If you play poker to win, to really win consistently in the long term, many modern theorists argue that edges are tough to find and so the mental game is where a bankroll is built or demolished. In the latest issue of Poker Player magazine extracts from Tommy Angelo’s book ‘The Elements of Poker’ focus on topics such as game selection and tilt. These extracts got me thinking about my entire process of evaluating players and the value in note taking when playing online. To some extent the note taking process is a waste of time at the stakes I play at, since the players are so erratic and their patterns of play are often not based on the cards but their whims and moods. However I am trying to form good habits that will stand me in good stead for the future when playing for more meaningful money, so I have come to examine my thought processes when observing plays. Typically I will notice a few limps, and then check folds or check calls and immediately label a player as a ‘calling station’ or the opposite, ‘aggro donk’ when I watch a player go in too heavy with raises and bluffs. I have come to conclusion that my notes are little more than brain farts, and a product of my need to feel superior when I sit down at a table.
I often lack confidence in myself and question everything I do, which should in theory make me a terrible poker player and probably would do if I sat down at a live table of decent players. In online microstakes poker though I can become someone else, I can leave my personality in the lobby and focus on making good decisions at the table. I can use my natural inquisitiveness to learn more about the game and observe the play of others to work out how to avoid their pitfalls. The mistake I have been making is that in observing the play of others I have become quick to judge, not because it will help me win, but because it will make me feel superior and more able to play a confident (and therefore more likely to win) game. My note taking has become little more than a scapegoat for my bad plays and a reminder of what I am not. I am like the teenager who adopts a hard line stance in music/fashion criticising others to mark themself out as different, but is in fact asserting only their difference and nothing of substance at all.
I do not think I will buy Angelo’s book when it comes out since I prefer reading strategy books and cannot justify the cost at the moment, but I am going to try changing my note taking (as Angelo suggests in the extract) to only write a note if I can articulate out loud how it will help me in a future situation. For example if I notice the patterns of play associated with a ‘rock’ type player I will write ‘tight range approx 10% vpip’ and go over a mental checklist for the best strategy to defeat them. I might decide to 3bet top three hands only for value, fold marginal hands out of position to them, open raise virtually any two cards in position/blind on blind, and treat their position raises as genuine value raises not steals. I will also make a mental note to observe how they alter their pre flop range as the blinds rise or their stack diminishes, since they may open up preflop as the pressure mounts in a tournament, but continue to play fit or fold post flop. This style of mental extrapolation should help me to avoid pigeon holing players and stay close to the path of good decision making. It may even help me to adopt a more humble approach to the game and less likely to tilt spew my money away when I should be thinking about what players are doing, why they are doing it, and what the best counter measures should be.
