Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Books and Publications Discussion and reviews of books, videos, and magazines. Sponsored by TwoPlusTwoStore.com.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-15-2015, 11:38 PM   #1
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Is Cardner Correct?

Hi Everyone:

On Patricia Cardner's Website she has written the following:

Quote:
Here’s another example of something he talks about ad nauseum which is NOT accurate. He has made reference several times to me advising taking a hot shower as a means of tilt repair – which I do not. I believe that what he is attempting to discuss is the research (written about in Positive Poker) on subjective well-being which contends that engaging in daily gratitude exercises increases overall subjective well-being.
To see the complete article, you can go here:

http://www.drtriciacardner.com/will-...mason-malmuth/

In my book Real Poker Psychology the following appears on page 1 (as part of the "Introduction").

Quote:
For a specific example, on the Internet I was recently listening to poker psychologist Dr. Patricia Cardner, explain what you can do if you feel nervous, stressed, or on tilt. Her suggestion was to think about things you are grateful for and I guess this is suppose to soothe your mind when you see someone else stacking your chips. And one specific example was to be grateful for the hot water you had in your morning shower.
So where does this come from? And the answer is the hot shower stuff comes from this video:

http://floattheturn.com/playvideo.php?vid=1172

At 4:58 of the video it switches to a new topic and the first thing we see is a whiteboard with the heading "Nervous, Stressed, or on Tilt?" And the first words we hear are:

Quote:
Finally, if you feel nervous, stressed or on tilt, there is a quick little exercise you can do, and it's called gratitude. Now what you want to do is take a few minutes and think of five or six things that you are grateful for. It can be anything. It can be little things like the fact that maybe you're grateful that you actually had hot water for your shower in the morning.
And to complete this post at the end of the first section of Real Poker Psychology the following short chapter appears.

Quote:
A Band-aid or a Cure

To end “Part One: Them Fluctuations,” I want to go back to an example given in the “Introduction” of this book. If you remember, one of the psychologists who is active in poker gave advice to think about things that you might be grateful for in an effort to gain some control over your tilt, and one example given was to be grateful for the hot water in your morning shower.

Now this brings us to two questions. Can something like this work? And if it does work, is it a true cure for tilt?

Well, in my opinion, something like this is unlikely to work. I guess there can always be exceptions, but it’s my experience that when people go on tilt they can’t think about much of anything because their minds get locked up in that proverbial infinite poker/computer programming loop.

However, there may be a small number of people who do go on tilt and then their minds quickly move away from what is bothering them. I know when playing tennis, missing an easy shot, and then getting mad, I’m ready to play the next point. So at least here my mind has moved away from what it is that’s locking it up.

So the reason why being grateful for a nice hot shower may seem to work for some people is by the time they can think about their morning ritual, they’re no longer on tilt. So it’s a false result.

To answer the second question, let’s assume that the hot shower idea really does help to calm you down. Does it solve your problem or is it more like a band-aid or pain pill that just masks the symptoms without curing the problem?

To answer this, let’s go back to “A Mathematical Model of “Tilt” — Cause and Cure” starting on page 9. Here we saw that tilt is caused by a logic disconnect which your mind can’t solve, and thinking about a hot shower, assuming you could actually do this when well tilted, will have nothing to do with the logic disconnect that has your brain locked up. So again, my advice is to go after the root of the problem by improving your understanding of all aspects of poker, and not be distracted or fooled by these seemingly simple solutions.
Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2015, 04:38 PM   #2
networth
veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: sochi
Posts: 2,191
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Is this your way of saying you have not made several references to her advising taking a hot shower as a means of tilt repair?
networth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 12:20 AM   #3
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by networth View Post
Is this your way of saying you have not made several references to her advising taking a hot shower as a means of tilt repair?
Networth:

No I am saying that she says to think about the hot shower that you took in the morning "as a means of tilt repair." If this is not clear to you, I suggest you read her statement again:

Quote:
Finally, if you feel nervous, stressed or on tilt, there is a quick little exercise you can do, and it's called gratitude. Now what you want to do is take a few minutes and think of five or six things that you are grateful for. It can be anything. It can be little things like the fact that maybe you're grateful that you actually had hot water for your shower in the morning.
MM
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 09:25 AM   #4
networth
veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: sochi
Posts: 2,191
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

I understand what she is saying. And I understand what she is saying about what you are saying she is saying, which is not what she is saying. So I'm just asking if you ever said what she said you said, that she said to take a shower as a means of tilt repair.

