Tikay insisted on capturing this rarest of sitings.
I haven't played live poker for about 7 or 8 months, mainly for both book and family reasons, but an invite to the Sky Poker Tour in Leeds was more than enough to awake me from my hibernation. I have nothing but good things to say about the tour – the team at Sky are second to none, the atmosphere is always fantastic, and the action is always very loose.
I was in a unique position mentality wise for this tournament, because I brought my fiancee along and we met some old friends beforehand. So I decided very early I would gamble for a big stack, because if I bust out, I got to catch up with some old friends. To make sure I did just that, I necked five pints in quick succession at the table.
I won the very first hand and after that, I reckon I was pretty much the chip leader or thereabouts for the rest of the tournament until the final table. It was a very liberating experience, playing with no fear of busting because I wanted to see my friends, and I was much looser and more aggressive than I can remember ever being. I was playing pretty crazily, but in a measured, considered kind of way.
The second interesting dynamic occured a couple of places off the bubble. My stack had just took a hit, but I was still easily in the top 5 or 6, but I had another dilema. Knowing full well I was gambling from the start, I didnt book a hotel, and I had about one hour to catch the last train home. So even though I was in a position where I probably should sit back, I started pushing every hand. Very liberating feeling again, no fear and the net effect was I was also creating a very good table image, and I accumulated a ton of chips.
The bubble burst, we soon made the final table, and again, I was pretty much the most active player from the get go. I ran really well throughout the entire tournament so I cant really complain about running into a few coolers near the end. The first pot I had AK vs AQ vs AA and lost to both hands, which damaged my stack. Soon after I shoved with AQ, the guy next to me didnt see me enter the pot and announced 'raise' as he was on the button. The dealer declared the raise had to stand, and his 8-6 hit a straight on the river to bust me in 7th place. Not much you can do about that.
Running into Thewy with a hand for the 9th time in a row
But it was great fun as always, especially sharing a final table with Julian Thew. Thewy is such a nice guy he makes you forget he is hoovering up your chips with no remorse, you almost root for him when he is in the pot against you. The event was televised and I did quite a good exit interview after (At least I think I did, I was pretty sozzled by then). The best part was that after years of wanting one, I actually got a genuine trophy, albeit just one for making the final table. I have always vainly wanted a trophy – for anything, not just poker – so that was a nice one to tick off the bucket list.
A great weekend indeed and I may have the live poker bug again, I'm just a bit gutted in my drunkon stupor I completly forgot to plug The Mental Game of Poker on TV.
One of the big concepts we discuss in The Mental Game of Poker is the learning process. A lot of mental game issues in poker are caused by people not understanding the nature of learning. Most poker players assume they have mastered certain concepts too early, or try and learn too much at once. Failure is often treated as a sign you should give up trying, rather than a natural and important part of improving.
If you get the book you will see some great advice on how to correct some of these incorrect assumptions. The whole process of writing the book has made me think long and hard about poker coaching. It is big business in the industry, I myself have been coached/sweated by 3 or 4 different coaches, some of them very high profile ones. Knowing what I know now, I realise how important understanding the learning process is for any coach, and from my own experience it is vastly overlooked.
First of all, I will say that one on one coaching is probably the most beneficial way anyone will learn poker (or anything else) – your game is exposed, stripped bare, and critiqued. You also will find a friend and role model if the coach is good. However, if the coach/student does not understand the learning process, it can actually be a frustrating experience.
I once had some sessions with Jay ‘KRANTZ’ Rosenkrantz, a sick sick player, but the difference between us was massive. A big blind for him was a buy-in for me, and he didn’t really cater his teaching style for the level I was at, rather he spoke to me like I was a nosebleed player – it may as well have been a foreign language I was hearing and I actually think the experience may have held me back, rather than helped me. The best coaching I ever had was from a great guy called Stuart ‘Balloo’ Menzies, who actually didn’t play games much bigger than myself, but he understood where I was as a player and coached accordingly.
The biggest single issue I have encountered from poker coaches is they try and teach too much, too soon. They will sweat a session, or study a series of hands, and overwhelm their student with all manner of technical information. Most of us poker students are just as much to blame, because we are just as keen to immerse ourselves in as much higher level literature as we can (I think everyone who has ever purchases a subscription to a poker training site has tried to watch all the videos back to back because of the sheer enthusiasm of having joined).
This is not how the learning process works; it is much more gradual and requires a lot of repetition. When we overload ourselves with information, or our coaches do, it only serves to create frustration when we are not able to execute that information when we are at the tables. Which in turn can lead us to question our ability and feel like a failure, because we don’t realise the learning process is supposed to be like this. (There is also a phenomenon called Decision Paralysis whereby the more information you have in front of you, the harder it is to make a decision and you are more likely to make a bad one, well worth reading up on).
If you are a coach or you have a coach, or even if you are just teaching yourself, it is vital you know that the learning process is much more gradual and you cannot just expect to know something because you have been told it.
