Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Psychology Discussions of psychology as applied to poker and other gambling games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-24-2016, 03:20 AM   #51
mike1270
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 837
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

I think the 10K rule came from a researcher named Anders Ericsson not Malcom Gladwell, and I am pretty sure I read about this 10K hours idea long before Gladwell wrote a single book.

Other issue no one mentioned - it would take thousands of hours grinding to build a bankroll big enough to compete in games that other elite player are in.
mike1270 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2016, 09:35 AM   #52
chrisshiherlis
journeyman
 
chrisshiherlis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 304
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

chrisshiherlis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2016, 11:11 PM   #53
Dr. Meh
adept
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,172
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisshiherlis View Post
Well-played.
Dr. Meh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2016, 07:56 AM   #54
Elrazor
losing momentum
 
Elrazor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 8,724
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

It's nice to see the argument against summarised in cartoon form, for those struggling to understand peer-reviewed academic work.
Elrazor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2016, 01:30 PM   #55
Dr. Meh
adept
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,172
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elrazor View Post
It's nice to see the argument against summarised in cartoon form, for those struggling to understand peer-reviewed academic work.
You waited 16 days for an opening for a comeback? Sad. But I won't judge.
Dr. Meh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2016, 07:42 PM   #56
cafepoker
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 219
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

One interesting theory i have is; whether or not you are an "elite poker player" depends not on history, past, present or future, but how you play the next hand.

How you play the next hand whether horribly or god like determines how good you are at that moment.

Of course being a great poker player requires lots of off the table skills, money managment, health, routine. Which is all determined by making your next good decision. People who say "im the best" just have a ego that might negativley affect them.
cafepoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2017, 12:09 PM   #57
Aces123123
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 637
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth View Post
Hi Aces123123:

Please find below the chapter from my book Real Poker Psychology on this subject.

Best wishes,
Mason
Thank you.
Aces123123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2017, 12:29 PM   #58
lkasigh
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 897
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

I'm not sure I agree with the contention that "poker is more a knowledge game than an execution game."

I'll try to articulate my thoughts here - I have spent a lot more time playing chess than poker, so I tend to relate things to chess, but I think my considerations would apply to both games.

I'm about 2100 rated in chess, ie., a decent amateur player. What separates me from the pros? If you give us the same position, the pro will play it better than I will within the time available. In some positions this will be largely due to the pro's superior knowledge (he's seen the position, or similar positions, before and knows how to approach it). But in most cases it isn't - it's because the pro is more efficient at applying his mental resources to the problem. Yes, the pro has a larger "mental database" of positional knowledge to draw from, but he's also much faster and more efficient at drawing on his knowledge, running through the various possibilities and making a decision.

Similar to tennis - what separates the top players from the rest is not so much that their tennis-playing muscles are more developed or that they have more stamina - but that they have trained their minds to exert a greater level of control over their muscles, they are able to be much more precise and consistent with making the ball go where they want it to with the right spin etc.

I tend to think about mind-sports in a similar way - the knowledge is sort of like the "base material," i.e., the physical attributes like strength, speed, stamina, for a tennis player. What matters most for a tennis player is their ability to use their physical attributes to consistently and effectively execute the right shot at the right time. What matters most for a poker or chess-player to draw on their knowledge to consistently and effectively execute a decision-making algorithm.

So I think they are all primarily about execution, just that in mindsports it is the execution of a decision-making algorithm, rather than a series of muscle movements. At least this is how it seems to me. I'd be interested in hearing some alternative views.
lkasigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2017, 12:13 AM   #59
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,049
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

Quote:
Originally Posted by lkasigh View Post
I'm not sure I agree with the contention that "poker is more a knowledge game than an execution game."

I'll try to articulate my thoughts here - I have spent a lot more time playing chess than poker, so I tend to relate things to chess, but I think my considerations would apply to both games.

I'm about 2100 rated in chess, ie., a decent amateur player. What separates me from the pros? If you give us the same position, the pro will play it better than I will within the time available. In some positions this will be largely due to the pro's superior knowledge (he's seen the position, or similar positions, before and knows how to approach it). But in most cases it isn't - it's because the pro is more efficient at applying his mental resources to the problem. Yes, the pro has a larger "mental database" of positional knowledge to draw from, but he's also much faster and more efficient at drawing on his knowledge, running through the various possibilities and making a decision.

Similar to tennis - what separates the top players from the rest is not so much that their tennis-playing muscles are more developed or that they have more stamina - but that they have trained their minds to exert a greater level of control over their muscles, they are able to be much more precise and consistent with making the ball go where they want it to with the right spin etc.

I tend to think about mind-sports in a similar way - the knowledge is sort of like the "base material," i.e., the physical attributes like strength, speed, stamina, for a tennis player. What matters most for a tennis player is their ability to use their physical attributes to consistently and effectively execute the right shot at the right time. What matters most for a poker or chess-player to draw on their knowledge to consistently and effectively execute a decision-making algorithm.

So I think they are all primarily about execution, just that in mindsports it is the execution of a decision-making algorithm, rather than a series of muscle movements. At least this is how it seems to me. I'd be interested in hearing some alternative views.
Hi lkasigh:

I'm not a chess player and know little about it. But I have played a lot of poker and I've also played a lot of tennis, and when I say a lot of tennis this goes back over 50 years and includes many days when I spent all my time at the tennis courts.

And with this background, I can say the following with certainty. If you want to be a top tennis player, it's going to take many thousands of hours of practice. For instance, when I was a kid growing up in South Florida, I use to bring a box of tennis balls with me and always tried to spend at least 30 minutes a day doing nothing but hitting serves. So the 10,000 hour requirement to become an elite tennis player seems reasonable to me. But it doesn't mean if you put this type of time and effort in, plus a whole bunch of good coaching, you're going to be on the tour.

I can also say with certainty that there's no equivalent in poker. Yes, you don't become a top notch poker player overnight, and it will take some time and effort to get a good understanding of the game. But since you're not concerned about things like speed, timing, and coordination, all of which can take a long time and lots of practice to develop, the claim of 10,000 hours is silly. 500 to 1,000 hours seems to me to be much more reasonable, and it's consistent with my experience.

Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 07:25 AM   #60
lkasigh
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 897
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

Thanks for the reply Mason.

It don't doubt that it takes different lengths of time to master poker vs. tennis. However I guess my objection is more to your thesis that the reason for the difference is due to some fundamental difference in the nature of the game ("knowledge game" vs. "execution game").

They are both execution games, tennis is just harder.
lkasigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2017, 03:27 AM   #61
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,049
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

Quote:
Originally Posted by lkasigh View Post
Thanks for the reply Mason.

It don't doubt that it takes different lengths of time to master poker vs. tennis. However I guess my objection is more to your thesis that the reason for the difference is due to some fundamental difference in the nature of the game ("knowledge game" vs. "execution game").

They are both execution games, tennis is just harder.
Hi lkasigh:

Okay. But I would say that the execution factor in tennis is much, much, much harder than the execution factor in poker. In fact, even though I've been playing tennis for over 50 years, I still hit a lot just to work on my basic game and to get my timing down right.

On the other hand, I also feel that the knowledge component in poker is much harder than it is for tennis. But the bottom line is that it takes no where near the hours to become a top notch poker player than it takes to become a top notch tennis player as long as you have the ability to become top notch in one of these.

Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2017, 08:26 PM   #62
Singasong2222
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 415
Re: It might take longer than 10 000 hours to become an elite poker player

So tennis players who become #1 should not bother? Because its hard

That's why mutt the Murray should get more credits.
Singasong2222 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online