As for whether her methods help some people play better than yes. Just remove tilt and pseudotilt from the wording and you may not disagree as much.

If someone plays looser than they know is ideal after losing a big pot, you say don't do that. She says here's ways to help you not do that.
networth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 05:13 PM   #5
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by networth View Post
I understand what she is saying. And I understand what she is saying about what you are saying she is saying, which is not what she is saying. So I'm just asking if you ever said what she said you said, that she said to take a shower as a means of tilt repair.
You can listen to the interviews and hear exactly what I said.

Quote:
As for whether her methods help some people play better than yes.
In the conclusion of Real Poker Psychology I do state that this mental stuff can be of small benefit providing it doesn't cause you to stop working on your game.

Quote:
Just remove tilt and pseudotilt from the wording and you may not disagree as much.
This is not correct and you'll need to read the book to see why this sentence makes no sense.

Quote:
If someone plays looser than they know is ideal after losing a big pot, you say don't do that.
I don't say this at all. Again you'll need to read the book.

Quote:
She says here's ways to help you not do that.
What she advocates has very little value at best and much of it, in my opinion, is just plain silly. Again, you'll need to read Real Poker Psychology to get a better understanding of what is really important and what is not.

Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2015, 06:41 AM   #6
Freewill2112
veteran
 
Freewill2112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die.
Posts: 3,201
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Cliffs: Buy my book!
Freewill2112 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2015, 07:02 AM   #7
King_of_NYC
betting he never calls me again
 
King_of_NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: F train
Posts: 4,015
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

The idea that one subjective experience can impact another subjective experience is utter nonsense. Debating the matter is completely futile, and does nothing but demonstrate how little those who would engage in such a debate know about the science of behavior.
King_of_NYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2015, 11:12 AM   #8
6471849653
old hand
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: EU
Posts: 1,589
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

If an experience is objective, then it may be harder to alter but still every day psychology. Taking some larger and positive view can sure alter the experience as a whole, and looksmore like the reality compared to the bad beat alone, where one will tilt but other factors can overpower it.

I know exactly what i am thinking when i get stressed or bad beated. I think about my positive edge because of my strategy, and about the long run, and maybe take a note that can produce me additional good in the future.

That though doesnt include plo at this time as i tilt there the most but that is my limitation and having some larger and more positive and tougher views would sure help me to improve there also. The other forms i play, about all of them, are more systematic and smaller and it might be that playing plo helps me to stay further cooler in other forms also.
6471849653 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2015, 05:51 PM   #9
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6471849653 View Post
If an experience is objective, then it may be harder to alter but still every day psychology. Taking some larger and positive view can sure alter the experience as a whole, and looksmore like the reality compared to the bad beat alone, where one will tilt but other factors can overpower it.

I know exactly what i am thinking when i get stressed or bad beated. I think about my positive edge because of my strategy, and about the long run, and maybe take a note that can produce me additional good in the future.

That though doesnt include plo at this time as i tilt there the most but that is my limitation and having some larger and more positive and tougher views would sure help me to improve there also. The other forms i play, about all of them, are more systematic and smaller and it might be that playing plo helps me to stay further cooler in other forms also.
Hi 646...:

Thanks for your clear and insightful post. But the question I have for you is do you take a hot shower in the morning?

Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2015, 10:02 AM   #10
King_of_NYC
betting he never calls me again
 
King_of_NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: F train
Posts: 4,015
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6471849653 View Post
If an experience is objective, then it may be harder to alter but still every day psychology. Taking some larger and positive view can sure alter the experience as a whole, and looksmore like the reality compared to the bad beat alone, where one will tilt but other factors can overpower it.

I know exactly what i am thinking when i get stressed or bad beated. I think about my positive edge because of my strategy, and about the long run, and maybe take a note that can produce me additional good in the future.

That though doesnt include plo at this time as i tilt there the most but that is my limitation and having some larger and more positive and tougher views would sure help me to improve there also. The other forms i play, about all of them, are more systematic and smaller and it might be that playing plo helps me to stay further cooler in other forms also.
Not sure if the bolded is a typo but the post above yours was challenging the practice of modifying a subjective experience with another subjective experience.

