Phil Ivey's column at FTP

[SANDSSTORM]

I thought Phil's column from Full Tilt was pretty good this month - did anyone else read it?
http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/tip-email-125-deposit.php?utm_id=317

I especially like his advice at the end:
So here’s my advice. Read this tip. Read other tips and poker books. Talk to your friends. Absorb as much information as you can. But at the end of the day you have to trust your instincts and play your own game – not someone else’s.

I have often defined myself as a more "instinctual" player vs. purely mathematical and may find situations where I was "mathematically" correct to call or fold, but had an instinct otherwise. Matthew and I have had long discussions about this too, as I've questioned some of his decisions over the years we've played and he mine. I like having good knowledge/pot odds/mathematics, etc. when I play, but I like better following that nagging voice/instinct in the end - especially when I'm right!

Just thought it was interesting...
Albert

[ciaran]

We've had this conversation as well, to a lesser extent than you and Matthew have I presume, and as you know I come down more on the math side. Some of this is the nature of the games I play, of course, but I think that to the extent that you listen to "instinct" in poker, you need to be very careful of the human tendency to remember the times you were correct and not the ones you were wrong.

This is important in reverse as well, in that you need to remember all the times you made the correct decision and got beat as well, and make sure you don't stray from making correct decisions just because they didn't work out.

[mchilger]

I've been thinking about math and poker quite a bit lately. One thing that I have been noticing is that almost all of the top players - especially the high stakes cash game players, are extremely proficient in math. Sgrugby wrote a column recently and he taught calculus in college. Stoxpoker was a derivative trader I believe (or something on Wall Street). The list goes on and on (ferguson, chen, seidel, etc.). Many of the top players have math skills way beyond most players. Obviously math is not the only skill you need in poker, but it seems like it is an essential one in practically every case (the only I'm not sure about is Mike Matusow).

I wrote in THOAP that almost every decision at the poker table in some way involves odds and probabilities.

Ivey asks the following questions:
Does this guy have a hand? I would ask, What are the odds my opponent has a better hand than me?

Can I push him off the pot? ...What are the odds he will fold?

Are they scared?...They look weak, I am going to weigh his range of hands toward weak rather than strong

Will they fold to pressure?... What are the odds he will fold?

Are they a maniac?...I am going to assing a wider range of hands to this player. How does my hand stack up to this range?

I think this debate has a lot to do with how you define instincts/math. Ivey asks all of the questions above based on his feel and poker knowledge and experience, but in the end he uses this knowledge to determine some type of probability on whether a play will work or not. I call it math, he calls it feel or instinct.

I think in the end that most of time we're all debating the same thing - there are just different definitions.

I do think there are a lot of players who don't understand the math and just play "by instinct" hoping they are making the right decision. What they call instinct I call guessing. If you're not sure whether calling with your hand is profitable or not against the range of hands your opponent might be holding - then you're guessing.

One of my biggest pet peaves in poker is hearing the following..."I put him on AK, or I put him on a small pair" where it is practically impossible to do so based on the action so far in the hand. Say you raise and then someone reraises a normal amount like always, what could he have? He could have A-K, A-Q, AA, KK, QQ, JJ, he could have some other hands, or he could be bluffing. You need to assign various weights to all of these possibilities. Now let's say you look at him and he looks weak like he doesn't want a call, then now you can weigh the weaker hands more, but AA is still in the range unless you have a tell which is 100% accurate. It is rare that you put an opponent on a specific hand unless there is a lot of information/action in the hand to narrow down his range.

Math is essential, but instincts/experience are essential also as they help you define the variables that go into the equation.

Matthew

[mchilger]

IP Classic Main Event today. $25-$50 blinds. EP raises to 125. MP raises to $400. Late calls, BB call. EP goes all-in for $1300 more. MP calls with 77. Says "I put him on A-K". Whether his call was correct or not, just drives me crazy.

Matthew

[AlamedaMike]

Interesting - I think that we need to develop a winning style of our own. One that we feel comfortable with in the games that we play. If math works for us then use it. I like the math side of poker since I am more Bachelor of Science than Bachelor of Arts kind of guy; more technical oriented than people oriented.

[toom]

I think studying the math outside of the play helps make the moves at the table instinctive. Therefore, plays that feel like instinct really have a solid foundation in math.

[bagheera]

oh, i definitely feel people should have an awareness of the math involved, as well as general player psychology...

but instead of (only) asking myself,

"does this player have a better hand then me ?"

or

"what are the odds i will lose this hand ?"

i ask myself...

"does the risk i take justify the results ?"

and yes, often that question makes me run scared from better players, because I understand that they can read me better then I can read them, so even if I hold top hand, I am less likely to get paid as well as I will pay them if they hold top hand.