[Ed Miller]

My question is then, take 1800gambler who is a good winning player who's had a 400bb loss, or GOT who had one that was over 300, were they making lots of -EV mistakes?

1. They are playing in games that are generally tougher and more aggressive than the micro and small games the target audience of my post is playing. I would be very surprised if either of those guys would experience a 400 bet downswing in the $1-$2 games most of you guys are playing. FWIW, I've never played with 1800, but I have played with GuyOnTilt, and he is a very good player.

2. They may play a lot of shorthanded games. The rules for shorthanded are a little different because you end up in marginal situations a whole lot more frequently.

Here's my real point. Poker players tend to think they "know better." They've played a few years, they've won a few bucks, and they start to think that their way is the right way. When someone comes and tells them that actually they have been misplaying certain situations, the natural response is, "No I haven't."

On this forum, people generally don't say, "Ed, you're wrong." Instead, they say, "Well, Ed's plays are really OPTIONAL. They are only for those who want to get every last cent. I'm happy with my 95% optimal strategy, and, hey, this way I won't have downswings that are as bad."

In other words, they use these EV/variance arguments as a JUSTIFICATION for making mistakes. They say to themselves, "It's not a mistake, it's just a choice I make."

Well, there are some plays that can be made for EV/variance reasons. David discusses these in essays in some of his books. For instance, he recommends that if you are "taking a shot" at a juicy high-limit game that you tighten up some preflop. In a spot where you might play K6s on the button, don't play it if you are deliberately playing higher than your bankroll can handle.

But for the most part, this EV/variance argument is employed when someone is making an error and simply doesn't want to change/doesn't quite believe that he's wrong.

Most of you guys play small anyway. You play $0.50-$1, $1-2, $2-$4, etc. If you lose a few hundred bets, who cares? Spend an afternoon mowing lawns and you'll have a brand new bankroll. Use this time that you are playing small to learn to play CORRECTLY. Don't make excuses. Force yourself to make some plays that are uncomfortable for you. Try them again. Get some experience.

I'm not making this stuff up. I'm not being nit-picky. If I put it in the book.. particularly if I backed it up with an example.. it's IMPORTANT. Make sure you absolutely 100% understand a concept before you start selectively ignoring it. Don't just dismiss it as "too high variance."

BTW, this is why I included the "Don't alter these recommendations for your own reasons. Chances are you'll be wrong and it will cost you money," line. It's not because I think I'm never wrong.

A statement like that doesn't apply to someone who understands poker better than I do like Roy Cooke... or the many mid-limit posters on this site like snakehead, Gabe, El Diablo, Clarkmeister, etc.

It's directed at the guy who has played for a few years, won a few bucks, and thinks that he generally plays a near-perfect game. Most of those guys make tons of mistakes... and they might actually get better if they'd just listen. But a lot of those guys will read the book, see a lot of stuff that doesn't jive with how they play, and say, "That Miller guy. He's an idiot. He has no idea what he's talking about." My statement was just a little extra warning not to leave the book with that opinion.