Then why have you heard of them?

Better question is, why have you not heard of argosy?

What number are they?

https://www.timeshighereducation.com...asc/cols/stats

But probably because I'm not American.

But if you take a Bayesian approach, suppose out of the 4000 degree-awarding universities in the US, maybe Mason has heard of 2000 of them. Let's also say that he has heard of 75% of the best 2000, and 25% of the bottom 2000.

Given the prior probability that a random university X is in the top half is 50%, the question is, does that probability change if we know that Mason Malmuth has never heard of it. The answer is yes, as 3/4 of the universities he has never heard of are in the bottom half so your assertion that

is incorrect - unless we think he is equally likely to have heard of a higher or lower quality one.

But all of this is irrelevant. The important thing is not what someone did in their 20s, it's whether they carry the culture of logical inquiry through life.

I would like to leave you with this quote from the Harvard Business Review article Dr Cardner linked to against using Bayesian reasoning:

Her point presumably being that playing a poker hand is a lot more like a firefighter running into a burning building and making instant decisions based on reflexes (type 3), than the nerd running a cost-benefit analysis of how much money to put in a parking meter when he doesn't know how long his meeting will last (type 1).

A number of top players apparently agree with her, but all I can say is it certainly doesn't feel like that at micro and small stakes NL and Mason reports it also doesn't feel like that at mid stakes FL.

Rankings have literally no alignment with the actual quality of an institution. They are simply reputation metrics, no matter how USNWR wishes to portray otherwise. I've spent a LOT of time digging into rankings metrics, and they are easily manipulated.

My statement was one of fact. The alternative facts you offer are not based in reality.

I'm so glad you all are so interested about me and my work! I'm so flattered <3 Especially when so much of the attention comes from a man with the stature of your fearless leader. It's positively swoon-worthy!

Since you seem so interested with my educational background, I thought I'd fill in the gaps for you!!

Don't fret; I'll be sure to let you know which schools have football teams as that is probably the most important factor in determining whether or not a school is top quality!

BA Psychology (with honors) - Texas A&M - Corpus Christi (No football team - Boo!!! I should probably get a refund on this one; oh wait - it was free because I had a full-scholarship. Moving on.)

MEd Counselor Education and Supervision - Texas Tech University (Yes! They've got a football team and with "Tech" in the name, you know this is a good one!!!)

PhD - Sam Houston State University - (Score! Football team) FYI: SHSU is one of the top PhD programs in the country for CJ/Crim - so I didn't get to see too many games - BOO!)
(My area of expertise is Corrections. Dissertation: Multicultural Competencies of Probation Officers)

EdD - Argosy University - Sarasota: Dissertation: Peak Poker Performance: A Qualitative Case Study (Darn it! No football team - but since this is my spare doctorate, I guess I'll give it a pass). They do have CACREP accreditation (http://www.cacrep.org/) - which is a national accreditation for graduate counseling programs - so maybe that evens it out...

I guess it's a wash since it's 50/50 on those football teams :-(


By the way, I attended Argosy while my husband was in the United States Air Force fighting for your right to post comments to a forum like this - so you're welcome for that. Because of his service, I wasn't able to go to a school with a football team and for that, I will be forever sorry. I've learned my lesson though and should I go for doctorate #3, I'll be sure to factor it in!


Side-note for those interested: behavioral economists are often criticized for theorizing that humans operate in a purely rational manner because the truth is most don't. Heuristics often lead to decision making errors and emotions clearly play a role in decisions and money matters, in particular, often engender illogical behaviors.

Have fun debating the merits of my various degrees and academic institutions. I wish I could find the time to post on here daily in defense of myself and my work, but alas, I'm busy trying to help people improve their lives and overcome their psychological difficulties.


Dr. C.

Sarcastic, thin-skinned and unfunny isn't the best play here...

So can you confirm

is not a misunderstanding on my part.

My response was a reply to requests for information from one Mason Malmuth.

Mr. Malmuth sent me an email requesting information about my education with an emphasis on football teams. He said:

Also, I never heard of Argosy University until you came along. That's probably because unlike my school, Virginia Tech, it doesn't have a football team. So this could be a good opportunity for you to explain why degrees from Argosy, like degrees from Va Tech, should be taken seriously.

Mason Malmuth

Sent from my iPhone

Then he brought it up again in this thread.


So as you can see, I provided him with exactly what he wanted.

I did, however, forget one degree, so I'll include that here. I am proud to say that I earned an advanced degree from the Logan Sill School of Interpersonal Communications. Sadly, no football team there either

Best Wishes,
Dr. Cardner

lol I went to Penn State and our football is good again!

I'm glad someone got the joke.

It is fun how difficult it is to stay looped in on the conversation, given one specific poster enjoys taking various statements out of context, and then posts them sporadically throughout the forum.

To clarify for what feels like the hundredth time....

