Overlooking self control
Have you ever read articles or threads on poker forums about the ingredients that make a poker player successful? Invariably, near the top of the list is "Bankroll Management." Somewhere on the list you'll usually find: minimizing tilt, strong analytical skills, game selection, and confidence, among others. What I'm here to say today is that most of the traits that make a poker player successful can be lumped into two major categories: 1) Analytics and 2) Self Control.As you can guess, “analytics” really encompasses everything related to formulating decisions based on math, how certain hands are typically played, current game conditions, and history. Basically it's the art (and science) of data gathering and processing.
Alternatively, the second general category, “self control,” has more to do with handling your emotional state. It could be anywhere from overboard elation of sucking out on someone, or the tilt resulting in being on the other side of the coin.
I believe both of these general categories are equally important in being a successful poker player, but I believe the second is often overlooked. Let's talk a bit about a fictional "blog hero" in some different poker situations. Our hero, by most definitions, is a “good poker player.” He understands basic preflop play, knows how to read hands reasonably well, and he has a decent grasp of basic poker math. Perhaps our hero even understands advanced lines, takes hand reading beyond level 2 or 3, can do some more advanced EV calculations, and he knows how interpret his image and game conditions to help him make better decisions in the hand. Our hero is somewhere between the range of “decent” and “expert,” much like you and me. In other words, his analytical skills are reasonably strong and he’s a winning player because of it.
Often, various aspects of these “traits of winning players” will fall into both general categories I talked about earlier. Let's take bankroll management as our first example. Most people will tell you that for a NL game of stakes $X/$Y you need a minimum of N buy-ins to handle the natural ups and downs without going broke (assuming you're a winning player to begin with). That's the analytical side. It usually doesn't take people long to conceptually understand why it's important to have an adequate bankroll. The part people don't consider, until it's too late, is their self control (or lack thereof).
Here's the example of how self control is often overlooked. It doesn't do our hero much good to know they need 30 buy-ins (or whatever number you choose) if they don't follow their own rules. “Oh there’s a big donkey at the table, it doesn’t matter that I’m sitting with 50% of my bankroll on the table, I have an edge.” That’s a pretty glaring aspect of non-existent self control. Time and time again, I see people who are otherwise very good at the analytical side of poker failing miserably on controlling themselves from taking unnecessary risks with their bankroll. Similarly, how often have you seen someone go on a bad run and get their account real low and instantly their answer is to find someone to “flip” (agreeing to go all-in preflop no matter what your cards are) for it to try to double up quick. Instead, perhaps they just take whatever they have left and put it all on the table at the highest stakes it allows. I think we’d all agree that these blatant acts of recklessness are a detriment to our hero, but I think it’s worth spelling out precisely why.
When our hero puts a large percentage of his bankroll in play at higher stakes than normal, it has several adverse effects. 1) It’s likely his edge is smaller than normal. Bigger games generally have better players. 2) Psychology, it’s difficult to think clearly when playing with “case money.” Let’s face it, if our hero was thinking clearly to begin with, he wouldn’t be playing with it all on the line. As a result of one and two, 3) our hero’s supposed strengths (his analytical skills) have been diminished, leading to worse decisions on average. In combination with the other reasons, 4) our hero’s variance is increased because one stroke of un-luck will result in the inability to exploit future positive EV situations (in other words, no more money = no ability to recoup losses). In one of Sklansky’s early books, he mentions that it can be correct to pass on +EV propositions now if losing would prevent us from exploiting a higher EV proposition in the future. That is the essence of #4 and is the basically bankroll management in a nutshell.
I’ve often wondered what causes people to make such critical errors in self assessment. Is it an inaccurate perception of their skill advantage vs. other players (analytical trait), or a denial of the reality that variance could cripple them? Or perhaps self indulgent vices such as an “ego thing” where they’re not willing to drop down to a level they feel is “beneath their abilities”? Perhaps it’s just the burning desire for a quick fix – i.e. good old fashion laziness. Whatever it is, it really amazes me that bankroll management tops most lists as the #1 trait good players possess, because in my opinion it should be trivially easy to attain and undoubtedly the least complex concept in this very complicated game. Keep in mind, when I’m talking bankroll management, I’m not referring to risking a small portion of your bankroll to take a shot higher stakes game. I’m referring to taking unnecessary risks in which a negative result would cripple your ability to recover.
