Caro Article

[Gabe DV]

[ QUOTE ]
i basically agree with caro that psychology is by far most important.

of course math is important, but that's implied. i'mean a good player isnt gonna chase a pot unless he knows he's roughly getting good overall odds on the situation.

and if i calculate something to be 55% in my favor, and in reality it's 45%, i think the luck factor cancels it out anyway. lord knows i've lost more than my share of 22-1 shots. as a favorite.

[/ QUOTE ]

tell you what, i'll take all the 55 percents, you take all the 45's, and we'll see who comes out ahead. The Caro article is wrong, plain and simple--just because psychology is important doesn't mean math isn't as well.

Thanks for the repost skp. I had never seen it put that way before.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does Caro even win at poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

Many consider Mike Caro to be one of the best players in Five Card Draw Poker ("real poker"). I'm sure sure exactly how good he is in other games, but I guess it's safe to say that he's no donkey.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty remarkable since he went broke playing that game in the early days in Ca.

[Felipe]

[ QUOTE ]
In poker math is meaningless and psychology is paramount. There, I finally said it... and I'm glad. Each time I got close to uttering those words, I lost courage and choked back the sounds. Out came silence, only silence. What made me afraid to speak the truth? Oh, I guess it was mainly a couple poker people to whom mathematics is sacred. If you dare define the real power of psychology in poker or point out the limited role of mathematics in the heat of poker combat, they lash out publicly, insanely, desperately. The hate to hear it.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think math is meaningless, that's silly. But I do think that psychology is more important than math, however.

There have been countless threads that ask, "any reads on the players?" or "take off the training wheels! Preflop charts are for beginners!" In poker, math helps people stay on the right track. It helps ensure they play sound poker and stay out of trouble. Psychology, though, allows people to grow out of a dependency on mathematics. Math is still relevant to poker (crucial!), but whom you are playing against truly matters much more.

The psychological aspects of poker are more important that the mathematical because they define who you are playing against. This old adage helps to illustrate the importance of knowing your opponent: "poker is a people game, played with cards; not a card game played with people." A good player can adjust to whom he is playing against.

Hold'em for advanced players is a book designed for players who play against tough, thinking, usually tight opponents. This "target" of opponents is founded on psychology - mainly how they play, how they think, and what they are likely to do in any particular circumstance. Math is still critical here, but this book is designed to improve your game against thinking opponents. It is designed with this specific goal in mind, a goal in which psychology plays a critical role.

On the flipside, Small Stakes Hold'em is an excellent book on beating loose games. Loose games are filled with loose players that make many mistakes, and Dr. Al has shown us the psychology behind why they play the way they do. Those are psychological criteria defining the style of those players. To play against these players and WIN, we have to know what mistakes they usually make and we have to know how to the psychology in order to successfully exploit those mistakes. Each of the 4 major player classifications (LP, LA, TP, TA) has strengths and weaknesses. Each of those classifications are delimited by elements of psychology, not math.

Other 2+2 poker literature suggests things like:
<ul type="square">[*] don't bluff bad players, they call to often[*]value bet more against players that call too much[*]play more marginal multi-way hands from late position in large pots against loose passive opponents[*]don't fold for one bet on the river with decent hands[*]to defend against a semi-bluff, you should semi-bluff raise. The original semi-bluffer will be forced to fold[/list]These all have to do with psychology. Math is still important for many reasons, but the sentences above illustrate the importance of knowing who your opponents are and how they play

I think a hand like K2s should be mucked in a tough high-limit game, not because of the mathematics, but because of the relative ability of the players at the table. As the players get better, good players are are very careful in selecting which speculative hands they are going to play. In a very loose game, we should play K2s in late position because we know that we can outplay our opponents after the flop. We know how they behave, we know their habitual tendencies, and we know that we can exploit the mistakes they are most likely to make. K2s is not usually a (very) profitable hand, but in a game with certain kinds of personality profiles (player types), it can become a profitable hand worth playing.

In no-limit hold'em, the implied odds often make a call correct even if the immediate pot odds don't warrant a call. This suggests the importance of psychology in no-limit. If you have a medium pocket pair (9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]) in the hole and face a bet on a flop of 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], a good knowledge of psychology can often swing a fold to a call. If you and your opponent have deep stacks ($1500) and he bets $50 into a pot of $50, and you know he's so loose that he'll pay off if he has a big Ace (for example) then a call is certainly profitable here because your implied odds are so huge. You'll invest 50 to win 1500 (plus whatever is in the pot). You implied odds are 1500:50 or 30:1 making the call profitable in the "long run". You made the correct decision because you understand the tendencies of your opponent.