You do not need 10,000 hours of experience to beat small stakes games.
I have never claimed that. However, you will find that most large-winning high stakes players have well over 10,000 hours of experience. I would bet that at least 90% of the players with a 20% ROI or more in the $10,000 buy-in and larger tournaments, and 90% of players who play $10/$20 no-limit or higher online with a 3bb/100 win rate or more have well over 10,000 hours of experience. To repeat so it is clear and hopefully not taken out of context again in the future, you do not need much experience at all to beat a soft $5/$10 no-limit game at Bellagio.

If you have a tiny win rate, you need a large bankroll. If you have a giant win rate, you do not need a large bankroll. Someone who asks the question "I hate losing, what can I do about that?" should not be replied to as if they have a giant win rate.

If you are sleep deprived, you will play worse than if you are well-rested.

Poker books have been in existence for at least 30 years.


Mason asks why I spend my valuable time replying here, given very few people even read this forum anymore. It is primarily because I don't appreciate my work being taken drastically out of context, especially given malicious motives are obvious. I also enjoy helping people who actually want to succeed at poker, and much of what has been posted recently in this forum by one specific poster is blatantly incorrect.

Perhaps 2+2 is simply no longer a place where people go to learn about poker, and if that is the case, I should realize that it is no longer relevant and should muck on it. Almost all the posters I learned from 13 years ago no longer post on 2+2 due to its current nature, so perhaps I should follow suit.


As an aside, I also went to a university that does not have a football team on a full academic scholarship. Should I feel like less of a human because of this?

Well here's the whole email I sent in response to one of your post reports wanting a post deleted. (We eventually deleted several posts in this thread: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/26...ching-1646243/ )

MM

Hi ScotchOnDaRocks:

Yes. It's good to see that Penn State is back. Also, I know that Va Tech has gone up against Penn State in a couple of recruiting battles and that they're tough competition in recruiting as well as on the football field.

Best wishes,
Mason

I went to Va Tech on an athletic scholarship, and unlike you I finished school.

MM

I shall address all of your above mentioned points.

First of all, I cannot link to my dissertation directly. It can be accessed via a university library or it can be purchased via proquest & this is information I have provided before in these forums. Thus, I did not feel the need to re-post it here, but since you did, I'll repeat myself for the hundredth time.

Second, I love the way you keep up your ill-founded harassment towards me and putting it in writing - it is the best form of communication.

What I especially like about it is how you have never once asked about the qualifications of any other mental game coach. Only me. Now, why is that? Is it because I am a woman or because you are intimidated by someone with my level of education and clinical experience?

I am clearly more qualified to talk about the mental game than you and perhaps that fact leaves you feeling a little bit less. The fact that I have to validate my accomplishments says something about you personally. The fact that I have done so indicates that I have no problem "proving" that I am a subject matter content expert, and my clients (who are some of the best poker players in the world) agree. For you to disagree would have zero basis in fact.

The reason the above mentioned posts were deleted is because they were libelous and this was confirmed via several communications that were exchanged with the proper authorities.

Finally, the reason I published my books with D&B Publishing and Jonathan Little is because they respect and appreciate the value I bring to the game of poker. These are things that are clearly of little value to you and your publishing company.

In light of full disclosure, I consider this matter closed. There is no reason for you to continue on with your harassment and ill-founded assertions. Consider this fair warning because it is the last one you are going to get.

Dr. Patricia Cardner

This isn't accurate. We stopped taking advertising from both Elliot Roe and Jared Tendler. My conclusion is that sports psychology has virtually nothing to do with poker. That's because sports has both a knowledge component and an execution component, and most everything I see from the poker mental coaches, and this includes you, are things that will help an athlete with their execution -- speed, timing, coordination, etc., and little if any relative to knowledge of the game.

Poker on the other hand is mainly a knowledge game. I fail to see, and this is my opinion, where the execution component plays more than a minor role. Thus I reject much of what I read coming from people such as yourself producing material in this area.

Please feel free to explain where I have any of this wrong.

MM

Mr. Malmuth,

As a former tenured college professor, I pride myself on my ability to teach virtually anyone any concept under the purview of understanding human behavior. You are a special case, having demonstrated on numerous occasions that you lack basic reading comprehension skills, you engage in tautological reasoning, and you appear to be recalcitrant when it comes to learning.

You merely want to "debate" as if we were equally matched in terms of our intellect, education and experience. You, sir, fall woefully short. If we were to engage in said intellectual contest, you would require extensive remediation, to which I am happy to provide assistance. PM me for my private rates and availability.

Yours Truly,

Patricia Cardner, BA, MEd, PhD, EdD

You keep saying this and my understanding is that this is not an accurate statement, and both David Sklansky and myself have addressed this in some of our posts on this forum.

Two Plus Two will soon come out with a new book, Poker and More: Unique Ideas and Concepts; Strategy, Game Theory, and Psychology from Two Renowned Gambling Experts By David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth. It consists mostly of essays that we wrote for our Two Plus Two Online Poker Strategy Magazine. The following is from the chapter titled "Real Poker Psychology — A Few Clarifications:"

One of the things I find interesting about this is that I have yet to read anything in the poker psychology literature, and this refers to a number of authors, that addresses any of this. If someone has, I would like to be directed to it.

