A thread that you must read if you want to be successful long term

[sublime]

very nice clayton.

btw, a lot of what gigabet talks about i have read in various forms before (not poker related, but then again gig's post wasn't really either) most notably in this book:

Magic Of Thinking Big

A great book, one of the best tools I ever came across.

[Jason Strasser]

Clayton,

He played two 15k sngs. Stop talking about his ROI in them.

-Jason

[ClaytonN]

My apoligies, I made an assumption which was wrong. I need to stop doing that.

That said, Giga is still a freak at the highest SNG levels.

[A_C_Slater]

Sounds like a bunch of loser talk to me.

[driller]

Its very hard to believe that he has the time to open up the hand history (and study it) for every hand that is shown down while 8 tabling. Call me a skeptic but I would have to see that to believe it.

[Bob Moss]

[ QUOTE ]
That post applies to a lot more than poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're right about that.

[ QUOTE ]
Gigabet: Identifying every negative thought as it creeps into your mind is a start, it takes practice to monitor your thoughts, but you cannot eliminate what you do not recognize.

[/ QUOTE ]

Total Freedom by J. Krishnamurti is a book I originally heard about from a peace john nickle post. One of the most interesting things he talks about is being aware of your thoughts. I'm not sure if reading Krishnamurti's books has improved my poker game, but I enjoy poker now more than ever.

Bob

[sublime]

Call me a skeptic but I would have to see that to believe it.

would you say the same thing if he claimed to have a 10 inch cock?

[climber]

looks interesting...thx

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
some of the most valuable advice you will ever hope to get

[/ QUOTE ]
Someone please explain to me why so many people agree with everything Gigabet does or says. Here are some comments I thought were wrong or silly in that post:

<font color="blue">"Success and failure are just ideas created by society to improperly judge others against ourselves. "</font>

Success and failure are words I use to judge my own accomplishments. I don't have to support a family with my poker winnings, but my guess is that those who do don't ask society whether they are successes or not. They look at where there is food on the table and money going into their savings.

<font color="blue">"There are no successful people, or rather, using these words, I should say that there are no failures and everyone is a success."</font>

There are a lot of people who have lost all of their savings trying to be a professional -EV gambler, or have not made progress toward other meaningful goals. Whether I would call these people failures or not, I would call myself a failure if I ever became like that.

<font color="blue">"Everyone is the same, and everyone has the same potential, some just direct their energies in different directions."</font>

Is everyone the same height, too? No, some people are tall. Some people are short (and I have nothing against either). Some people have good eyesight, and some, poor. Some people have fast reflexes. Some people are good at multitasking. Some people are good at deriving good information from noisy feedback. Some people have an aptitude for poker. Some people have developed that aptitude.

This sounds like, "There are no bad hands, only bad flops." There are bad hands, and it is important to recognize this. There are some good players among your opponents, and it is valuable to identify them. If you are not yet able to beat a game, you need to admit that to yourself, and not say, "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me!"

<font color="blue">"The people who come to realize these negative labels aren't real, either concretely or intuitively, are the same people that do not give up, no matter how bad things seem to be running. Eventually they become the "professionals" in whatever walk of life they choose."</font>

Or, they greatly damage their lives or blow large sums of money (or win small amounts rather than large amounts) instead of fixing easily treatable problems.

<font color="blue">"I try very hard not to allow any negativity in my life, ask my brother(ship_it_tome) how upset I get when he is at my house, playing, struggling, for hours on end, and finally says "I can't win." We get along very well, but I get very irate with him when he utters those deadly words,"</font>

Isn't it negative to get irate with him? Poker can be frustrating, and your brother is expressing a natural frustration. There are many helpful suggestions people have offered in threads on dealing with the frustration of poker. Wouldn't it be more positive to direct someone who just lost to one of those?

Now, on to poker:

<font color="blue">"The real game is about people, not the cards in your hand. "</font>

Many people lose because they don't properly evaluate hands. They draw without odds, make silly value bets, and hopeless calls. They fold profitable hands, and play losing hands. People are so bad at misevaluating hands that it is relatively easy to win with no reads in most games.

It is great that so many fish think poker is all about playing the player and bluffing. That makes it more exciting for them than learning to fold weak hands and weak draws. Perhaps some people need to increase their appreciation for the importance of reads, but I see them overemphasized even in these forums.

<font color="blue">"So how can you figure out what they have? Well, get to know him, watch him play. "</font>

I agree with this, but I don't think it is profound or surprising. How many people advocate not watching your opponents?

<font color="blue">"Every time there is a showdown, and the losing hand is mucked, open up the hand history file, and see what he had. Go through the hand again and see if you can figure out why he willingly showed down a losing hand(something that should rarely be done.) "</font>

It is good to go through the hand.

I disagree with the idea that you should rarely show down a losing hand. In fact, you should often lose at showdown. If not, you are playing far too weakly.

I think it is important not only to review the river decision, but what your opponent had on each street. What did the hand look like to him? If he was drawing, how many outs did he have, and how many did he probably think he had? Did he ever play differently from the way you would play?

<font color="blue">"Bad beats are no longer bad beats, they are just the cards coming out randomly, evening themselves out over time."</font>

When a short stack pushes, a big stack comes over the top with Q3, a tricky medium stack limper calls with KK, and the player with Q3 flops two pair and takes it down, that is a bad beat. If you often win this way with Q3, it may be an indication you are spewing chips, and your perhaps your excessive aggressiveness means you are getting trapped rather than gaining folding equity.

If you no longer feel you need to work on your game directly, fine. Practice reading your opponents while 8-tabling. Practice being calm in the storm of variance. However, many people are not yet close to their potential level of skill, and we need to work on playing poker better, not accepting our current abilities.


There was good advice in what Gigabet wrote, but I don't see how why people called this "post of the year" and "the most enlightening and helpful thing I have ever read about poker." Were these people being facetious? Many said they liked the Q3 play, too.

[krazyace5]

Just reading some of the replys in that thread is making me nauseous...