Effort without application
Sup
Ive been thinking a bit about the concept of putting a lot of effort into something, yet still being uncommitted to that which you think you would like to achieve. At first, it felt like a pretty contradictory concept, but the more I thought about it, the more it makes a ton of sense to me. In addition, I feel like it's super important, or at least I can see how understanding the concept is very relevant in my own life.
The idea is that you can apply a huge amount of mental or physical effort to something and achieve no results, and the fact that you do not achieve anything is directly related to your initial approach to the problem. Golf is a great concrete example which I can think of which will help you to understand what I'm talking about.
Imagine that every day you drive to the range, buy 200 balls and hit them all. Any rational person would expect that their golf game would improve with this level of effort, but the actual success or failure of that player to improve their game would be down entirely to the method with which they chose to pracitce. A player who swings wildly at the ball and tries to get through the bucket as fast as possible will obviously not improve at all - but it must be noted that this player HAS made a phenomenal commitment to the game. He comes diligently every day to the range, hits his balls, exerting a huge amount of physical effort in doing so. He is committed and he works hard, but he will never improve.
This obviously relates directly to poker. A player who grinds out a billion hands a month wont necessarily improve, because just like the golfer, its possible to play poker for a long long time and never make any progress at all. The progression of your game is not based on the effort you exert or the number of hands you play. You may think "well that's not me. I study my game and watch videos every day". Though this is better than nothing, it is still no more conducive to becoming a winning player. In fact, it could even be said that it would be BETTER to play a billion hands than study mindlessly, because at least with volume comes improvement via repetition and osmosis.
I feel that people have an idea that there is a requisite set of things which they must do in order to become a winning player. Be it playing a certain number of hands, or watching a certain number of videos, or taking notes, or whatever. The problem is that this is effort without application. You are doing these things simply because someone else has told you to, or because you have developed the idea that this is what is necessary in order to become good at poker. Therefore, when you do not improve, you feel entitled to go to 2+2 and make a post along the lines of "poker is unbeatable. I study every day and I get nowhere. I'm the most unlucky player in the world".
The truth is that there is no concrete set of instructions or requirements which you need to folllow in order to win this game. It is not a step by step process, and if you feel that it is, you are destined for a long and arduous journey to nowhere. I don't propose to be smart (or arrogant) enough to hold the answer to the question "how do I become a winning player?", but I feel that I have been playing for long enough to say that the keys to improvement are application and understanding. Don't just grind endlessly or watch training videos because everyone else does, grind and study because you have a specific goal in mind. Respond to the problems you face at the table in an organic way - seek the answers to the questions which originate from your own mind and the situations you face playing your own game. Poker is a game of self development, so do not aim to copy someone elses process - develop your own.
Its this last point which is the most important. Playing poker mindlessly, playing too many hands, watching endless training videos etc etc is simply LAZY. You are deluding yourself into believing that you will get better by making this mindless effort. The truth is that you are making effort without application. Application in this sense would be to actually sit down and figure it all out for yourself, relying on nothing and nobody but your own mind. If you think about most superstar players - Isildur, Durrrr, Galfond etc - the large part of what makes them so good is that they have formed games around their own concrete understanding, and although they doubtless have great networks of poker friends who they can bounce ideas off, in the end they are great players because they made themselves that way as individuals. One only need look at the vast differences between the styles of the three players I've mentioned above to see that this is true.
Jersey shore / The hills
This will be a pretty quick post, because I like to make my blogs interesting and I'm not sure how interesting I can make this one.
Essentially I am totally dumbfounded at these two shows. I am not really a fan of very many TV shows but I can usually pick out the merit in a given program - that is, even if I don't like a show, I can usually tell what other people like about it. For example, I think that show "the king of queens" is super awful but I can see how other people might find it funny.
With Jersey shore and The hills however I am totally lost as to how anyone could actually sit down and deliberately subject themselves to this kind of torture. The worst thing is, these shows are super popular which is insanely depressing when you think about the kind of people who would intentionally watch more than one episode.
I had heard a lot about Jersey shore on 2+2 and the net in general so I checked out some random episode and made it less than 5 minutes before I had to turn it off. With The hills I lasted a little longer, about 15 minutes before I couldn't take any more.
