This is probably the first post on this topic. It's will be impossible to cover all of this in one blog, but I want to begin an important discussion.

There is a lot of discussion on 2+2 about the presence and effectiveness of poker bots. Here is some general background:

1. Bots have been around for years and they are winning at a good rate (2 bb/100+) at the midstakes (1/2 to 10/20).
2. Their technology and speed will only get better.
3. If done correctly, it will be impossible for pokersites to detect them.
4. They could effectively kill the games.

All of this adds up to being pretty scary. Some top calliber players have stated that the problem is very serious and with some depressing implications. I'll try to summarize some of the ideas that have been floated around.

1. Bots have been around for years and they are good.

This shouldn't come as a big surprise, but some of the most primitive bots would all play the same style, grind out a small profit (and make tons off rakeback). They were easy to detect and highly exploitable once you could identify them. They would mostly play at the micros. I just recently learned that this new wave of bots has been playing the midstakes and killing them.

Here is a graph of the compilation of ~70 accounts playing 6-max from 2/4 to 10/20:

I was reading Daniel Kahnema's Thinking Fast and Slow. Kahneman begins by showing a picture similar to this one:

Problem 1:



What can you tell from that picture?

Problem 2:

***

Next, find a number which makes the following statement true:

"Four more than seven times some number is equal to thirty-nine"

What's the answer?

***

When you are confronted with the first problem, you engage with Kahneman describes as "System 1" of your brain - located mostly in your amygdala. It's an emotional reaction and you process it quickly and effortlessly. He calls it "Fast Thinking". You let the totality of the situation sink in and make a decision.

Contrast that with the second problem. This one you solve using "System 2" - engaging among other things your preflontal cortex. This is what Kahneman describes as "Slow Thinking" - it's deliberate, effortful, and orderly. It's also taxing on the brain as it requires effort.

So what's the point of this blog post?

Have you ever been involved in a hand and made decisions which upon review don't really make much sense? It's almost as if another person played that hand. Does it seem often that when you look at different forum posts you seem to come up with lots of good lines and answers which other respectable posters seem to agree with, but when you actually play, there is tons of FPS in your game?

What's going on there?

One answer is that when you are involved in a hand online, there is money at stake, time is limited, and you have lots of information to consider at once. If you are also playing lots of tables, you need to make quick decisions. You will often tap into your System 1 of thinking and make Fast Thinking decisions - mostly emotionally and with limited (notice I said limited and not absent) mental effort.

On the other hand, if you are reviewing your hand on the forums, there is no money at stake, you are able to logically and deliberately break the hand apart with no time constraints and arrive at an answer you are happy with. You are working almost entirely using your slow thinking.

So there you go - the You at the tables is siginficantly different than the You on the forums and the You that reviews your sessions afterwards.

Where the expert players have a huge edge is many of the small decisions are automatized and they are able to devote their mental focus in actively engaging their slow thinking during important situations at the table.

I have no experience with any sort of programming or coding, but I am sure some of you guys do.

1. How difficult would it be to write a program like PokerStove?

2. How difficult would it be a write a simple simulator where you play NLHE HU vs. a computer opponent who is programmed to make basic plays with specific frequencies and ranges?

Let me know if you are interested in a leakfinder. I would review your last 30K hands and then do a 40-50 minute video review. The content would be made into a CR video.

PM me with some basic info about yourself:

1. Stakes you are currently playing.
2. Country you live in.
3. A little about yourself outside of poker.
4. What role does poker play in your life.

I'll pick one or two submissions.

I've been working on a book which documents from my experience what I believe is important to building a bankroll at the micros and moving up in stakes. The book centers on my experience of going from $200 to $10,000 in 2011. You can get more details about it here:

http://www.mtmicropoker.com/

The actual book is all written and is currently going through edits. If you would like to stay in the loop with updates and prizes, be sure to sign up for updates on the site. I'm very happy to be so close to having the product done. I think it will set the right foundation for anyone who wants to beat the micros and beyond.

Sigh ...

http://www.subjectpoker.com/2011/09/doj-merge/

As I wrote on June 8th, I was not happy with the answers I was given about player funds being segregated and have kept only a few hundred dollars to dabble in the 25NL games. Bottom line - until we get regulations in the U.S., I don't feel good about keeping money online.

"It would be some consolation for the feebleness of our selves and our works if all things should perish as slowly as they come into being; but as it is, increases are of sluggish growth, but the way to ruin is rapid."

-- Lucius Anneaus Seneca, Letters to Lucilius, n. 91

I just finished my fourth session with my student Patrick. He told me that he had a really bad session. I inquired about why he had the bad session and he told me that he tilted. I asked him to show me what happened and we looked at his hands + graph.

Over time, I've learned just how important it is to quit when things are not going your way. You're just not going to win some days. For example - here is a good one where the cards decided that it wasn't meant to be. Patrick said things like "I hate being in the red" and "I got frustrated and wanted to win it back". He has ambitions of playing for a living, and if he is to do that, he needs to learn to quit at the right time.

Here is the graph he showed me. I added my own notes afterward:



As you can see, towards the end of the session, his losing started to accellerate. This is the pattern he'll experience again in the future. Namely:

1. Staring out on the A-game, winning at a steady click.
2. A few losses, back to even.
3. Starting to win again, but not a lot of consistency.
4. A-game is starting to fade, now all the small pots we were winning at the beginning we are losing. Frustration is starting to mount.
5. Now we are losing the big pots.
6. After losing two big pots, we win a small one and we follow that up with another big lost pot.

At this point we need to stop. The deck is cleary against us - reglardless of if we feel like we are on our A-game or not.

"But Verneer - I can still play my A-game even after such a stretch!"

Probably not, but even if you think you can, take a break. Get away from the table, walk around, and come back. Poker will still be there.

Recognizing the point in which your B/C game meets bad variance is critical to knowing when to quit and that in turn is critical in being a consistent long-term winner.

A player that contacted me and asked for coaching (most of the time I say "not coaching atm" - sometimes though I take someone on for a bit) asked me about my winrate. I sent him my 2010 & 2011 results + graphs (close to million hands) and he wrote me back:

"when I asked about your win rate, I wasn't questioning your abilities."

I wrote back:

"You SHOULD question my abilities. You SHOULD question my winrate. You SHOULD question my coaching. Too many people in the poker industry aren't questioned and don't want to be questioned and that is a problem.

After these two sessions you have a sense of what I can offer and how I work. I would also encourage you (and all my students for that matter) to not settle for me as a coach just yet. If this is your first opportunity working with someone, you own it to yourself and me to look around the marketplace and see if there is someone better for you. I need to be clear - I am not saying that I don't want to work with you, but I do think that you should have a clear picture about what other coaches are doing and only then can you decide if I am the right one for you."

Only informed consumers can truly make good choices. I am all for transparency & choices in any industry.

With the super committee set to work on finding ways to reduce deficit, we get an opporunity to reach out to the 12 members and let them know about HR 2366 - the bill to regulate and legalize online poker.