In terms of poker, assessing behavior is quite simple. Bet, call, check, fold, raise. All of which can be directly observed. The question is then what are the conditions in the environment that elicit any of these behaviors. And those environmental conditions themselves should be objective as well. The actions of the other players, the time of day, the time you've been sitting in the session, the last time you've eaten something, the win-loss up to that point etc.

Defining "tilt" in terms of these objective behaviors and environmental conditions is what's required to effect any real understanding of the phenomenon.
King_of_NYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2015, 09:40 PM   #11
avatar77
adept
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,036
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

I am surprised Patricia Cardner is not chiming in on this thread
avatar77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 03:57 PM   #12
klezmaniac
old hand
 
klezmaniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the right side of the river
Posts: 1,397
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by avatar77 View Post
I am surprised Patricia Cardner is not chiming in on this thread
Open letter from Dr. Cardner from her blog.


--klez
klezmaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 04:49 PM   #13
King_of_NYC
betting he never calls me again
 
King_of_NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: F train
Posts: 4,015
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Mr. Malmuth has written a book which is not based on anything more than his uninformed opinions.
smart woman. although not just for the obvious
King_of_NYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 06:01 PM   #14
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by klezmaniac View Post
Open letter from Dr. Cardner from her blog.


--klez


So what is the purpose of your post? Notice in my OP this exact same link appears. I suggest you carefully read what I wrote in that post to get a better understanding of what this thread is about.

MM
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 06:10 PM   #15
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by King_of_NYC View Post
smart woman. although not just for the obvious
Really? Let me address the Cardner statement that you quote in your post this way. I think it's very fair to say that I and 2+2 have done more by far than any other group to revolutionize our current understanding of poker, and this process is still ongoing. In addition, there is nothing we haven't published that I haven't spent much time working on. So in my opinion, only an incompetent fool would make the kind of statement that you quote in your post.

MM
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 09:34 PM   #16
klezmaniac
old hand
 
klezmaniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the right side of the river
Posts: 1,397
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth View Post
So what is the purpose of your post? Notice in my OP this exact same link appears. I suggest you carefully read what I wrote in that post to get a better understanding of what this thread is about.

MM
It is a response to the person I quoted, who expressed surprise that Cardner hadn't responded itt.

I did not go to the links you posted, just read the excerpts you posted.
Clearly the person whom I quoted hadn't yet, either.


--klez
klezmaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 10:17 PM   #17
redfin
centurion
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 171
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Let me preface this by saying that I am very grateful for what Mason Malmuth has given to the poker community: which is simply the 2+2 forums. A lot of poker players owe their gratitude for learning poker thru these forums. I’ve found the forums, for the most part, to be very fair and well run.

As it pertains to Patricia Cardner, to be quite blunt, she comes across as someone to stay far away from as it pertains to improving ones poker game. Unfortunately she has neglected to even open the debate on why Mason may be wrong and has resorted to letting things get personal . Had someone questioned my methodologies, on that which I base my business on, I assure you, I would have responded in much more depth and specificity to why they were wrong. This leads one to ask the question: Did she really ever have anything important to say in the first place?
redfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2015, 02:27 AM   #18
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by klezmaniac View Post
It is a response to the person I quoted, who expressed surprise that Cardner hadn't responded itt.

I did not go to the links you posted, just read the excerpts you posted.
Clearly the person whom I quoted hadn't yet, either.


--klez
Hi klez:

Thanks for your reply and correction. I thought your other post was directed at me and thus my reply. My apologies for my error.

Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2015, 02:37 AM   #19
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by redfin View Post
Let me preface this by saying that I am very grateful for what Mason Malmuth has given to the poker community: which is simply the 2+2 forums. A lot of poker players owe their gratitude for learning poker thru these forums. I’ve found the forums, for the most part, to be very fair and well run.
Hi redfin:

Thanks for your post. I also want to point out that our publishing company has also made many contributions to poker, and we do our best on these forums to be an honest broker where all points of view can be heard.

