not showing losers

[turnipmonster]

so last night I got a set of kings cracked by 57s on the river. the thing that upset me most about the hand was that I felt compelled to show my cards, despite the fact that the winning hand had already been tabled. I am normally good about never showing losers, but I find it particularly hard to do after a rough beat.

anyone else have this problem? I am inspired by tommy's posts to work on stuff like this, but this has been a sticking point for me that is hard psychologically for some reason.

--turnipmonster

[slavic]

Repeat after me: "Ouch, that beats bottom pair. Nice hand sir." Toss hand directly into the muck.

Rinse and repeat.

[andyfox]

Winning is a communal experience: everyone sees your good cards, your good play, your good fortune. And you keep busy, stacking and smiling and talking while the dealer shuffles and gives out the next hand.

Losing is a solitary experience: nobody else can truly experience your pain as your good cards and good play turn to dust against some idiot. And you just have to sit there with nothing to do but feel bad and watch the other guy stack all those chips that should have been yours. So we all feel the compulsion to share the bad news, to have the others see what a tough beat it was, how unfair life is, to relieve ourselves of a bit of the pain by sharing it.

It's only a poker hand. There's be another in a minute or so. Think about people who really have had bad breaks in life concerning things for which there won't be another in a minute or so. And think about how you yourself have cracked a set of kings drawing short.

Beware Entitlement Disease. [Thanks to Tommy for that wonderful phrase that has become a anti-mantra in our household.] You're not entitled to win the hand because you have three of a kind. Be thankful and humble when you do win and imagine I'm looking over your shoulder watching how you react both when you win and when you lose.

This too shall pass.

[squiffy]

I like Slavic's line. Showing the table your pocket kings would give them the impression you are a tight player who only plays premium hands and make everyone at the table less likely to call you. Wouldn't that hurt your earn rate?

If you don't show, they may think that you and this guy are both LOOSE AGGRESSIVE idiots. And when you have KK, they may chase you with lousy cards.

It's the opposite of the advice a Church-going mom might give to her high school-aged daughter. At the poker table, you want to project a loose image.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
At the poker table, you want to project a loose image.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather have a tight image that everyone is scared of.

[squiffy]

No. The ideal for making money would be you play only AA and KK and they think you have 2,3 offsuit. Though hard to maintain this image very long.

[turnipmonster]

great post! slavic's line is good also. next time, the cards are going straight in the muck, set of kings or not.

--turnipmonster

[Nottom]

I'd rather be able to win pots by betting a mediocre hand than have people hang around on my Big hands. I generally get dealt hands like AJ and KQ a lot more than AA and KK and would like people to just hand over the pot without a lot of hassle.

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather be able to win pots by betting a mediocre hand than have people hang around on my Big hands. I generally get dealt hands like AJ and KQ a lot more than AA and KK and would like people to just hand over the pot without a lot of hassle.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I'd rather people think I was a super tightass. I may play good cards, but the flop still misses me an awful lot.

[daryn]

i guess we all have our preferences, but i love the maniac image. i often raise and reraise the first hand i get dealt at the table, regardless of what it is, just to create a maniac image.

sometimes just my action alone is enough to project this image, and of course sometimes i end up sucking out to win my first hand with J6o when i make trips on the turn.. it's the best thing ever to have all the so called pros at your table think you're a total idiot.

[Kevin J]

it's the best thing ever to have all the so called pros at your table think you're a total idiot.

Just make sure they're not wrong. It's doubtful that anyone who wastes a ton of $$ on J6o at least once per session, is a super genuis either.

[Tyler Durden]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather have a tight image that everyone is scared of.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea I think Mason wrote that the best image to have is that of a tight aggressive player. You want opponents to respect/fear your play.

[mosch]

Before my last orbit last night, I made the comment 'last orbit for me, last chance to take my money'. Then, by a huge streak of luck, I received QQ, AJs, AQs, AKo and KQs during my last 7 hands.

The fact that other players thought I had tilted was not a significant problem. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[turnipmonster]

I would too, I think it's just a matter of personal preference. lots of people make their money off a loose image and getting their big hands paid off, other people make their money off winning pots uncontested.

I think it's a combination for all of us, a function of how well we are running plus other things (appearance,etc) that make up our table image.

--turnipmonster

[squiffy]

Yes, but Mason's advice is for medium to high limits, where winning a few mediocre pots can make a huge difference. If you are betting $10 and $20 per bet.

