Downswing Advice

Originally posted by unshpe

I really like this, bookmarked it and gonna refer back to it if I feel things starting to slip

Accumulated emotion hand histories, again please correct or point out any other flaws that I have missed in doing these.

1) You lose wayyy more than 50% of my coin flips.

2) Because you lose a lot of flips, many of them at critical times.

3) Variance. Each individual coin flip is 50% chance of winning and losing, independent of how many you've lost in the past. You have also won many coin flips but because you won them you feel like you deserved to, especially as you remember how many you have lost and this takes away from the fact that you actually won the flip because you are mentally justifying it rather than acknowledging that it was just as lucky to win as it was unlucky to lose. This is also an issue because you have lost a handful of critical coin flips at crucial times, which magnifies the pain of losing the flip and makes the memories and emotion stand out in your mind, thus making losing future coin flips more painful and tilting than they should be.

4) Remember that you cannot control the cards. You are just as likely to win a flip as you are to lose it, meaning that if you consider yourself unlucky to lose one, you should consider yourself lucky to win one. Each flip is independent of all previous and future flips. Regardless of how many you have won or lost in the past you are still 50/50 to win or lose in the present.

5) Variance is very powerful. It is imperative to look at the present without bringing baggage from the past. Only then will you be able to control your emotions on the level at which you aspire to do so.

Originally posted by DavidNegranu

Originally posted by unshpe

I really like this, bookmarked it and gonna refer back to it if I feel things starting to slip

+1
It is very good for sure.
Someone once said, "It's all one big session".

Another thing I might mention is the word "fish".
Are we using it as a put-down or as an evaluation of someone's play?

Generally, we hear people divided into "fish" and "regs", but in reality there is a whole spectrum, and within that are some distinctive player types:
Calling station, Weak-tight and so on.

So instead of "fish" categorize each player:
http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/bss/1568/1/

or
http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/bss/2259/1/

I sometimes think that we just call them "fish" as an ego thing.

--VS

Some great advice in here

Another thing I might mention is the word "fish".
Are we using it as a put-down or as an evaluation of someone's play?

This is a pretty good point.

I think if you sucked out on and call someone a "stupid fish" because of that, that's obviously not the way to go.

However, if you are discussing a hand and are calling a weak player a "fish", that's a whole different story. Of course then there's still a distinction between different types of weak players, like you said, including calling stations, nits, you name it.

I agree that very often, we just call people "fish" because we think we're better players. This might be the case very often, but we do need to be careful. Do you call someone a fish because he sucked out with KK vs your AA, or is he a fish because he's simply a bad player?

There's been some discussion about whether or not we should be calling weak players "fish". I personally don't have a problem with using this terminology, but I do agree that you need to make a distinction between different kinds of weak players.

It's easy to call someone a "fish". But it takes more than a couple hands or one suckout to determine whether or not that's actually true.

Just my thoughts on the matter

1) You get sucked out on a lot and run really bad, especially in some super profitable spots.

2) Because getting your money in with way the best hand, you should make a lot of money. It hurts to lose.

3) Variance is very powerful. Unless your opponent is drawing dead when youre all in, he has equity in the hand and therefore a chance to win. You cannot control what cards come and you have done your job well in getting the money in with the best of it. If you get your money in good far more often than you get it in bad, it is expected that you will get sucked out on more than you will suck out because your opponents have more oppurtunities to suck out than you do.

4) You cant control the cards. In the long run you will be very profitable in these spots. Each hand is independent of any others. Just because you lost last time with 95% equity, doesnt mean it is less likely for you to lose with 95% again next time. Variance is very powerful.

5) All you can do is get your money in with the best of it. You cannot control the cards, dont get disheartened when you get sucked out on, you will be very very profitable in the long run.

Originally posted by VorpalF2F

Another thing I might mention is the word "fish".
Are we using it as a put-down or as an evaluation of someone's play?

Generally, we hear people divided into "fish" and "regs", but in reality there is a whole spectrum, and within that are some distinctive player types:
Calling station, Weak-tight and so on.

So instead of "fish" categorize each player:
http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/bss/1568/1/

or
http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/bss/2259/1/

I sometimes think that we just call them "fish" as an ego thing.