MM

1) Is it your opinion that "poker psychology" (in the context of this specific discussion, factors involved in decision-making processes) is different than psychology (again, decision-making processes) than other forms of psychology?

2) Do decision-making processes differ between poker and other non-physical fields?

3) Do you intend to use data from studies investigating the effects of mental and physical fatigue and sleep deprivation on cognitive functions from other fields?

4) Do you believe that, e.g. a physician's or air traffic controllers cognitive abilities are identical at the beginning of a shift and after 8+ hours of work? If not, why not, and what can you provide evidence to support your view?

ETA

5) Is it your assertion that physical and mental "tiredness" are independent, and therefore have no effect on each other?

6) Is all knowledge about a topic accessible under all conditions for a given individual?

I think both Dr Cardner and Mr Malmuth accept that there are different ways of making decisions. Cardner points to a model of 3 decision-making philosophies and as far as I can see, classifies poker decision-making as type 3. Malmuth uses different terminology but he seems to be classifyng it in type 1.

As a result they disagree on almost everything else, restating the root of the disagreement in infinite configurations.

I like this. I'm actually a recreational air traffic controller having played
HATC (http://www.mobygames.com/game/heathr...raffic-control) as child.

Everyone agrees that there is a drop off in performance, the question is, how bad would the tired air traffic controller be on a scale where I'm a 3 and his normal performance is 10? To what extent would his better knowledge of "all things air traffic control" keep him ahead of me and how tired would he have to be for it to be better to swap him out and put the amateur in?

Off course the interesting parallel with poker is that the massive stakes magnify even the smallest advantage or edge.

Even Mason agrees that the mental game stuff is worth something - in his book he estimates 0.1 Big Bets per hour (though I think it's much higher, I will write a review of his book soon pointing out where I disagree) so obviously someone like Todd Brunson who has been reported playing $50/$100K would be well advised to work on the mental game aspects.

Appreciate your input, but I was specifically addressing my questions to MM.

I know, but there is enough disagreement in the thread without bringing up things which are actually common ground.

Of course there is. My understanding is that sports psychlogy helps with things like speed, timing, and coordination, and to me that makes sense. I know when playing tennis if I'm able to reduce stress, have slept well, improve my diet, etc. all these things will help me hit the ball better. But in a game like poker, where the execution factor is minimal at best, those things the sports psychologists try to bring to the poker world have, in my opinion, very little value.

I'm going by memory, so maybe I have authors confused, but at the beginning of the book Positive Poker I think Cardner asks the question does the poker world need a sports psychologist? And my answer is no. Perhaps some of the things that people like Cardner, Tendler, and Roe advocate might be very good for an Olympic athlete or an MMA fighter, but my position is that this stuff has no more than a little value in the poker world.

I'm not an expert on many other non-physical fields. But I do believe that in the world of math and statistics, where my background is from, the decision making process is very similar to poker.

What a stupid question. Why don't you stay awake for three straight days and see how well you play poker.

I know very little about air traffic controlers and many physicians do seem to work long hours, especially in an emergency room, and you don't hear about lots of problems.

I think the way to answer this question is are things like speed, timing, and coordination involved. If this is the case, and perhaps with a surgeon this would be accurate, then being physically tired would make a difference. But I doubt that this would be true with air traffic controllers, but I certainly could be wrong since I know nothing about the job.

On the other hand, if a specific job comes with a lot of stress, and this is probably true with an emergency room doctor, then over time becoming mentally tired should set in and they'll need a vacation. And in a high stress job a person may need a vacation a little more often than in other jobs. So this may be the answer for air traffic controllers.

I'm not an expert in this area and have made no assertions one way or another like this. But what I find interesting, is that the poker mental coaches, who do claim to be experts in this area, as far as I know, never even mention it. But my approach to poker psychology, which is based on mathematical modeling and statistical theory brought me to this point.

I give up. Why don't you tell us since this appears to be a "gotch ya" question.

MM

This response reveals you're not curious enough to question your own assumptions or conclusions, particularly since there are literally thousands of studies that address this topic.

And this response reveals that you don't seem to be willing or able to consider alternative hypotheses.

I'm curious why you think it is that we "don't hear about lots of problems" involving suboptimal decisions under stressful conditions.

I'm also curious as to why you presume that prior knowledge is essentially worthless in this area.

Its quite an interesting discussion. I suspect both sides are right in their own way.

I'm not good enough at poker to know what the answer is.

That said I have done a huge amount of exams in my day. Based on Mason's arguments (I think) he would suggest its just about how well you have studied. Cartner's view would be that there are other angles to it.

My sense is that the debate is being made artificially mutually exclusive.

You will always do better at an exam by knowing the subject better.

But you will also do better coping with the stress, having self belief, being able to access the knowledge.

I don't think this always comes from just studying harder, although this also helps (a lot).

Even if it did, there are those that go into the hall who haven't studied hard enough who will do better because of their ability to cope with that stress (or who have the better mental game)

Both sides are right (kind of)

Hi Zoltan:

You got my answer and now you don't like it. Well, vigorous debate is what these forums are about.

Best wishes,
Mason