At LOW LIMITS it's a totally different game. You want to make money with volume pots and volume monster hands. Because people are more willing to call raises and stay in with trash. If you have a tight image you are only discouraging people from paying you off on the flush draws, straights, and sets that make you real money.

Remember, at mid to higher limits, where you are often playing short-handed or heads up, and where a few bets are still a lot of money, you definitely make profits by scaring people out when you have marginal hands.

You don't lose anything by having a tight image because you will rarely be involved in volume pots.

But at low limits, if people are terrified of you, as has happened to me sometimes, since I am ultra-tight, then everyone folds when you raise with AA or KK and you just take the blinds.

It would be much better to get tons of callers when you have AA and KK.

And remember, anyone with poker tracker can tell you that that is where you make your big money. That is what makes you profitable. The amount you milk out of your big pocket pairs.

It would be a huge benefit to have tons of callers, when you raise with AA.

[daryn]

did you mean to say "just make sure they're wrong"?

anyways, i don't know about "a ton of money". but say what you will, i win large amounts of money.

[Tommy Angelo]

turnipmonster,

It's one thing to want to change this behavior. It's another thing to know why you want to change it. And it's a whole nother beast to get from wanting to, and knowing why, to physically moving those two cards toward the dealer face down, the same way, every time.

I've gone through so many intentional behavioral changes at poker that I've got a little system and maybe it can work for you.

Two types of causes will effect change. One shallow. One deep. The shallow method is short-ranged and has a reward. This is what I use to get over the first step, which is, to do the desired behavior, once. I might use the shallow method many times, in succession or not, before searching for deeper causes that might permanently bring about the desired effect.

In the specific case of mucking face-down while not giving away any information with my body, I found these two words to be at the root of what made this behavioral change so difficult.

Pride.

Shame.

Short range. Just do it, and reward yourself immediately somehow, perhaps by having not indulged in something you normally would, until after you have performed the task. Could be something as simple as a cup of water.

Long range, try really really hard to stop caring so much about what other people think about how you play. On their way home, none of them give a rip.


Tommy

[stripsqueez]

i think i am a very gracious loser - however i have repeatedly been told i am the ugliest winner people have ever seen - i am plainly of the view that when you win you can do whatever takes your fancy

i never show my losers nor say what they were - if you had shown me your kings i would of told you to throw that s*** away - my competitive streak would of rejoiced that you got hurt enough to show me your cards - the prospect of you getting sympathy would be zero

never give gloating scumbags like me the opportunity to do this

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[bomblade]

I rarely show a hand if I don't have to. If I have quads and no one calls my river bet, I'll show it usually. But I will never show a losing hand, no matter what it is. I'll very rarely show a winner.
I see people, all the time, showing their hands at the end of the hand. I especially will see it when someone is bluffing. I guess it's to say "Ha Ha, I got you with nothing, I am such a great player, I can win with nothing, everyone come after me, cause next time I'll have the nuts, Ha Ha."
Personally, I feel no need to give any more information about myself or about my hands. When you show your set of Kings, after you've lost, it just shows you're affected emotionally by the hand. If you are affected emotionally, there's no need anyone, other than yourself, needs to know that.

[PYITE]

[Who Yaw]

The hand is over. The faster the cards get into the muck, the faster the next deal is completed. Winners make money by making better decisions. To make better decisions we need hands with which to work. Work on this little exercise at stop lights: smile and say "they're good" while making a muck flick with your hand. In no time at all you'll be smiling through that grimace.

[nykenny]

i never show to the whole table. i just tell everyone that i was only bluffing. and then show or tell only a close friend at the table /images/graemlins/smile.gif

kenny

[I.Rowboat]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but Mason's advice is for medium to high limits, where winning a few mediocre pots can make a huge difference. If you are betting $10 and $20 per bet.

[snip]

It would be a huge benefit to have tons of callers, when you raise with AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

A few comments to squiffy:

1) First, this is the mid-to-high stakes forum, so I assume that the games being discussed are mid-to-high stakes games and play like them, except where noted.

2) I'm sure this has been discussed to death elsewhere, but do YOU really want a ton of callers when you have pocket A's? I sure don't.