--VS

I always find it tough to categorise players into these because so many people have aspects across all of these. Thats why I refer to him as a fish because he is a weaker player but for a number of reasons. If I was going to categorise him I would say he is predominantly a calling station, though he wont just call with 9 high because he might backdoor a straight. Usually its A high and some wierd gutshot or bottom pair when his opponent has shown a lot of strength. However, he overplays a lot of draws, i.e 4bet shoving a 10 :spade:6 on a 2 :spade:3 :spade:A board when his opponent 3bet 50% of his stack so he clearly has very little fold equity. He will also try and implement other moves that he has picked up talking to me and other more accomplished players such as floating and bluff raising with air on a raggy board but without any idea of when to do it, meaning it just looks like a wierd move

Originally posted by TinoLaan

However, if you are discussing a hand and are calling a weak player a "fish", that's a whole different story. Of course then there's still a distinction between different types of weak players, like you said, including calling stations, nits, you name it.

I agree that very often, we just call people "fish" because we think we're better players. This might be the case very often, but we do need to be careful. Do you call someone a fish because he sucked out with KK vs your AA, or is he a fish because he's simply a bad player?

There's been some discussion about whether or not we should be calling weak players "fish". I personally don't have a problem with using this terminology, but I do agree that you need to make a distinction between different kinds of weak players.

It's easy to call someone a "fish". But it takes more than a couple hands or one suckout to determine whether or not that's actually true.

Just my thoughts on the matter

Personally I use the word fish to generalise bad/weaker player(s), especially when the player(s) in question of aspects of many different type of weak players and so calling them a calling station would be largely ignoring their propensity to overplay a hand or go crazy in a wierd spot

http://www.boomplayer.com/en/poker-hands/Boom/3939140_1DC9580A4C

This is the guy im talking about. He's playing zoom so no info on anyone and thats how he plays his jacks...

Well the guy w/ A:cT:c clearly did not believe you had a K.

In all fairness, he read you correctly -- you did not have a K ♦

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
Well the guy w/ A:cT:c clearly did not believe you had a K.

In all fairness, he read you correctly -- you did not have a K ♦

The guy with the Jacks is the 'fish' that i've been berating in this thread quite a lot. He thought he played them really well and I was thinking 'wow, how do you play like that and get lucky that its some ejit with A high??'

Also, another issue I have which is definitely related to my mental state when I play is keeping my stack at 100BBs regardless of whether it goes over or under. Because I play zoom I can cash out a 150BB stack and return with a 100BB stack with no problems and given that the majority of stacks in it are <100BBs I dont feel like I sacrifice much in the way of implied odds and gain a lot in peace of mind in knowing that my losses in any one hand are capped at 100BBs. Would people say this is another thing that I need to work on or is it not really much of a problem?

I'd personally just keep playing. If you're leaving the table with 150bb, you're essentially just playing scared money. Yes you can potentially lose 150bb vs another 150bb stack. But on the other hand, you can also win 150bb there.

If you drop below 100bb, always top up to 100bb. If you get above 100bb, just keep playing until the end of the session imo

it is all a question of mindset. In the scheme of things if playing deep bothers you, you should not play with more than 20% of your BR at one table. But again I thing it is more a case of getting accustomed to it. Once you get used to it you'll have much more fun playing even 400bb deep ;).

Originally posted by DavidNegranu
Also, another issue I have which is definitely related to my mental state when I play is keeping my stack at 100BBs regardless of whether it goes over or under. Because I play zoom I can cash out a 150BB stack and return with a 100BB stack with no problems and given that the majority of stacks in it are <100BBs I dont feel like I sacrifice much

There is a silver strategy article: "How to play deep stacked" that would be well worth reading when you get to silver.

When you have a deep stack, you more cautious in some situations and more open in others.

It's best to stick with what you know, and extend yourself slowly.

Did you take the NL Beginner's course yet?

Peace,
--VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F

Originally posted by DavidNegranu
Also, another issue I have which is definitely related to my mental state when I play is keeping my stack at 100BBs regardless of whether it goes over or under. Because I play zoom I can cash out a 150BB stack and return with a 100BB stack with no problems and given that the majority of stacks in it are <100BBs I dont feel like I sacrifice much

There is a silver strategy article: "How to play deep stacked" that would be well worth reading when you get to silver.

