If tilt is such a big issue for you then quit studying strat and focus on that because it’s costing you more money than any more poker knowledge can make you. Acting like tilt is inevitable and just something to accept is nonsense. You should be working to eliminate it or at least make it insignificant.

You should be a robot at the poker table.

Not being chippy, but I didn't say I never tilt. I said losing three (or five) buy-ins does not tilt me. And as others have stated, I'm always going to gii when I have an advantage, and if I happen to lose, so be it. It doesn't tilt me.

Now, if I lose because I'm playing badly and making bad calls -- that might tilt me.

Think I'm more in Mike's camp on this. Saying the above is the ez part; actually doing something about it ain't so ez. In the real world, practical solutions (such as stop losses or whatever other "-EV" moves that help you avoid tilt situations) are often going to be much more feasible to actually implement (versus "simply play like a robot").

But, each to their own, and whatever works for you. Not all of us humans/robots are wired the same.

GcluelessrobotnoobG

Of course it’s not easy. I don’t claim this is low hanging fruit, nor do I claim that I’ve successfully become an emotionless poker robot (although I think I’m quite a bit better than most) Recognizing one’s own limitations is fine, but don’t allow yourself to be bound by them to the point where you’re skipping big +EV spots and rationalizing that it’s okay. Humans are great at improving themselves so work on improving your emotional control at the table instead of being a slave to tilt. Nobody is as good as they can be in this regard and for some reason it doesn’t seem to be a topic of focus for many people.

Maybe it's just the games that I play in, or the number of hours that I put in, but losing 3 BI flips doesn't bother me anymore. If your game is good you should be getting stacks in on a relatively regular basis anyway.

Come on down to the Isle in Pompano Beach Fl and play some 2/5. Home of the nittiest of the nits. Yesterday we went 8 hands in a row without a flop and no pot over $100 for over an hour....I left at that point.

Im 100% convinced win rate ceiling is lower here than any room in the Country and even more so from April-July/Aug. Lose a few buy ins and good luck getting them back.

I'm not sure why I'd want to play in a game that sucks when there are games here with people straddling the button for $100, shipping blind, getting blasted drunk, and otherwise punting cash.

You should start blind shoving.

You wouldnt, but but that's how this room is (even though everyone is under the impression that every S. Florida room is a gold mine).

If you happen to play in a room that nobody has ever even heard of a bomb pot, maybe 1% of players drink, and the avg age is 70+....you probably dont want to call blind shoves for 200BBs without a bigger edge than A7. Youre never getting that money back if you lose and its going to greatly affect your mindset. You arent going to play your A game going forward. That alone will offset any 5-10% equity edge you had in the blind shove hands.

Now if your room has this kind of monkey business going on quite often then go for it. You'll come out ahead long term.

Marshman called the blind shoves with AJ, KQ and A7. Not bad hands at all to call a blind shove with. Hes definitely ahead of random hands. However, this is clearly results oriented but demonstrates how bad a hit you can take if you are unlucky.

He had AJ vs 22....$900 each......47% equity
KQ vs 97..$1000 each...64% equity
A7 vs AA..$1600 each....7% equity. No way Im calling 300BB+ with A7

So again, even though the first 2 hands are fine to call blind shoves with (if they 100% were really blind), and the 3rd is still ahead of a blind hand even though I would muck it for sure.

Marshman still was way way behind in total equity. Unless this kind of thing happens in your room all the time, its just not worth making these calls IMO. The risk is not worth the reward and you will never get to the "long term" for them to even out.

mike... that post just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of Expected Value.

feel free to turn down clear +EV spots if you can't handle it mentally / aren't rolled for the variance but what you are trying to argue is just mathematically incorrect

what his actual hands were has absolutely no relevance

Quoted for truth. What can happen is a red herring. What matters is what is expected to happen, and since we're talking blind shoves, that means each of those equities should be figured against a random hand.

If the game is so completely terrible, you shouldn't be passing up the chance to score the biggest win you'll have in weeks just because it's *less* likely that you'll lose than you'll win.

No, I understand the math. I'm just saying there are other factors involved. If this guy is blind shoving every hand, I can probably wait for stronger hands than A7. If hes blind shoving now and then, he probably sucks at poker badly enough that I have a much bigger advantage over him than 5-10% in standard poker hands.

Having said everything Ive said, Im not adverse to going to war with maniacs. We have 1 maniac who comes in randomly now and then. The last time I played with him, this happened...