Before embarking on coaching, the coach and student should agree between them what the 3 or 4 biggest areas they need to work on are (Whether they are leaks, or developing new skills) and frame the coaching around those issues. If the student’s biggest areas for improvement is 3-betting and playing in multi-way pots, don’t overwhelm them with 4-betting, G Buck calculations, playing the turn and metagame, it is just too much to take in (Obviously these scenarios will come up, and do address them as they do, but keep it simple and mark it as a future topic for discussion).
Don’t move onto something new until the student is proving they have learned the lesson over a large sample. Don’t assume because they showed they understood something in a sweat session they have learned the lesson to the point where it will show up every time. They need to consistently prove it when they are not being watched before it can be considered mastered. If they can prove they have learned something while under extreme pressure, like a big downswing, then you know they have it mastered and are ready to move on to the next lesson.
One on one coaching or discussing hands with friends is definitely the most valuable learning experience in poker, because you not only learn about the game, you learn about yourself. Just make sure everyone involved knows what learning looks like, because you can actually hinder progress if they don’t.
Apologies for anyone who pre-ordered the The Mental Game of Poker, for reasons beyond our control we were delayed by 3 or 4 days beyond the projected shipping date. Believe it or not, it was apparently because the printers didn't quite have the right shade of blue for the cover and it came out slightly purple-y instead. Had we known this was the issue right away we would have just sent a Barney the Dinosaur version of the book out.
If you did pre-order the book, Jared & I will be sending something along shortly as a special offer and thank you via email.
Anyway, we are now both going to try out the medium of Video Blogs, just because it seems easier, more compelling, and more engaging. I probably should have shaved beforehand, and my god do we both look tired - that is actually the toll the book has taken on us lately, no joke. The sound quality is pants and it will be better in the future, I will also edit my mug out of it more often next time.
There is a ton of blog stuff coming its way in the next few days but right now I just wanted to post a link to Jared's interview on a recent Poker Show with Jesse May. Jesse reviews the book and he couldn't say enough about it. Jesse is probably one of the top five industry guys I respect in poker, his knowledge and enthusiasm for the game is unparalleled in my opinion - so for him to like the book so much has really got me excited.
In the motivation section of The Mental Game of Poker I touch on a subject that is dear to me, prop bets. I have always been a big fan of some of the stories of outrageous proposition bets in poker, in particular, old school road gambler legends like Amarillo Slim (Shame he is a bit, erm, dodgy, in other aspects of his life).
There are some fantastic modern prop bets in the online generation, however, there is a notably different trend among online players, which I call 'Motivational Prop Bets'. Back in the day, a successful proposition gambler would rarely bet unless it was a sure thing (And in some cases, when they have outright cheated). Usually the bet would involve a 'sucker' who would be unaware of a significant edge the gambler had (Look up the legendary Amarillo Slim table tennis bet series to see what I mean).
I call these 'Edge Prop Bets', you only bet when you believe you have an edge that you can run 100 miles/play 100,000 hands a month/eat 30 eggs in an hour etc. That is exactly what a successful gambler should be doing, investing in a perceived edge which will pay off over time. Most successful poker players know all about this.
But the modern trend of 'Motivational Prop Bets' suggests quite the opposite. Check out any popular poker forum and you will likely find a ton of these. Someone will propose that they can play x number of hands in a month, win x amount of money, or lose x amount of weight. Most of the time, rather than proposing these because they believe they can do it, they propose them because they want to do them, but are struggling to motivate themselves.
They have no prior evidence to suggest they will actually succeed, in fact, they have a ton of evidence to support the opposite viewpoint. They don't have enough motivation to lose the weight or play x number of hands for its own sake, so they want to force their interest by putting money on the line.
If someone proposes a bet because they are struggling to motivate themselves to do something they should be doing anyway, particularly if it is way off what they are currently capable of, take it. This is a bet that is destined for failure more often than not.
Motivational problems are not caused by a lack of motivation, rather the focus of your motivation is elsewhere. When someone is struggling to motivate themselves to play more hands, it is actually because they are very motivated to take more time off from playing. If someone is struggling to motivate themselves to lose weight, it is because they are very motivated to eat bad foods and not exercise.
I know that sounds like really fluffy pop psychology but it is true, and most of the time that motivation to eat crap or play less is stronger, much stronger, than the motivation not to lose money in a prop bet. I read a great book called Drive by Daniel Pink recently that confirmed just that. Basically, our ability to perform actually decreases when financial incentives are introduced, even when it is a hobby you would do for free, introducing money makes it feel like work, which makes it a real grind – all of which makes it all the more likely that desire to be lazy will win.
It creates an interesting paradox with poker, because of course it is a game where money is the way to keep score. One thing I have learned from working with Jared Tendler, and also from observing hundreds of players I have interviewed, is that in order to succeed when money is on the line you need to detach yourself from the dollars and concentrate on developing the skill needed to make it for its own sake.
