Chopper’s Rationalization

A close friend we can call “Chopper” for this post takes poker seriously, studies the best poker books, reads the 2+2 forum, plays an “A” game or close to it all the time, and wants to make as much money as possible when playing after work and on weekends. Over a few years and almost 1700 hours of play Chopper has an average hourly win of over $55 per hour at the lower middle limits (15/30 and 20/40) and shows signs that most of this win rate is the result of talent and good play. Chopper keeps accurate records of results in an Excel spreadsheet, although to keep things simple 15/30 and 20/40 results are combined. Note that in this area it is common to often change between these two limits to stay in the best game and this simplification facilitates record keeping.


Usually Chopper has between a three to six hour “window” to play. By “window” I mean a day and time interval where Chopper can play without causing any personal or work problems. Let’s re-emphasize that Chopper’s goal is to maximize earnings, as Chopper could use the extra money from part time play.


Despite apparent success, I believe Chopper has not made anywhere near as much as possible. Chopper’s weakness is that when up a few buy-ins during the first hour or two of play (let’s say $600 in a 20-40 holdem game), Chopper usually leaves the game (even when the game is better than average). If stuck or close to even for the session, Chopper will usually play the full three to six hours in the playing window (even if the game is somewhat worse than average).


In other words, Chopper could have easily played another 600 or so hours in the last three years in good games at virtually no personal cost (Chopper loves to play anyway) and figured to win another $35,000 or so. The 600 hours is a ballpark estimate of all the hours not played due to leaving after an hour a two a moderate winner rather than playing the full three to six hours in the “playing window”.


Chopper insists that a lot of this relatively high hourly rate is due to “chopping” out small to medium sized wins. In looking at results, Chopper points out that very short sessions have a high win rate compared to longer sessions. I point out that the short session win rate is illusionary because Chopper will rarely leave after one or two hours stuck. Thus the short sessions are almost always small to medium winners (with an occasionally big win due to a rush or a small loss if the game REALLY sucks and no other game is available). The longer sessions are usually small winners where Chopper came back from stuck or moderate losses when Chopper had to go home at the end of the playing window. To Chopper’s credit, there are no all night sessions trying to get even when badly stuck and no serious losses (maximum loss was $1700 in a 20/40).


I believe Chopper loves the feeling going home a winner THAT NIGHT. But if Chopper wants to achieve the long-term goal of maximizing winnings, Chopper needs to put in more hours, especially when the game is good and Chopper has time to play.


My solution, which Chopper agrees will start tomorrow, is to add another column to the Excel spreadsheet used for poker records. Chopper will track results at the one-hour point for all sessions and compute an hourly rate for the first hour over time. My guess is that if the sessions that start poorly are factored in, Chopper will find out that there is no special advantage to short sessions.


Comments appreciated along with any other suggestions to cure “chopping” for the serious player.

i am all for maximizing your earn while at the table. but there is a life away from it as well. if leaving winner makes that part a little happier for the rest of that day so be it. he needs to address the losing session though, as they are more likely to be dragging his earn down as he puts more time in those spots when he may not be playing his best, or the game is not as good for him.

Ray,


Chopper has many interests outside poker and works a flexible schedule in a regular job that takes care of benefits. Chopper needs the money poker provides. Before becoming an excellent player, Chopper worked two jobs to make ends meet (one was part-time but required more hours than poker does now). The second job has been dropped but poker income doesn't quite make up the difference yet.


Another problem with extremely short sessions is overhead. It takes just as much time to drive to a card club or casino, wait to get in a game and play a reasonable length session as a “chopped” session. Note that in almost every case of a one-hour session Chopper had several hours to play.


Note that unlike many players, Chopper's poker does not detract from family and personal matters. In fact, family wants Chopper to play a little more or get back that second job.


Your point about playing in better games is good. There is a reasonable degree of correlation between being stuck and being in a bad game.


You wrote: ”if leaving winner makes that part a little happier for the rest of that day so be it”


This happy feeling is a sort of addiction. EVERY one-hour session Chopper has played has been a winning session. All but one two-hour session has been a winning session. And my guess is that near the end of losing sessions, Chopper’s play probably deteriorates a little in an effort to get even; however, I’ve seen no signs of serious tilt yet.

he makes $55 an hour in mid limits and is worried about making more? i'm all for self-improvement, but it seems like 1.5-2 BB an hour would make most people happy in those games.

2d,


But what if you have time to play an extra 5 hours per week but don't because of chopping and you need the money? That is about $13,000 per year if we assume Chopper can sustain this hourly rate.

I'm no psychology expert, but I suspect that Chopper has already made a choice. it seems like he (she?) values the extra 250 hours a year, or the good feelings of leaving as a winner over the extra money to be won.

As Z said, there is some value associated with feeling good.

If chopper's making $55 an hour at his second job and money's tight, maybe poker should be his first job?

This happy feeling is a sort of addiction. EVERY one-hour session Chopper has played has been a winning session. All but one two-hour session has been a winning session. And my guess is that near the end of losing sessions, Chopper’s play probably deteriorates a little in an effort to get even


Ok, so maybe I am nit-picking here, but obiously not EVERY one-hour session is a winning session. If that were true he would never have a non-winning 2 hour (or any other 1hr+ length session).


however, I’ve seen no signs of serious tilt yet.


Maybe he fears he has a propensity to "tilt" after a big +rush and will give back the big profit? Lots of people play awful when they get way ahead quickly, but I admit he doesn't sound like the type...it is just a thought. If for whatever reason he is "afraid" of losing back his profit he would play worse to some degree. To how great a degree would be the major issue...


I think you guys are caught up in a "freedom to set my own hours" versus "make as much $ as possible" debate and you are both, esentially, correct. It is just a matter of priority.