Maniac is in LP. 2 guys limp. I limp KT in MP, knowing full well the maniac is going to raise and the limpers are going to call. Maniac goes $35. BB and both limpers call. Then I jam my $550 ish. I know my KT is ahead of his range and I know this guy will almost never fold after raising.

The maniac called with Q6 and I won. One of the limp/callers folded AK.

I only mention that hand to show Im not afraid at all of spots like this at all. I talked about all of the other stuff because I find it hard to believe that Marshman's drastic downswing happened right after he lost the 3 blind shoves and that they arent related.

running below EV happens in poker - like browni said before, the advice should be to work on your mental game if it affects you, not turn down free +EV spots (again, assuming you are properly rolled)

The guy handed Marsh +150bb in EV. That is MASSIVE. He just happened to run really well. Doesn't mean Marsh didn't make the correct decisions.

Can you show the math on that?

AJ vs Random: 64.01%
KQ vs Random: 61.942%
A7 vs Random: 59.377%

AJ = $576.09 EV ($900 V puts in)
KQ = $619.42 EV ($1000 V puts in)
A7 = $950.032 EV ($1600 V puts in)

Total = $2145.5 +EV

So ... Call it 430BB instead.

AJ hand

Pot $1800
We have 64% vs 36%

We have 28% equity advantage. $1800 X 28% = $504. Is that not how the math is done?

AJo vs {100%} has 63.56%
KQo vs {100%} has 61.46%
A7o vs {100%} has 58.84%

AJo we are risking -900 to win 63.56% of 1800 so (1800*63.56%)-900 = +$244.08

can also calculate it like: 63.56% we win 900; 36.44% we lose 900

(63.56%*900)-(36.44%*900) = 572.04 - 327.96 = +$244.08

AJo vs {100%} for $900 pre = +$244.08
KQo vs {100%} for $1000 pre = +$229.2
A7o vs {100%} for $1600 pre = +$282.88

sum of those three is $756.16 / 5 = 151.232bb +EV

edit. My pony is slow, and Dizzy's post above is correct. I rounded a tidge and used the "random hand" numbers, instead of the 100% range numbers, which are slightly different, so that's why the answers are slightly different

No. That is not how the math is done. Neither of them are.

AJ hand
64% of the time we will win $900 (+576)
36% of the time we will lose $900 (-324)
Overall EV of the AJ hand +$252

KQ hand
62% we will win $1K ($620)
38% we will lose $1K (-$380)
Overall EV +$240

A7 hand
59.4% we will win $1.6K (+$950)
40.6% we will lose $1.6K (-$650)
Overall EV +$300

Total EV +$792
Divided by $5 BB equals +158.4BBs, as Dizzy estimated.

Total overall EV

No, edge is applied to the money we put in, not the total pot.
.28*900 = $252 is the correct answer.

More typically we calculate EV by enumerating each possible payout multiplied by the probability of that payout. Since this is an even money bet it's easy to calculate the edge (your .28*900 method wouldn't work as cleanly if the bet wasn't even money)

900*.64+(-900)*.36 = $252

BTW, Angrist's numbers are a bit off

AJo vs. random : .6356
KQo vs. random: .6146
A7 vs. random : .5936 (marshman didn't specify suitedness)

Assuming the 900/1000/1600 numbers:

(.6356-.3644)*900 = $244
(.6146-.3854)*1000 = $229
(.5936-.4064)*1600 = $300

In sum 155BB +EV

it looks like Angrist/Garick used all AJ, KQ, A7 combos vs random hand instead of specifying offsuit, so that would include suited combos which is why their equities are a bit higher.

I guess this is getting too close to strategy but Id like to know from MarshMan, where he was sitting in relation to the crazy guy? Also, was he jamming every hand blind or was there some pattern? Did he announce before the hand he was jammng and did it he do it when he said he would? Were there other bind shoves that other people called?

And most of all, is it possible that he looked without Marshman seeing him look on the AA hand, which happens to be the biggest stack he jammed. Or at least the biggest that Marshman called.

All those things factor in IMO.

I definitely had a guy who angled me for 100bb’s when he “blind raised” KK while switching seats. It was pretty dirty. ****ty players/people will do anything for $500.

^ yes those are all extremely extremely important factors

obviously for my calculations I am assuming we know with 100% certainty that villain is all in blind and we are calling off last to act.

there are many other non-tangible factors that come into play outside of the math.

Yeah, I just took Angrist's numbers and showed how he was missing the negative side of the EV calc.