I can support this argument first hand too. After working on the book with Jared Tendler I managed to drop quite a bit of excess weight through plain old eating less and exercising more. I did this by applying his mental game methods by changing my attitude to eating (I was a bit of a binge eater) and learning to box at my gym. Rather than focussing on my weight, I focussed on why I was binge eating, my eating habits, and improving my ability in my new hobby at the gym. I haven't changed the food I eat, I just am learning how to exercise portion control. It has gone really well and I am only keeping half an eye on my weight (In fact my first real dip in progress came when I started weighing myself regularly and made it all about the numbers again, which I quickly changed back again to once a month).
It has been about five months I have lost about 20-22lbs, but more importantly it hasn’t felt like a grind because I have done it for its own sake, not for the sake of losing weight itself, which will hopefully means I am developing the habits that wont see me sling it all back on again.
I actually was offered to turn it into a prop bet at the start of the year with someone who was looking to lose a similar amount of weight, I am glad I turned them down. Doing something because I wanted to is much easier than doing something because I feel I had to. When you see some porker telling you they want odds that they can lose x amount of weight in a month, unless they are Ted Forrest, take them up on it, because deep down they probably don't want to win as much as they claim to.
Several people, including Betfair Blogger Yorkypuds, have mentioned to us that they are going to use The Mental Game of Poker as a jumping off point to start a foray into playing PLO. Evidently their hope is that it will provide a solid emotional base to withstand the inevitable swings of the four card version of hold'em.
In principal, that is a great idea, and I like to think that the book can do just that. What I would say, however, is that most players should probably work on major mental game issues within their usual games initially before attempting to test them in uncharted waters. One of the things we strongly stress in the book is that you should work on your biggest leaks first before trying to develop new skills. You really need to work on the issues in your 'C game' before moving towards mastery, otherwise they are just going to show up again (and probably sooner and much worse in a game like PLO).
I think just about every poker player (myself included, several times) has had a 'PLO phase'. It is a bit like the poker equivalent of a mid life crisis, most players I know have attempted a different game when they are frustrated with poker – a change is as good as a rest. The ironic thing about most PLO phases is that often players are frustrated with the variance of hold'em, yet seem to think the way to remedy that is to take up an even swingier version of the game.
Of course not everyone has their PLO Phase because of frustration or variance; some just want a new challenge or see it as potentially very profitable. And for many, it isn't a phase, but the start of their new bread and butter game. Yorkypuds is a keen student of the game so I am sure he is fully aware of the swings about to come his way.
I guess the key thing I want to get across is that if you currently have a problem coping with variance in hold'em, work on that issue first until you know it has improved before taking up PLO for the first time. Variance itself doesn't cause mental game issues, it only amplifies them, so taking up a higher variance form of poker is only going to create more problems. I say this both as someone who has spent the last two years shadowing Jared Tendler, and also someone who has had their fair share of ill advised PLO phases.
Of course the nice flip side of this is that when you do have a really solid ability to cope with variance, you put yourself in an even better position to make money in the high variance games. Jared had a great article about a year ago about how often these highly charged testosterone fuelled games often comes down to the player with the best 'C game' and I think it's very applicable to PLO.
I enjoyed Thank You Economy by Gary Vaynerchuk so much I snap bought his first (none wine) offering, Crush It. If time taken to buy-then-read is anything to go by, clearly I loved it, as I managed to blitz through it in a matter of days.
And love it, I did. Crush It is all about how we live in an age where anyone can turn a hobby or passion into a career. The message is simple enough, find something you love and monetise it. If you are passionate enough about a subject you will be able to find a niche way of blogging/wrtiting/video blogging/podcasting/creating content about that subject, which you can build into something people will pay for.
Step forward social media, which is how you find your audience. Just like in the Thank You Economy, Gary reminds us that social media is really the greatest listening tool in the world – not an opportunity for spammers and old school marketeers to dump links.
It all sounds so simple. Find your passion, produce the best blog site in the world, create a community of followers, wait for the money to roll in. Of course it isn't as simple as that, it requires lots and lots of hard work, which Gary is all too eager to point out again and again. However, he is so passionate and persuasaive that he does fill you with confidence that we all have the power to do it.
This book spoke to me as much, if not perhaps a bit more, than Thank You Economy. I think this is because for the past five years I have turned a passion into a career. I haven't done all the things suggested in Crush It, nor have I necessarily done those things I have done to the best of my ability, but I have seen first hand how liberating having a job you would do for free is. With my first book now available to buy, I think this was a very fortuatous time for me to have discovered Crush It.
It's a brilliant book, and a rare one I may read a second time. I think Thank You Economy is the better book, and one that everyone should read. But Crush It is perhaps my personal favourite of the two, because it really speaks to me as a self employed journalist.
Once again, as good a book as it is, think seeing the man in action does much more than my review ever could.
Posts
