This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

A Concept of Anxiety?

    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Each tournament even when played consistently is unique each time the player participates in the same tournament meaning a person can prepare the same way or have a system of thought but reality is that each stage is unique each time then only to say this is true or that is false is like chasing a flush expecting to hit it consistently, or following the same system expecting the same results.

      We know it does not hit consistently nor do the results happen consistently. Because it does not happen that way nor does playing MTT’s in this manner each day. However, players are expecting the same because for the most part they are playing the same, without an injection of intelligence in the moment just reaction?

      Working on this part will hopefully lead to channeling thoughts of divine feeling away from the table to experience the search of existence beyond ourselves, and then channel the feeling at the table. Psychology offers conditions for philosophy to use, understand when the movements match the feeling of the divine. This unconscious competence of thought knowing the moves, feeling the dynamics of each individual because knowing the dynamics in previous sessions that now have matched in the moment.

      Being an existence of a feel player, the feel can be moved to a model of learning this new existence of feel then would be the first stage of existence to understanding new information away from the table then feel would be also the first stage of intelligence to use at the table from learning new knowledge that is yet to be applied in the moment until it moves into the second stage that becomes the first stage of poker intelligence at the table. One step closer to mastery of just on stage of poker, and as the merry go round continues, and so does the existence of learning poker.

      It is better to stay on the rainbow than to find the pot of gold because the rainbow is a continuous circle with no pot of gold; the pot of gold has another place and will need other thoughts to achieve the proper movements. We only see the horizon and just a part of the actual rainbow, but have injected a pot of gold in the end because of how the horizon breaks our view of the circle. I am working on viewing the entire rainbow as a way to explain my existence at the table.

      This is a draw game, a high degree of abstract thought is needed, timing, mental capacity to understand how, when, where, and why to invoke mistakes, anticipate our own mistakes, as well as recognize routine situations that will either end with a negative or positive outcome, these situations define most of a player’s own mortality within an MTT tournament. Psychology offers conditions of conflicts that repeat themselves by the way the community cards that produce combination draws on the flop for example, straight and flush draws, then how do players react to board texture, play their hands for one pair against certain texture boards as further examples of these psychological conflicts.

      Away from the table we can build the perfect system typed nice and neat on paper because all probability, all possibilities can become actuality. However, at the table it is the opposite of how we discuss MTT tournaments away from the table in poker forums because the best information we can use is leaked for free, and this happens while observing the moment over and over, moment to moment.

      We make important short term decisions for the long run of the game, but the opposite is what this player observes every day by my opponents in the micro stakes MTT’s. The mistakes made each day in a game that could be described as a game that is inherited with mistakes by the very design whether this was intentional or not it still happens.

      Leveling situations happen with players representing certain board textures that look the same as made hands or strong combination draw hands because of how players will play their draws, second best hands with marginal kickers, as a couple of examples. These conflicts that look the same, make up a great deal of post flop play that is flawed when considering flipping hands pre flop and then no mistakes are made after turning the cards over.

      The brain has a very hard time trying to pull up the right memory when both types of memories have both good and bad results attached with them, but people use the good memory to chase without filling in the blanks first? Ultimately what is the brain processing properly that would allow the player to continue? If both situations look the same however, since being stuck the player still has to make a choice and players feel they need chips chasing an unmade hand against a made hand.

      Some situations offer the unmade hand no value after hitting their hand because all the money went in first without any thought about how many bets are needed after they make their hand? Each time a hand is made with no value of extra bets to be gathered then this mistake will have tentacles that will reach other parts of their game. This situation still has an ultimate decision still to be made? Do not let opportunity go by even though; it could be the opposite result of the initial decision in theory? Or always chase the chips?

      Having to think of the opposite, play the opposite, this process is not natural for the brain to perform in our poker sessions because the brain is looking to pattern its own existence from repeatable routines to help to understand its own reality not to think the opposite of what is true. This type of thought process is not natural for the brains natural existence within the game of poker, but now the brain has to resist routines of pattern memories; and to use opposite memories of poker moments to exist consistently in a opposite poker reality.

