SlowStroke,

Let me start by saying that I thoroughly enjoyed reading your initial post in this thread. It is packing some excellent, thought provoking ideas. I will pm you about it if you don't mind. Still, I believe that your argument is incomplete (almost to a point that makes it incorrect).

You claim that the relationship between your state of mind and the actions you take in poker is one of cause and effect (that the causal relationship between the two runs only in one direction). In other words, if I understand it correctly, your claim can be stated in the following way: "If your state of mind is optimal, the actions you take are also optimal, so concentrate on being in the correct state of mind" However, I think that the relation between the two is one of equivalence (I am using equivalence in the mathematical sense of the word). So my statement I guess then is: "Your state of mind is optimal if and only if the actions you take are optimal".

Wouldn't you agree? Yes, the state of mind you are in influences the decisions you make. However, the actions you take also help you to define the state of mind you are in (For example, when you tilt, you don't realize it at the time and you need to analyze your play later on to 'diagnose' your sub-opitmal state of mind). Being in the optimal state of mind and playing optimally are equivalent. If you achieve one, you also achieve the other. That is why I liked your advice to concentrate on improving your mental state (your awareness) when playing in order to make better decisions. Approaching the 'problem' from that point of view, is indeed more productive and should certainly make the original poster feel less frustrated about one particluar mistake.

Some of the other claims that you made, I completely disagree with. For example, you wrote: [ QUOTE ]
First realize that you never make a mistake.You always make the correct decision based on the information that you are aware of.


[/ QUOTE ]

That is not true. You always make A DECISION based on the informatin that you are aware of/your mental state, but that decision is not necessarily correct/optimal. For example, if your state of mind is one of a mentally unstable person, you might make the decision to kill somebody. That doesn't make the action correct or justified just because of your mental state. It is the same with poker. You must have some objective/frame of reference in the game - for most people it is to maximize profit=play optimally. So you must also have some notion of optimal play (probably that is to make the plays with highest expected value). I think that because of the way you defined the relation between mental states and resulting plays you dismissed the latter as simply an "effect" that cannot be labeled as correct or incorrect by itself. Thant is why i think that an equivalence relation between the two is better. Your mental state can be sub-optimal and so can your play. In fact, when either one of the two is sub-optimal, then necessarily so is the other.

Anyway, I really enjoyed the ideas in your posts. Just wanted to add my two cents.

Bate