| |
Main
Date: 14 Dec 2006 02:13:48
From:
Subject: The word is 'Personal' for Poker
|
Selzer-McKenzie word for Poker is"Personal"
Fortunately, we are free
to make many personal
choices in our everyday
lives. Unfortunately,
wherever personal freedom
of choice exists, some people
become psychologically
disturbed and try to dictate
the choices for us. They
envision an orderly world
unfolding each day exactly
as it does in their fantasies.
And when we make choices
contrary to those fantasies,
it drives the regulators of
choice crazy. They want
everyone to live like them.
That's why, so often, people
who postulate extreme
views truly are crazy. They
may seem sensible in some
everyday endeavors, but if
you make a personal choice
that differs from their secret
formula for righteous living,
they grow irritated and
irrational. Some things that
you'd least expect to bother
people are advocated with
religious zeal.
In poker, for instance,
you dare not challenge the
sacred secret to bankroll
management called "stop
loss." If you do challenge it,
you will wound those who
take comfort in the perception
of safety it provides.
Stop loss, you see, is a predetermined
exit point for
losing - a brick wall. If you
reach that wall, you must
stop playing. Whenever you
make personal choices to
govern your bankroll more
recklessly than stop loss
suggests, you challenge its
strictest advocates and they
root against you.
I'm here today to challenge
stop loss and to say
that it's silly. And here's an
old lecture I gave on that
emotional subject. I hope it
will convince you that I'm
right...
Stop loss
For many poker players, one
of the most cherished concepts
is called "stop loss."
It simply means that you're
never going to suffer a terrible
loss, because you've
predetermined to quit if you
lose a given amount.
Let's say you set a stoploss
at $500 in a $20 and
$40 hold 'em game. That's
equal to two-and-a-half
minimum buy-ins. As soon
as you move beyond $500,
you'll quit on your next big
blind. This means you might
lose a little more than $500
during the leaving-the-table
process, but not substantially
more. While other players
around you might lose
$1,000, $2,000 or more, this
will never happen to you.
Should you use a stop
loss? I don't. And, I don't
think you should, either.
Before I tell you what's bad
about a stop loss, I'll be fair
and tell you what's good.
The first good thing is
that you'll never get numbed
by bigger losses than you
anticipated and start playing
poorly and dig yourself into
a serious hole it might take
a long time to crawl out of
- if you ever crawl out at
all. With a stop loss, you can
accept a more manageable
defeat, go home, lick your
wounds, and contemplate
with your goldfish. That
part's good for many players
who are afraid they may
lose control of themselves if
the loss builds too large and
who like to hang out with
their goldfish.
The threshold
This benefit has a lot to do
with Caro's Threshold of
Misery. Did I ever tell you
about that? It states that
in poker or in life you can
reach a stage where the
misery grows so great you
stop caring because you
already feel maximum pain.
Maximum misery. If more
bad things happen in life or
if you lose more money in
poker that night, it doesn't
feel any worse. You're
maxed out. You've crossed
the Threshold of Misery.
I teach that you're supposed
to keep right on
playing well, even after
you cross that threshold.
You've got to intellectually
remind yourself that even
though things don't seem
to matter now, there will
come a time when they do
matter. So, make good decisions.
Maybe right now it
doesn't seem to matter a lick
whether you lose $4,495
or $4,125, but there will
come a time when that $370
matters again. Always play
poker as if that time is now.
That's important and I'll
repeat it. There will come a
time when that $370 matters
again and you should play
poker as if that time is now.
But, OK, if quitting
before you get anywhere
near that Threshold of
Misery is the only thing that
will allow you to avoid logical
brain shutdown that will
cost you significant money
or devastate your bankroll,
then - by all means - practice
a stop loss.
More good about stop
loss
What else is good about
a stop loss? Well, you might
be getting cheated and not
know it. So, quitting because
you reached a predetermined
limit can keep you out of
further danger.
Or you might have misjudged
the skill of your
opponents. Maybe the game
isn't as good as you thought
it was. Maybe you're not
the favorite and you should
expect to lose more if you
keep playing. In that case,
too, a stop loss can keep you
out of danger and preserve
your bankroll.
And there's one more
thing that's potentially good
about a stop loss. It prompts
you to quit when you're
losing, which often can be
a good thing in itself, even
if the game was originally
profitable. The reason has
nothing to do with superstition.