      Looking to understand the opposite of how people play and being better at understanding abstract thoughts that translates to play at the table of observing the opponent in the moment. Practice of this mental thought process helps my abilities to counter system thinking about value of starting hands, the probabilities of possibilities and for the system to exist consistently, properly it will still take another movement to see this actuality. The same probability of possibilities that takes a movement of thought to invoke mistakes within their own system of thought of a system to play MTT is what this player is consuming to unleash on opponents.

      However, hypocrisy of systematic thought is still applied from my own thought process in this entire post against systematic thinking but only to systematically dismantle a system that the brain is imposing on the player to follow because of how ethics will help create anxiety within their game. This happens when the player any player will put themselves in psychological conflicts of thought about their system that have a first and second ethics perhaps more levels of ethics of systematic thinking along with the ethics of the system will eventually produce a moment that can be exploited.

      This player will recognize the conditions from which psychology offers about their thinking, this leads to knowing how situations are going to be bet, played, and then apply philosophy to realize what they have because philosophy will get closer to the truth, the absolute, closer to the root of the moment to then make the proper movement because of each having its own individual proper movement, proper place just as a puzzle has each piece in its proper place.

      For example, I realized I do not have a fear of death but rather anxiety about death because of not knowing how or when my own mortality will happen. Just like in an MTT my game does not have fear of death, but rather anxiety of how and when it is going to happen because of how rare it is for us to win our last hand of an MTT. My game recognizes anxiety of moments within opponents in this same process of abstract thought about my opponent(s).

      Fear and anxiety have their own proper place and movement within my thought process. When this concept is not in its proper place then this concept can plunge thoughts into the Abyss, this Abyss will also lead the player back out again, back to nothingness of thought in which all thoughts are pure again all seems right for the brain to make decisions again properly.

      What happens for the brain when playing is the concept of anxiety from which poker puts the brain in these moments over and over? How do we improve to be better with our movements to be consistent within our game in spite of knowing the concept of anxiety of how the brain will deal with its own mortality? Then having to make poker decisions each day, each stage, each final table, each final decision of, each last potential hand, and about the unknown; the vastness, abstractness of poker?

      When my brain, game performs consistently everything else will take care of itself relieving my brain from having to face anxiety consistently that comes from the un-known, not understanding abstract thoughts of an abstract game, how this is applied in the moment, and this allows for freedom of thought, that will help my game in the moment to perform to the best of my abilities.

      What use to be anxiety for the brain to function poorly now becomes a nothing for it to perform in the moment with confidence without anxiety because of the quiet mind of nothingness? My game does not have to prove my truths or truths of others but what is false about my truths or the truths of others in the moment at and away from the table. The actuality of this is the “self” struggling with its own mortality within the game of poker, the Concept of Anxiety?
  • 70 replies
    • tonypmm
      Joined: 11.01.2009 Posts: 5,493
      It looks like MTTs are a wrong poker format for you. You can avoid the anxiety by choosing a format where 'tournament life' is not so important.

      This is the case in cash games but also, to some extent, in SNGs. While playing multiple tables of hyper SNGs, I 'die' almost every minute so there's no time left for me to ruminate about the 'death', whose significance is way less than in MTTs because it implies the loss of the opportunity to win only a few buy-ins, as opposed to dozens or hundreds of BIs in MTTs.

      Besides, I can simulate the future game more effectively because, with short stacks, there are much fewer possible betting patterns and typical situations, so I can analyse all of them in advance and even take into account the 'population tendencies' (typical habits of 'the average weak opponent') quite precisely. Thus I can get quite ready for the possible scenarios of the game before it starts.