More generally on this thread:

As has been noted by a few posters, I think there are strategic benefits to showing losing cards, sometimes. Sometimes I don't want people guessing what sort of hand I'm on. I want them to assume I'm strong, and fold their top pair-weak kicker/middle pair/etc. -- especially when I'm bluffing or semibluffing. I don't expect to educate the player who hit his 5 outer, or who hit his flush when we were headsup and a flush card was his only out. If I choose to show my losing cards, it isn't to get sympathy or moan about a bad beat, it's to spread a little propaganda, throw out some info that I can use in the future to my benefit. At the mid limits and higher, peopel are going to put you on a hand. I'd rather be put on good cards than bad cards, at least some of the time. It makes it easier to make plays in future hands when I DON'T have anything.

Just my experience...

[squiffy]

Excellent point. I never pay attention to the forum when I post.

Yes, I have seen the AA question discussed here and in probability a bit. One of the probability people who responded to my post seemed pretty emphatic that if you have AA and raise, you actually want 10 callers and would like all 10 to cap. This would optimize your return with AA.

At least, this was his analysis. Personally, I previously thought that with AA, the optimal number of callers would be say 3-5 people, since with 10 callers (or rather 9 at a full Party table), your chances of winning a pot will go down with each player who enters.

But apparently, if you look at the long-term statistics, with a premium hand like AA, I think you would ideally want 10 callers, capping preflop.

This doesn't sound intuitively correct to me, and no one has been kind enough to show me any calculations, but this is what was stated to me by a person who seems to know his probability. And the forum seems to treat the question as a no-brainer.

[Aces McGee]

Squiffy

Oversimplified explanation:

Pocket aces hold up against 9 random hands approximately one-third of the time (really, about 31%).

Let's say you cap the betting every round against nine random hands, and they all stay until the showdown.

Two out of every three times, you're going to lose 12 BB (two preflop, two on the flop, four on the turn, four on the river). That's 24BB.

One out of every three times, you're going to win 106BB (12BB each from the other 9 players).

So that's 82BB, net, over three hands, or approximately a net of 27BB per hand.

That seems like a pretty good return to me.

Aces McGee

[joedot]

I would suggest not showing a close friend, unless you plan on showing the whole table. These bleeps will usually cry and moan, "show one show all" and you'll end up having to show the whole table. So unless you want to show all the crybabies, muck it and tell your friend.

[nykenny]

that is precisely why i also recommend the tactic of "show one and turbo muck into the middle of the discarded cards". only one time i failed by mucking it to the bottom instead, and the stupid dealer pulled my cards and insisted to show the whole table WITHOUT anyone requesting "show one show all"! i was furious.

To this day, whenever that dealer deals, I make sure to under tip. And I am quite a good tipper (winning or losing). So too bad for her... that stupid bitc...

nykenny

[nykenny]

I would think the theoretical best situation is having 10 people capping before the flop whenever you have AA.

however, i would still prefer only 2-4 people capping when i have AA. Because i don't get AA alot and i like it to win. I can't repeat the same situation 100 times in that session to show profit. and hell not even 10, not even 5... you get my point. moreover, in your next 100 AA experience, they might not cap, there might not be 9 other callers.

It's more like there is one bullet in a 6 bullet revolver gun, and you have to shoot yourself. If u live, you get 100,000 dollars. But there is another revolver, it has 5 bullets, and if u shoot urself and lived, you will get 5,000,000 dollars. Which deal will you like to choose?

1st gun gives you 4:5 odds to winning 100,000. for each shot, u will get an average payoff of 500k / 6 = 80K or so.

2nd gun gives you 1:5 against making 5,000,000. each shot gives you an EV of roughly 800K to you. but you are likely not to have the chance to get a normal distribution in this life time.

As with AA, it's just like you don't want to play in a game where, it's 10-20 holdem, but every time you get AA, the games is 10,000,000-20,000,000 and everyone calls to the end. Becasue you CANNOT technically repeat this situation 100's of times for you to show a profit. maybe you will be broke on this first game. because you are only a rough 30% favorite.

all i am trying to say is poker is about repeating situations (in limit poker anyway). if a situation won't likely to repeat it self much, it's best to just increase the chance of winning.

On top of all that, it is easier to play in a smaller pot than a 10-way pot.

don't know if any of my opinion make sense... read it or forget it.

Kenny

[34TheTruth34]

do YOU really want a ton of callers when you have pocket A's? I sure don't.


YES_YOU_DO