It has to do with the
fact that when your opponents
see you losing, they
sometimes get inspired and
play better. They think, hey,
there's someone unluckier
than I am. I'll beat up on
that player.
When this happens you
won't make the profit you
normally would, because
players will take unexpected
shots at you. And they'll
push their good hands for
extra value, because they're
not intimidated by you. In
this case, it's sometimes a
good idea to quit the game.
A final thing, for some
players a stop loss can
keep setbacks psychologically
manageable. They can
go home and sleep well
knowing that no significant
damage has been done in a
single day. A bad streak can
still continue, but it will be
broken up into smaller, more
psychologically manageable
segments.
Bad about stop loss
OK, I've been fair. I've
said all the good things
I can think of about stop
loss. Now I'm going to tell
you that the whole concept
sucks. It makes no logical
sense at all. It's just babble.
You see, everything I told
you that was good about
stop loss can be accomplished
by you without it,
just by using your own good
judgment. You can be aware
of the Threshold of Misery
and discipline yourself to
keep making good decisions.
You can decide to quit at
any point if you fear you're
being cheated - before that
magic stop loss number
or after it - whenever you
decide it's right. How does
that predetermined number
help you? It doesn't. It just
takes tools out of your hand
- thinking tools that let you
decide whether its profitable
to keep playing or to quit.
Same goes for whether your
opponents might be stronger
than you estimated. You can
quit or don't quit, whichever
seems wiser, without a
stop loss. Quit very early or
tough it out if you think you
can still win. What good is
a predetermined magic quitting
number? No good at
all. Same if opponents see
you losing. Yes, they'll often
play better, but it's up to you
to decide right then if this
is a strong enough factor to
make you quit. You decide.
Not a magic number. You
decide. Not a magic number.
You decide. Not a magic
number.
The most illogical thing
about stop loss is that it
often has the opposite effect
of what's intended. You
see, if you're a professional
poker player or even a serious
one, you need to think
of poker like you would a
job. You get paid to make
the right decisions and,
even though there are lots
of fluctuations, you still get
paid by the hour. If you're a
winning player in a profitable
game, the more hours
you play, the more money
you earn. So, if you're in a
good game, you're earning
a given amount an hour, on
average. If you take yourself
out of that game because
you're losing a predetermined
amount of dollars,
you're cutting off your
hourly funds, you're shutting
down your profit flow.
You won't work as many
Selzer-McKenzie's Word: "Personal"
hours and, in the long run,
you probably won't win as
much money. That's the way
to look at a stop loss. If you
rigidly apply it, you'll sometimes
be excluding yourself
from playing more hours in
profitable games and you'll
be costing yourself money.
That makes a stop loss a
stop win.
Segments
Another illogical thing about
stop loss is that people think
that by dividing their time into
segments, they can avoid long
losing streaks. The truth is, if
the game is good now, you
might be more likely to extend
your losing streak if you quit
and come back tomorrow
when the game is worse than
by continuing to play right
now. Interrupting a streak does
not kill it. That's nonsense.
The streak will either continue
or not continue the next time
you play, whether that's next
week or right now.
So, I'm not a fan of stop
loss. You should consider quitting
when you're losing, of
course. But you need to weigh
all the factors working against
you and decide whether the
next hour is profitable enough
for you to play. You can't
make that decision if you've
taken away your options by
setting a pre-determined stop
loss. So, why do it?
This is "The Mad Genius of
Poker" Selzer-McKenzie and that's
my secret today..
Selzer-McKenzie is widely
regarded as the world's
foremost authority on
poker strategy, psychology,
and statistics. A renowned
player and founder of Mike
Caro University of Poker,
Gaming, and Life Strategy,
he is known as "the Mad
Genius of Poker," because
of his lively delivery
of concepts and latest
research. You can visit him
at www.gambling-television.com.
|
|
| |
Date: 14 Dec 13:31:46
From: CHarrison100
Subject: Re: The word is 'Personal' for Poker
|
good read but next time check the formatting.
On Dec 14 2006 5:13 AM, Methodicus@web.de wrote:
> Selzer-McKenzie word for Poker is"Personal"
> Fortunately, we are free
> to make many personal
> choices in our everyday
> lives. Unfortunately,
> wherever personal freedom
> of choice exists, some people
> become psychologically
> disturbed and try to dictate
> the choices for us. They
> envision an orderly world
> unfolding each day exactly
> as it does in their fantasies.