The thing about both these shows is that they are both about real people, which is just unfathomably depressing. I can only hope that Americans in general are not represented by the people on these shows. For those who actually watch the Hills, can you please reconcile with me how that Heidi girl can be so completely retarded when its so obvious that Spencer is the hugest douchemonster in the known universe? I think that's what actually broke me down and made me unable to continue - his insane douchebaggery combined with her total denial slash infinite retardation.
Anyway, I don't watch TV much and after today I think I'll just forget about it altogether. What a waste of time.
Funktrust
When I was nineteen, I was all about the breaks.
I'm not sure what it was exactly, but I just couldnt get enough. Its not that I didn't listen to anything else, either - it's just that when it came down it, me and breaks were inseparable.
If, like me, you had a breaks problem, you definitely knew about Funktrust. Funktrust was the name of a breakbeat night - no, a breakbeat institution - which used to take place in my old hometown of Sydney Australia. For those of you who know what I mean, I'm talking about when it was old school, back at the Globe nightclub. They played a glorious mix of hip hop, breaks, electro and drum & bass. It was totally amazing.
You might naturally assume that I was part of the scene, with smooth moves, cool clothes, attitude to match, mad dance floor abilities, and you'd be completely wrong. I was effectively the most uncool person in the room. But I didn’t care about any of the hype - I was just there for the music, and the dancefloor. Make no mistake, I absolutely cannot dance. I don’t care though - if the music is right, ill be out there giving it 110%.
My friends at university were much more of the house music type. I quite like house music but I can't stand the clubs. Overpriced, pretentious, soulless meat markets. So as a Funktruster, I was pretty alternative - edgy, if you will - which gave me a bit of mysterious appeal. My really good friend Jason in particular spun the fact that I listened to breaks into this huge fantasy about how I was effectively a b-boy with amazing rapping, scratching, breaking, and whatever else skills he could think of.
You might wonder where I’m going with this. Well, we were out at some lame club with a big crew of about 15 of us, guys and girls. I don’t know what you were like when you were 19 years old, but we were all wasted. Not drunk, wasted. Naturally we were on the dancefloor doing our best to impress. Suddenly Jason has a drunken epiphany.
"DUDE. DUDE. YOU DEFINITELY NEED TO BREAKDANCE. RIGHT NOW."
I was in that state where although heavily intoxicated, I was thinking pretty clearly on the inside. I rationally explained to Jason that I was unable to breakdance and that the fact that I went to Funktrust in no way made me capable of anything remotely impressive. This came out something like
"LOLOl NAH CAN'T MAN IT'D BE SO DUMB"
Of course that only spurred him on more, and in no time he had gathered everyone around me to eagerly await my debut performance.
"THISH ISH GONNA BE SIIIIIIIICK!!11!"
I had a very rational conversation with myself in which I pointed out that if I was to attempt any kind of breakdancing I would not only look totally ridiculous but also subject myself to the risk of significant injury to my person. This however was moot, because the baying mob made it impossible for me to escape the destiny of my upcoming performance. "Oh well" I thought, "better go down in flames then" and dropped to the floor, giving it my customary 110% effort and enthusiasm.
You may think that by some miracle I pulled out the performance of my life and destroyed the dancefloor with my incredible skills. You would be incorrect. I would describe my effort as somewhere inbetween a dead fish and an epileptic seisure - but done with great commitment all the same. The whole time, my rational self was shaking its head in shame with the realisation of how utterly stupid I looked. Tiring rapidly, I resigned myself to the knowledge that I had totally destroyed my credibility in front of all my peers, finished my "performance", and stood up.
Everyone went totally beserk with congratulations. I mean this was a reception worthy of a rock star. I have never felt so much adulation, or genuine confusion, in my life. Did they miss the part where I looked like a total retard? i.e. the whole thing?
It suddenly dawned on me that everyone was completely WASTED. In addition, the club was pretty dark, as clubs are. I guess that nobody really saw anything, and just assumed that I was awesome. By some freak of fate I had become a nineteen year old breakdancing legend.
The moral of the story is that if you’re afraid to do something, you should probably just go ahead and do it anyway. If you’re worried about the consequences of getting it wrong, be it losing a stack on a bad bluff or being rejected by some girl who probably isn’t worth it anyway, just remember that once upon a time I squirmed around like a complete moron on the rancid floor of a crappy nightclub – and came away a legend.