How about another commonly listed trait: game selection. There's the old adage that goes something like: "What good is it to be the 6th best player in the world if you only sit with the 5 better players?" It's obvious why as a poker player you want to sit in a game where you have an edge on a daily basis (let's save the arguments for 'testing yourself' and 'taking shots to move up' for the time being). If you have a positive expectation in a game, you'll make money in the long run. We all know this. That's the analytical side. On the other hand, how often have you seen someone like our hero, an otherwise excellent player, refusing to play a level lower than normal when the games at their regular stakes are harder than average? Or how about when the one donator at the table busts and leaves and our hero stays in the game with the other good players where his edge might be small or nil? It happens all the time. For some reason, it’s very difficult for our hero to saddle up and find a softer seat, why? I have a feeling it has to do with some of the reasons mentioned in the above paragraph.
Another example is when our hero tries to be, what I’ll call, a “super hero.” He sees another player (villain) he’s never seen before and assumes that’s enough to warrant sitting in. After all, if villain was any good, hero would have encountered him already, right? In fairness to our hero, this line of thought is often correct and is at least some piece of information about an otherwise unknown online opponent. So naturally he sits with him at a heads up table or two and the games begin. Right away it seems like the poker gods have taken to our villain this match. Most turns seem to be a scare card for hero and when they aren’t the river gives the villain a better hand. Hero assess he has an edge, but at this point he’s down 4-5 buy-ins and his head is more focused on just getting it back. “Another couple pots my way and I’m done,” he says. Another river in villain’s favor and frustration in hero really starts to set in. Before he knows it he’s tilting and down 6 buy-ins… you can see where this is going.
Our hero is so focused on simply getting back to even, he forgets that there’s no rule that states you must win back the money from those you lost it – yet we see this all the time. I believe it’s where the poker term “stuck” (meaning, to be losing money) came from. “Sorry I can’t leave, I’m stuck in this game.” Hero needs to ask himself who’s in control – himself or the red numbers in pokertracker? I’m not saying hero should abandon a hugely +EV situation because he’s getting unlucky, but I am advocating a constant reevaluation of your edge in a game – which isn’t determined by simply answering the question “how bad is my opponent?” which hero seems to think. Instead it’s a combination of questions and answers including: “how bad is opponent and how well am I playing? how has our recent history effected the momentum of our match and what am I going to do to alter/continue the current flow?” Stay in control, Hero, You can dew eeeeit!
As you can see, when our hero loses control of himself, his weakness begins to dilute his strengths and a slippery slope can often begin. A big edge becomes a small edge, which causes the swings to be bigger, which increases the likelihood of a huge downswing, which leads to more tilt, which inhibits our hero’s normally stellar judgment, which leads to a smaller edge, and on and on… Before you know it, our hero has spiraled himself into a –EV situation in which only his luckbox can save him. After all, is this really any better than the poker pro who can’t pass a craps table without rollin’ the bones a few times?
So who is our hero? Our hero is you, our hero is me. Our hero is the player you most respect in your game and he’s the donator. He’s everyone at one point or another. The more self control you have, the more you can avoid the pitfalls our hero trips into in my examples above. I’m sure you can name many more common traps people fall into. At some point, all of us are likely to repeat the mistakes our hero made above and more. The trick is quickly recognizing them and regaining control to allow our strengths to shine through and pull us out of a tough run. Stay in the driver’s seat and do something to reinforce it. Set some hard and fast rules if you have to. Stop-losses can prevent a good player from maximizing his EV, but only if said player can keep his same positive expectation when losing buy-in after buy-in. Be honest and be true to yourself. It’s the first step in keeping control. Be in a constant state of evaluation of yourself and your opponents. Recognize when they’re out of control and figure out how to exploit it. It’s part of the game within the game and it’s how most successful players continue to play their A game day in and day out. In poker terms, that’s truly heroic.
Aaron.
posted by WiltOnTilt at 3:39 AM
2 Comments:
You nit. ;)
Nice one Aaron!
Post a Comment