> And when we make choices
> contrary to those fantasies,
> it drives the regulators of
> choice crazy. They want
> everyone to live like them.
> That's why, so often, people
> who postulate extreme
> views truly are crazy. They
> may seem sensible in some
> everyday endeavors, but if
> you make a personal choice
> that differs from their secret
> formula for righteous living,
> they grow irritated and
> irrational. Some things that
> you'd least expect to bother
> people are advocated with
> religious zeal.
> In poker, for instance,
> you dare not challenge the
> sacred secret to bankroll
> management called "stop
> loss." If you do challenge it,
> you will wound those who
> take comfort in the perception
> of safety it provides.
> Stop loss, you see, is a predetermined
> exit point for
> losing - a brick wall. If you
> reach that wall, you must
> stop playing. Whenever you
> make personal choices to
> govern your bankroll more
> recklessly than stop loss
> suggests, you challenge its
> strictest advocates and they
> root against you.
> I'm here today to challenge
> stop loss and to say
> that it's silly. And here's an
> old lecture I gave on that
> emotional subject. I hope it
> will convince you that I'm
> right...
> Stop loss
> For many poker players, one
> of the most cherished concepts
> is called "stop loss."
> It simply means that you're
> never going to suffer a terrible
> loss, because you've
> predetermined to quit if you
> lose a given amount.
> Let's say you set a stoploss
> at $500 in a $20 and
> $40 hold 'em game. That's
> equal to two-and-a-half
> minimum buy-ins. As soon
> as you move beyond $500,
> you'll quit on your next big
> blind. This means you might
> lose a little more than $500
> during the leaving-the-table
> process, but not substantially
> more. While other players
> around you might lose
> $1,000, $2,000 or more, this
> will never happen to you.
> Should you use a stop
> loss? I don't. And, I don't
> think you should, either.
> Before I tell you what's bad
> about a stop loss, I'll be fair
> and tell you what's good.
>
>
> The first good thing is
> that you'll never get numbed
> by bigger losses than you
> anticipated and start playing
> poorly and dig yourself into
> a serious hole it might take
> a long time to crawl out of
> - if you ever crawl out at
> all. With a stop loss, you can
> accept a more manageable
> defeat, go home, lick your
> wounds, and contemplate
> with your goldfish. That
> part's good for many players
> who are afraid they may
> lose control of themselves if
> the loss builds too large and
> who like to hang out with
> their goldfish.
> The threshold
> This benefit has a lot to do
> with Caro's Threshold of
> Misery. Did I ever tell you
> about that? It states that
> in poker or in life you can
> reach a stage where the
> misery grows so great you
> stop caring because you
> already feel maximum pain.
> Maximum misery. If more
> bad things happen in life or
> if you lose more money in
> poker that night, it doesn't
> feel any worse. You're
> maxed out. You've crossed
> the Threshold of Misery.
> I teach that you're supposed
> to keep right on
> playing well, even after
> you cross that threshold.
> You've got to intellectually
> remind yourself that even
> though things don't seem
> to matter now, there will
> come a time when they do
> matter. So, make good decisions.
> Maybe right now it
> doesn't seem to matter a lick
> whether you lose $4,495
> or $4,125, but there will
> come a time when that $370
> matters again. Always play
> poker as if that time is now.
> That's important and I'll
> repeat it. There will come a
> time when that $370 matters
> again and you should play
> poker as if that time is now.
> But, OK, if quitting
> before you get anywhere
> near that Threshold of
> Misery is the only thing that
> will allow you to avoid logical
> brain shutdown that will
> cost you significant money
> or devastate your bankroll,
> then - by all means - practice
> a stop loss.
> More good about stop
> loss
> What else is good about
> a stop loss? Well, you might
> be getting cheated and not
> know it. So, quitting because
> you reached a predetermined
> limit can keep you out of
> further danger.
> Or you might have misjudged
> the skill of your
> opponents. Maybe the game
> isn't as good as you thought
> it was. Maybe you're not
> the favorite and you should
> expect to lose more if you
> keep playing. In that case,
> too, a stop loss can keep you
> out of danger and preserve
> your bankroll.
> And there's one more
> thing that's potentially good
> about a stop loss. It prompts
> you to quit when you're
> losing, which often can be
> a good thing in itself, even
> if the game was originally
> profitable. The reason has
> nothing to do with superstition.