Quote:
As it pertains to Patricia Cardner, to be quite blunt, she comes across as someone to stay far away from as it pertains to improving ones poker game. Unfortunately she has neglected to even open the debate on why Mason may be wrong and has resorted to letting things get personal .
I think this is 100 percent correct. When someone's only response is stuff that would come under the insult umbrella, it's probably safe to say she's not capable of defending her material in any legitimate way against the many flaws in it that I have pointed out.

Quote:
Had someone questioned my methodologies, on that which I base my business on, I assure you, I would have responded in much more depth and specificity to why they were wrong. This leads one to ask the question: Did she really ever have anything important to say in the first place?
This would make you a worthy adversary and the ensuing debate might lead to better information for all. And to answer your question, based on the Positive Poker book (written with Jonathan Little) and the other stuff of her's that I have become familiar with, there is, in my opinion, virtually nothing of value.

Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2015, 10:24 AM   #20
the_spike
old hand
 
the_spike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,381
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Is the assertion in this thread that Dr. Cardner advises taking a hot shower as a means of tilt control, based on the quotes given? If so, the assertion is wrong. It's such a simple logic/math problem that I feel silly having to explain. Being grateful (for something, such as having hot water for my morning shower) as a means of tilt control does not imply that the "something" is the means of tilt control. Gratitide is the act, the shower is an indirect side effect, and it could be any one of a number of things. You could just as easily be grateful for your toothpaste and the water to brush your teeth with, and neither the tooth brushing nor the drinking of the water would be the tilt reduction techniques.

networth appears to understand this, as I would assume the other thread readers do as well.

This is similar to some basic Buddhist beliefs, which seems to work for over 500 million people. You could say the Buddha was the ultimate tilt reducer.

This is so obvious that I feel silly stating it, so I will assume that is not the assertion in this thread. But that does leave me wondering what the assertion of this thread is. Maybe I'll feel silly when someone explains something really simple that I missed.

Last edited by the_spike; 12-28-2015 at 10:47 AM.
the_spike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2015, 12:14 AM   #21
curtinsea
WA iPoker NOW
 
curtinsea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,216
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

My 2 cents is this Mason . . .

You took a throw away example included in her actual suggestion and turned it into the focal point. You have taken it out of context and gave it new meaning. I consider it a dishonest representation of what she said.

I know you to be an intelligent man, it wasn't done by accident. So, you don't think much of Dr. Cardner, you make it apparent. A lot of what amount to petty jabs, just from the excerpts you've posted.

I admit I haven't read the book, but I have been amused by the Twitter war. So, is the book about poker psychology or is it an expose of someone you believe to be a fraud in her field?

For the record, I don't know her any better than I know you, so I can't say if she is a fraud or not. But I do wonder why you felt the need to take pot shots at her in your book
curtinsea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2015, 01:32 AM   #22
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtinsea View Post
My 2 cents is this Mason . . .

You took a throw away example included in her actual suggestion and turned it into the focal point. You have taken it out of context and gave it new meaning. I consider it a dishonest representation of what she said.

I know you to be an intelligent man, it wasn't done by accident. So, you don't think much of Dr. Cardner, you make it apparent. A lot of what amount to petty jabs, just from the excerpts you've posted.

I admit I haven't read the book, but I have been amused by the Twitter war. So, is the book about poker psychology or is it an expose of someone you believe to be a fraud in her field?

For the record, I don't know her any better than I know you, so I can't say if she is a fraud or not. But I do wonder why you felt the need to take pot shots at her in your book
Hi curtinsea:

I think you should read Real Poker Psychology. The vast majority of it is not about Cardner and includes a good number of topics/ideas which I don't believe have ever been published before.

Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2016, 07:09 PM   #23
chrisshiherlis
journeyman
 
chrisshiherlis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 306
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtinsea View Post
My 2 cents is this Mason . . .

You took a throw away example included in her actual suggestion and turned it into the focal point. You have taken it out of context and gave it new meaning. I consider it a dishonest representation of what she said.

I know you to be an intelligent man, it wasn't done by accident. So, you don't think much of Dr. Cardner, you make it apparent. A lot of what amount to petty jabs, just from the excerpts you've posted.

I admit I haven't read the book, but I have been amused by the Twitter war. So, is the book about poker psychology or is it an expose of someone you believe to be a fraud in her field?