When you have a deep stack, you more cautious in some situations and more open in others.

It's best to stick with what you know, and extend yourself slowly.

Did you take the NL Beginner's course yet?

Peace,
--VS

My stars account isnt linked to PS so I wont be getting to silver unless I buy it, which I already did once. I think the main reason why im cautious about having >100BBs is because in zoom you never know who youre playing against so its much easier to make a fatal error, but this is a mindset issue more than anything. I dont have any issue with playing deepstack in live or on regular cash tables, in our stars home game I sit with 250BB starting stack. Its just a mental block making me uncomfortable with it in zoom and given that 80% of stacks are <100BBs its not something ive thought to address until now, where I am attempting to drastically overhaul my whole mindset. I havnt taken the beginners course, I feel that technically, my game is pretty sound, I made enough money playing NL10 live last year to cover my food and social bills for the year and online im posting 33.2 bbs/100 winrate, so its definitely something which is secondary to solving my mental game issues.

I havnt posted in here for a while and I am aware that this is becoming more about my mental progress than downswing advice but its helpful for me to get feedback on what im doing and if im progressing from more experienced players with a more developed mental game. I skipped past the individual tilts and moved to fear because I found myself to be suffering from 13/13 signs of fear that were in the introductory list. The past couple of days ive been working really hard on it and have written some key concepts taken from 'the mental game of poker' that I am constantly reading and going over so that I can attempt to train them to the level of unconscious competence:

Without some failure you cannot learn what is needed to achieve greater success. Real failure only happens when you give up.

Expect setbacks to happen. They are a normal part of the learning process. Setbacks are not failure. Take them in stride and keep working.

You cannot control the cards or your opponents. You can only control your decisions and your reactions. Spending time and energy trying to control variance of other players means you're less focused on playing well.

Mistakes are oppurtunites to improve. Focus on playing well now and learn from them later.

Here is a thought process I did in order to attempt to get to the bottom of my choking in big spots. Let me know if there are any other thoughts or underlying flaws which I have missed:

Fear of making a big/critical mistake.
Why do you fear this?
Because I don't want to make the wrong decision.
Why don't you want to make the wrong decision?
Because I dont want to make a big mistake.
Why don't you want to make a big mistake?
Because I don't want to lose.
Why don't you want to lose?
Because I hate losing and I don't want to lose money. I feel like a failure when I lose.
Why don't you want to lose money? Why do you feel like a failure?
I don't want to lose money because that is how I measure the success of a session.
I feel like a failure because I expect much better from myself.
Success in poker isn't measured in monetary gains or losses. Success is measured in making decisions. If you make the right decision, you will make money in the long run. If you make the wrong decision it will allow you to learn from it and improve. When reflecting on a session, don't analyse your profit/loss. Analyse your decisions in key moments.
Why do you expect better from yourself?
Because I work very hard on my game off the felt and feel like a lot of the mistakes I am making is elementary.
You are putting too much pressure on yourself when you play to play perfectly. This is creating performance anxiety and clouding your ability to think clearly when playing. Allow yourself to make mistakes, even if they are ones that you think you should not be making. Analyse them after the session and try to determine why you made these mistakes. That way you will be more relaxed and play closer to the level that you hope and expect from yourself

There is some pretty good stuff in that last post!

A couple of things:
♦  It's all one big session. Ending one day's play down doesn't necessarily mean you made any wrong decisions. Everyone has had the AA cracked, but it is still the correct decision to play them.

♦  The value of money can be a problem. You must want to win it, but at the same time, you must not care if you lose it. In poker you can only win to the extent that you are willing to risk. This does not mean that you should be a maniac -- discipline fits in there somewhere, too.

I have a suggestion, too....

Why not start a blog?

It's a good way to track your progress...

Best of luck,
--VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F

I have a suggestion, too....

Why not start a blog?

It's a good way to track your progress...

Best of luck,
--VS

I have thought about that but I am someone who thrives on and needs re-assurance that im going in the right direction and input from other people. In this thread you have helped me a lot and I have found some of the posts from other guys like badgerer and unshpe really helpful too. I'm a little worried that a blog may just be a whole lot of rambling to myself and losing the input from other people that I have in this thread?