Treefrog

TreeFrog,


You wrote: “Ok, so maybe I am nit-picking here, but obiously not EVERY one-hour session is a winning session.”


I have a copy of Chopper’s Excel spreadsheet in front of me. I double-checked. Of 340 total sessions there are 36 one-hour sessions. EVERY one-hour session is a winner. There are 39 two-hour sessions. All but one two-hour session is a winner. I don’t know enough about Excel to extract information automatically but Chopper (an Excel whiz) swings by tonight and may be able to extract the data by average win per session broken down by session length. The spreadsheet is set up with the following fields:


Date, # Hours, Cumulative Hours, Earnings, Cumulative Earnings, Average Rate/Hour


Note that if Chopper switches between 15/30 and 20/40 during one visit, it is still entered as one session. The longer sessions tend to be small to medium winners where Chopper started stuck and came back then went home. Chopper does have quite a few losing sessions, but they usually are the longer sessions (max sessions are around seven hours) where it was time to go home. The problem with Chopper is usually going home early then necessary when up the first hour, even when the game is good. Chopper has very few good size wins ($1500+) you would expect for a top 20/40 player.


”If that were true he would never have a non-winning 2 hour (or any other 1hr+ length session).


I’m not clear what your above sentence means. Maybe you can elaborate or clarify.


”Maybe he fears he has a propensity to "tilt" after a big +rush and will give back the big profit? Lots of people play awful when they get way ahead quickly, but I admit he doesn't sound like the type...it is just a thought. If for whatever reason he is "afraid" of losing back his profit he would play worse to some degree. To how great a degree would be the major issue...”


Chopper has the killer instinct and plays well stuck (well almost) or way ahead. But Chopper does fear losing back session profit. I believe that is why Chopper “hits and runs” and it is folly if your goal is max earn (as John Feeney has written).


[b]”I think you guys are caught up in a "freedom to set my own hours" versus "make as much $ as possible" debate and you are both, esentially, correct. It is just a matter of priority.”[b]


Maybe, but before going to the club Chopper had a longer session planned. Keep in mind that Chopper has at least a one-hour drive traveling to the card club and back plus the wait to get into a game. This is expensive and time consuming.

Stephen,


Chopper needs the benefits from the first job, which also pays a bit more (not after taxes). BTW, I’m amazed that all the aspiring pros on 2+2 don’t seem to worry much about health insurance, getting auto loans and so on.


Also keep in mind that many people start out as big winners in the first few thousand hours, but slow down later as opponents adjust to their style or their hourly rate regresses toward the mean. Chopper is aware of this and keeps studying to stay ahead of the competition. But right now Chopper’s hourly rate is actually improving!

Chopper does feel good these days!

'Ok, so maybe I am nit-picking here, but obiously not EVERY one-hour session is a winning session. If that were true he would never have a non-winning 2 hour (or any other 1hr+ length session). '


1st hour - wins a little.

2nd hour - lose a little.

3rd hour - wins a little.

4th hour - wins a little.


goes home a winner.


qed.


brad

you can buy health insurance real cheap, at least if youre male and in your 20's or 30's.


as for cars, its a lot cheaper if you dont pay interest. (doesnt apply to me, since i drive a beater (everyone around here drives crazy, the other day i ran into someone who left turned right in front of me. her car wrecked, a little scratch on mine /images/smile.gif) )


brad

Brad,


Thanks for responding. The following statements are all true:


1. Every session Chopper chooses to end after one hour is a winning session.


2. Chopper does not end all sessions after one hour when ahead. Sometimes Chopper plays on. This is especially true when Chopper is only a small winner the first hour or two.


3. Chopper never (so far) chooses to end a session after one hour when losing. With one exception the same is true for ending a session at two hours.


4. I think being ahead or stuck unduly influences Chopper's decision as to whether or not to play on very early in a session when more time to play is available without personal consequence.


5. Chopper loves to play and may have more talent for the game then I.


Regarding your example, Chopper has many sessions similar to the one you describe (but, I’m still having trouble understanding how that clarifies your statement).

i just meant that treefrog is not right when he says that chopper cant lose or whatever .


brad


p.s. maybe one reason chopper has a high win rate is because his hit and run tactics (even 4 or 5 hours isnt really that long when thats his longest stretch) dont allow his opponents to really get a good read on him.

1. Every session Chopper chooses to end after one hour is a winning session


Ok, I missed the boat on this. I inferred you meant every hour he plays is a winning hour. In other words he plays 4 hours, that is 4 one hour sessions. Yes, I know, it is totally obvious what you meant if I had thought about it logically, so I am a dolt. I am thusly taught to leave the nit-picking to the nits, as they are better at it.


The rest of my commentary remains the same.


Sorry,

Treefrog

OK so Chopper agrees to make an effort to stop chopping and has started keeping track of results at the one-hour point in each session. On Tuesday Chopper goes to card club, up first hour in a good game about $750, wants to chop but thinks about this thread, plays another hour, loses back $200 or so and goes home around a $550 winner.


Chopper comes by Wednesday night and tells me that chopping out a one-hour win of $750 would have been better and hits me on the head.


I can’t win this argument so I give up /images/biggrin.gif

I can’t win this argument so I give up


And therein lies the rub. He didn't want to keep playing and his play probably suffered somewhat. Amusingly he would have either won more or (as it happened) lost a little back and got to "prove you wrong" so it was a win/win for him wasn't it? And even if he won the 2nd hour, if he loses the 3rd he can still say he was right he should have left.


You are correct. There is no way you could win this argument. But you are a good guy to try and help him out. (Un?)Fortunately we as humans, not machines, all have different motivations for what we do.


Treefrog