For the record, I don't know her any better than I know you, so I can't say if she is a fraud or not. But I do wonder why you felt the need to take pot shots at her in your book
From the limited amount that I know: much of her stuff was done based around a PhD involving psychology and poker players. If you are granted a PhD it means you had to do the research, reason it out to conclusions, in a way that advances science, and then you generally have to formally defend this in front of a bunch of well-educated peers so that it stands up to scrutiny. Often the Government has stumped up the cash for you to do a lot of it, and that cash isn't appropriated willy-nilly.
Hardly sounds like a very good launch-pad for a fraud to me.
I've heard a fair bit of her stuff, and to be honest I quite liked it. For one thing, she doesn't talk a lot of s***, dressed up as 'science', which I've heard plenty of from some of her peers, who seem to pass with nothing like this level of scrutiny.
Think this whole thing will progress more smoothly when we've all had a chance to read Mason's book, and regroup. I've read his other stuff and was very impressed by it.
chrisshiherlis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2016, 03:42 AM   #24
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisshiherlis View Post
From the limited amount that I know: much of her stuff was done based around a PhD involving psychology and poker players. If you are granted a PhD it means you had to do the research, reason it out to conclusions, in a way that advances science, and then you generally have to formally defend this in front of a bunch of well-educated peers so that it stands up to scrutiny. Often the Government has stumped up the cash for you to do a lot of it, and that cash isn't appropriated willy-nilly.
Hardly sounds like a very good launch-pad for a fraud to me.
I've heard a fair bit of her stuff, and to be honest I quite liked it. For one thing, she doesn't talk a lot of s***, dressed up as 'science', which I've heard plenty of from some of her peers, who seem to pass with nothing like this level of scrutiny.
Think this whole thing will progress more smoothly when we've all had a chance to read Mason's book, and regroup. I've read his other stuff and was very impressed by it.
Hi chrisshiherlis:

I have a suggestion. Why don't you post some idea or concept, preferably from Cardner's Positive Poker book, which you feel is really good and we can discuss it right here. And if you post something from her book, please be sure to give the exact location where it appears in her book.

Best wishes,
Mason
Mason Malmuth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2016, 03:57 AM   #25
Mason Malmuth
Top Dog
 
Mason Malmuth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: @MasonMalmuth
Posts: 10,052
Re: Is Cardner Correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by the_spike View Post
Is the assertion in this thread that Dr. Cardner advises taking a hot shower as a means of tilt control, based on the quotes given? If so, the assertion is wrong. It's such a simple logic/math problem that I feel silly having to explain. Being grateful (for something, such as having hot water for my morning shower) as a means of tilt control does not imply that the "something" is the means of tilt control. Gratitide is the act, the shower is an indirect side effect, and it could be any one of a number of things. You could just as easily be grateful for your toothpaste and the water to brush your teeth with, and neither the tooth brushing nor the drinking of the water would be the tilt reduction techniques.

networth appears to understand this, as I would assume the other thread readers do as well.

This is similar to some basic Buddhist beliefs, which seems to work for over 500 million people. You could say the Buddha was the ultimate tilt reducer.

This is so obvious that I feel silly stating it, so I will assume that is not the assertion in this thread. But that does leave me wondering what the assertion of this thread is. Maybe I'll feel silly when someone explains something really simple that I missed.
I think Cardner's argument goes something like this.

Gratitude is something that can reduce stress and this is good for your poker game.

Now I agree that in the world of sports, and in my book Real Poker Psychology I frequently use tennis since I've been playing tennis from a young age, I do agree that stress reduction and being relaxed on the tennis court can be helpful for fluid movement which results in proper execution of ground strokes, volleys, serve, and so on. But what does it do for you in poker?

As I show in my book, games can be broken into two components which I'll call here their knowledge component and their execution component. It's my opinion that poker has a large knowledge component, certainly much larger than the knowledge component for tennis. But its execution component is quite small when compared to virtually any athletic sport. That is you don't need speed, timing, and coordination to throw your chips into the pot. And the execution component is where things like speed, timing, and coordination come in, and that's where something like gratitude (which is suppose to reduce stress) is helpful.

So here is an example of an idea which probably comes from the sports world that has at best little value in poker. And one other thing, your toothpaste won't help you with your poker game either.

Mason
Mason Malmuth 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 09:24 AM.


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