Good luck till next time.
-ama-
You should lose more
Hey guys,
Welcome to my blog! Ill be writing my random musings here from time to time, though I'm not sure that Ill be blogging as frequently as some other poker pros do. The main reason is that I want to make this interesting for you to read, as opposed to just telling you that I went to the shops and bought some milk, then watched TV, oh yeah and I had steak for dinner, I like poker its fun zzzzzzzzz.....
I've been training as a student of Kung-Fu for the last 2 years or so, and my experiences there will frequently appear in this blog. The reason is that Kung-fu (or any form of hand to hand combat) is SO scarily similar to poker that its too good not to use as a metaphorical example of how you can play better. The similarities are striking - you're face to face with another guy who is trying to dominate you and force you to submit. The guy who submits first, loses.
By far the most awesome part of training is sparring, and I want to share a recent experience I had and how it changed the way I view my poker sessions.
I began training at a new hall and as such I was sparring with a new group of people, most if not all of whom were far more experienced than I was. The first session did not go well. They hit harder, faster, were more deceptive, and I had real trouble adjusting. In short, I got my ass handed to me and it was incredibly frustrating.
I always react badly to this, but over time I've learned to control myself. I allow myself a few minutes to sulk and moan and tell myself how its unfair and generally act like a 5 year old, then I force myself to start learning. As Morpheus says - "how did I beat you"? That's the question I always ask myself on the train ride home. "How did they beat me?" There are three parts to this.
Firstly, what did I do wrong that allowed them to see an opening in my defense and allowed me to get hit?
Secondly, what aspects of their attack leave them open so I can exploit next time?
Thirdly, what can I steal from their technique that I found hard to deal with, and therefore my opponents will suffer from?
Mulling these questions over is always fun because it makes me burn to have another shot at the guys who owned me. I start to think about how I can beat them next time and force them to see that I wont be run over. Also, I just love to improve at things in general, so I'm always thinking about skill elevation.
During my thinking session there was one guy who I knew I could take advantage of. He had a sweeping right hook which he then snapped into a multiple backfist. When executed quickly this is hard to understand as the strike rapidly changes direction. But thinking about it later, I realised that not only is there ample forewarning of the sequence, but also he was leaving his whole left side wide open during his attack because his attention was focussed only on his striking hand (very common). The easy counter is: close the gap, step right, right hook or straight to the head and go from there (more strikes, sweep, anything).
Next session I was up against the same guy. Sure enough he telegraphed the sequence, I countered, and BAM he goes down. Eeeeeexcellent. But consider what happens next. If he is non-stupid, hes going to think about what happened. That means its unlikely that the same opening will be there next time, as he'll be wary of me exploiting him again and change his technique to suit. He might even offer a counter to my counter, allowing me to attack and then trapping me with further aggression. And so the game goes on and on.
How does this relate to poker? There are a few good things to think about.
This process of improvement in my technique will only take place as a result of losing. I don't learn anything from winning, except to practice what I already know. Improvement is a result of pressure. If you're never under pressure, you don't need to improve because you're doing just fine as it is. Once you are challenged or pressured, you will be forced to adapt.
Playing (and sometimes losing) against better players not only helps you to improve, but it gives you a framework that you can use to steal their moves and bolt them on to your own game. If you feel uncomfortable at any point against a better player, ask yourself why. Then do that to the people you're playing against, and they will feel as uncomfortable as you did.
If someone is constantly owning you, you need to adapt. If you stand there and let a guy punch you, why is he going to stop? Force him to get around you. Offer aggression of your own, and put him on the back foot. You cant just stand there like a rabbit in the headlights as he checkraises flop after flop against you. You have to do something! Adapt to the stimulus he is giving you.
So basically, you cant ever really lose in poker. If you win money, that's good. If you lose money, that's good too, because it means you've been given a great shot at improving. Poker should never be about winning anyway, its all about the challenge. Don't be afraid to step up your game, whether its trying some new moves, taking a shot at the next level, or deliberately playing in "bad" games. If you lose money, you'll gain experience and that's all that matters.
-ama