*NOTE: I’m not much of a NL player, but I do believe that this shows the importance of psychology AND math, and not math alone.

Further more, psychology can be of significant use in a live card room, and can dramatically boost one's bankroll. Paying attention to people's tells is a subsection of psychology. These tells can reveal very important and profitable information about an opponent's hand. Proper interpretation of (and reaction to) these tells can add a considerable amount to your bankroll at the end of the year. Caro has also written things about how to play the players, how to act like a "wild one" and make opponents somehow think you play every single hand! I think at high(er) stakes these tools can generate a lot of money. This extra income comes from a mastery of both psychology AND math.

The math aspect of poker is critical and without it most poker players would lose in the long run (most poker players already do!). Some players seem to think they can play by intuition alone. Some of them probably succeed without a deep fundamental understanding of the underlying aspects of gambling, statistics, and probabilities. Nevertheless, they do use mathematics when making their decisions, because if they didn't, they would surely lose just like roulette players do all over the world. They may not know that the chance of hitting 4 outs in hold'em after the flop is exactly 10.75 to 1 against, but they know that they need a fairly large pot (or great implied odds) if they are going to continue playing. They also know that chasing gutshots without enough money in the pot is bad news. They are using their intuition and their poker experience to influence their decisions. But these decisions are correct because they are mathematically sound, whether they know it or not. I think psychology is the most important aspect of most, if not all, of the games of poker because they establish the kinds of opponents you are playing against. Once we have that information, we can use mathematics to perform the basic arithmetic necessary to make decisions which always produce the positive highest (or least negative) mathematical expectation.

Psychology influences the decision you make throughout the entire session, or throughout a whole range of limits (for example $10-$20 to $40-$80, or .5/1.00 to $3-$6). Math affects decisions throughout the course of a single hand. Mathematical calculations begin when the cards are dealt and they end immediately after the cards are revealed at the showdown. But psychology spans much more than that. It has an overwhelming presence everywhere, and at every moment.

Felipe

[newhizzle]

i lost respect for caro when i read his 12 days to holdem success thing, and how he says you should never raise from early position in limit holdem, but i like his chapter of supersystem

what i dont get is i always thought he was a very mathematics orientated player, didnt brunson say something like when he first met him he had a bunch of statistics on a crumbled up piece of paper?

plus theres the whole statistics chapter of super/system, it seems like hes contradicting himself with this quote

[SoftcoreRevolt]

Uh, there is no such thing as luck. If you are actually 45% to win, you are 45% to win. You will win that hand 45% of the time. Thinking luck will make up for a rather large error on your part.

No amount of minor tells you pick up, especially online is going to make up for the fact you are putting too much money into the pot when you calculate your odds 10% to high.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mason,

As someone who has read virtually everything written by both Caro and 2+2 authors over the years, I really don't see how Caro can be referring to anyone other than you and David.

[/ QUOTE ]

Check the batteries in the old sarcasm detector, chief.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well he IS a MAD GENIUS

[/ QUOTE ]

He's needs to lay off the mad magic powder or whatever dust that has turned the man retarded. He is way off the mark and totally wrong

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder if he could be exaggerating to stir up controversy and make a point.

Naw, that would be crazy, just MAD. Even GENIUS perhaps.

But who are we kidding, I'm sure he's completely serious.

-g

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mason,

As someone who has read virtually everything written by both Caro and 2+2 authors over the years, I really don't see how Caro can be referring to anyone other than you and David.

[/ QUOTE ]

Check the batteries in the old sarcasm detector, chief.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't being sarcastic. Just who do you think Caro was talking about then?

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mason,

As someone who has read virtually everything written by both Caro and 2+2 authors over the years, I really don't see how Caro can be referring to anyone other than you and David.

[/ QUOTE ]

Check the batteries in the old sarcasm detector, chief.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't being sarcastic. Just who do you think Caro was talking about then?

[/ QUOTE ]

He means that Mason was being sarcastic and that you need to check the batteries in your sarcasm detector. It is clear to everyone that he is refering primarily to Sklansky and Malmuth in his article.