit omaha" is quite common online these days and it takes a little more mental energy, aka focus. It is also common crazy kids these days play more than one table, I know that's difficult to comprehend but i'm serious.
Maybe you should approach Google with your new findings. You can explain to them how they are wasting 8 figures a year providing good quality nutrition for free to all there staff so they can be at there peak mental performance. I am sure they will be very grateful and chuck you a few milly for your work.
Best wishes,
Sir Onions
wow
LOL
mason for president
mason for president
Or are you saying that a good player is unaffected by being tired, being hungry, or not having the endurance for a long grinding session?
If the latter, I don't see how that is possible as we are human and not machines.
Apparently if your weaknesses are sleepy or hungry you aren't good at poker.
You could be affected by those things and still be good at poker, but not be a good player.
It is like that line from one of the Rocky movies where Apollo tells Rocky, "...you fight great, but I'm a great fighter."
At many B&M poker rooms you can order food at the table and I have seen people sleeping in the games on many occasions. So neither one of these should be an issue.
Best wishes,
Mason
Maybe you should approach Google with your new findings. You can explain to them how they are wasting 8 figures a year providing good quality nutrition for free to all there staff so they can be at there peak mental performance. I am sure they will be very grateful and chuck you a few milly for your work.
Best wishes,
Sir Onions
Best wishes,
Sir Onions
I'm just talking about playing poker. There are lots of other reasons for Google to feed their employees well such as reducing sick leave and reducing early retirement.
Best wishes,
Mason
That is way off from my understanding of what Mason said, but as my understanding of what Mason said could also be way off, I hope Mason returns.
You could be affected by those things and still be good at poker, but not be a good player.
It is like that line from one of the Rocky movies where Apollo tells Rocky, "...you fight great, but I'm a great fighter."
You could be affected by those things and still be good at poker, but not be a good player.
It is like that line from one of the Rocky movies where Apollo tells Rocky, "...you fight great, but I'm a great fighter."
Originally Posted by Doc T River
You could be affected by those things and still be good at poker, but not be a good player.
But again, this is my trying to figure out what Mason meant and only Mason can tell us if I am on the right track.
-Jack
Feedback is used for internal purposes. LEARN MORE