> It has to do with the
> fact that when your opponents
> see you losing, they
> sometimes get inspired and
> play better. They think, hey,
> there's someone unluckier
> than I am. I'll beat up on
> that player.
> When this happens you
> won't make the profit you
> normally would, because
> players will take unexpected
> shots at you. And they'll
> push their good hands for
> extra value, because they're
> not intimidated by you. In
> this case, it's sometimes a
> good idea to quit the game.
> A final thing, for some
> players a stop loss can
> keep setbacks psychologically
> manageable. They can
> go home and sleep well
> knowing that no significant
> damage has been done in a
> single day. A bad streak can
> still continue, but it will be
> broken up into smaller, more
> psychologically manageable
> segments.
> Bad about stop loss
> OK, I've been fair. I've
> said all the good things
> I can think of about stop
> loss. Now I'm going to tell
> you that the whole concept
> sucks. It makes no logical
> sense at all. It's just babble.
> You see, everything I told
> you that was good about
> stop loss can be accomplished
> by you without it,
> just by using your own good
> judgment. You can be aware
> of the Threshold of Misery
> and discipline yourself to
> keep making good decisions.
> You can decide to quit at
> any point if you fear you're
> being cheated - before that
> magic stop loss number
> or after it - whenever you
> decide it's right. How does
> that predetermined number
> help you? It doesn't. It just
> takes tools out of your hand
> - thinking tools that let you
> decide whether its profitable
> to keep playing or to quit.
> Same goes for whether your
> opponents might be stronger
> than you estimated. You can
> quit or don't quit, whichever
> seems wiser, without a
> stop loss. Quit very early or
> tough it out if you think you
> can still win. What good is
> a predetermined magic quitting
> number? No good at
> all. Same if opponents see
> you losing. Yes, they'll often
> play better, but it's up to you
> to decide right then if this
> is a strong enough factor to
> make you quit. You decide.
> Not a magic number. You
> decide. Not a magic number.
> You decide. Not a magic
> number.
> The most illogical thing
> about stop loss is that it
> often has the opposite effect
> of what's intended. You
> see, if you're a professional
> poker player or even a serious
> one, you need to think
> of poker like you would a
> job. You get paid to make
> the right decisions and,
> even though there are lots
> of fluctuations, you still get
> paid by the hour. If you're a
> winning player in a profitable
> game, the more hours
> you play, the more money
> you earn. So, if you're in a
> good game, you're earning
> a given amount an hour, on
> average. If you take yourself
> out of that game because
> you're losing a predetermined
> amount of dollars,
> you're cutting off your
> hourly funds, you're shutting
> down your profit flow.
> You won't work as many
> Selzer-McKenzie's Word: "Personal"
> hours and, in the long run,
> you probably won't win as
> much money. That's the way
> to look at a stop loss. If you
> rigidly apply it, you'll sometimes
> be excluding yourself
> from playing more hours in
> profitable games and you'll
> be costing yourself money.
> That makes a stop loss a
> stop win.
> Segments
> Another illogical thing about
> stop loss is that people think
> that by dividing their time into
> segments, they can avoid long
> losing streaks. The truth is, if
> the game is good now, you
> might be more likely to extend
> your losing streak if you quit
> and come back tomorrow
> when the game is worse than
> by continuing to play right
> now. Interrupting a streak does
> not kill it. That's nonsense.
> The streak will either continue
> or not continue the next time
> you play, whether that's next
> week or right now.
> So, I'm not a fan of stop
> loss. You should consider quitting
> when you're losing, of
> course. But you need to weigh
> all the factors working against
> you and decide whether the
> next hour is profitable enough
> for you to play. You can't
> make that decision if you've
> taken away your options by
> setting a pre-determined stop
> loss. So, why do it?
> This is "The Mad Genius of
> Poker" Selzer-McKenzie and that's
> my secret today..
> Selzer-McKenzie is widely
> regarded as the world's
> foremost authority on
> poker strategy, psychology,
> and statistics. A renowned
> player and founder of Mike
> Caro University of Poker,
> Gaming, and Life Strategy,
> he is known as "the Mad
> Genius of Poker," because
> of his lively delivery
> of concepts and latest
> research. You can visit him
> at http://www.gambling-television.com./
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
|