      Compare poker to chess. For classical time control games at the grandmaster level, it's very difficult to prepare, and GMs spend many hours and even days to figure out what they should do in the opening, which affects the entire game - subtle opening mistakes can ruin the whole game because GMs are experts at converting small advantages into wins.

      In classical time controls games at an amateur level, one doesn't 'prepare' an opening against an often unknown opponent, but one relies on intuition and general middlegame / endgame knowledge instead. This is akin to non-turbo MTTs where the theory of optimal play against weak opponents isn't well-developed yet - only some heuristic 'rules of thumb' are known.

      In blitz chess games, preparation for the opening phase does make sense because, due to the limited thinking time, people fall into opening traps a lot more often and then it's easy to convert the large advantage into a win by applying well-known techniques like promoting the extra pawn and checkmating with the queen. This is akin to hypers where precise preflop strategy preparation is already a large step to winning.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Just like in life or in poker a post about anxiety does not mean a person faces anxiety within a chance to compete in the moment but emotion, psychology affect the brain of all players. Taking the pain staking time to know my moments is to induce anxiety at the table; the nothingness comes from being an athlete from 5-33 so, competing with confidence knowing that winning and losing has the same feeling.

      Understanding the concept of the self to admit shortcomings does not define a shallowness of the game because the depth of the opponent is to understand how to induce psychology of conflicts for them because of emotion only having endured the same. The mental game is the passion to unleash the mental game for others will define their weakness. The “self” recognizes itself in another, the mistakes that my game makes is recognized in weaker players. Making mistakes is natural humans beings will repeat from routines that form patterns, poker is abstract with inherited mistakes, and this understanding is continual process that is not systematic but rather to identify a one dimensional thought process of others.

      Freedom of thought allows this to exist, playing opposite allows my game certain styles such as, LAG, TAG, LP, TP, LPA, TPA. Playing exactly the opposite of the way a person should play then countering their movements is what happens not just playing against the weak because of individual table dynamics and different abilities each player possess.

      My passion is MTT’s not a problem, SNG’s, cash games takem or leaveem. Chess is similar but it is not abstract enough because of seeing each piece being moved absolutely each turn. Abstract thought about each other, concepts, strategies are similar in compare and contrast about both games. Just like my post the opposite is to be assumed because of not knowing the absolute however, people do form opinions from limited information just like in poker to disguise one’s true objective is also a technique that cannot be measured. Nice to have met you and thanks for the information and detailed response to my thoughts. Hope this defines more about me however, as time goes existence of other thoughts about theories form from my own process will help to define more about nothing that has already not been said by others that have played before I ever existed.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Crushing the concepts, concept of the exact, putting a person on an exact hand, then only to move down levels of thinking of the exact, not exactly what they have but what they have by range, what they do not have by their play, how they draw at their hand, will they call a hand they will not bet with, bet with a hand they will not call with, second pair bad kicker, top pair bad kicker, listing conditions of the concept that include a slight eye angle adjustment less than the exact.

      Listing conditions from psychology, without conditions from psychology how could philosophy explain the concept of the exact? Knowing more than what was listed above is an example of what started from the definition, the context of the word exact then moving forward to understand the concept of the exact.

      Philosophy offers the context of how to use words, this could evolve existential thinking from this, then working on being a better word smith to explain philosophy from a contextual, conceptual view of words that form conditions from which to list using psychology, then enter the existence of math will support philosophy in how to extract the proper amount of bets or how math will use the odds, probability that make a movement into the actuality.

      This from the concept of the exact. Then everything can become possible wrote down on a piece of paper. Change, increments of change the same way math offers possibility of change as from odds, probabilities that move to the actuality of change the odds and probabilities have to make other movements to see the actuality of a draw making a hand.

      Working on my game here allows for the same increments of change at the table when using philosophy, psychology to understand how change takes place how additional movements need to be brought into existence before change or the actuality of change in my play or the play of others at the table.

      This to explain how my game moves forward backward to see increments of change; if my game cannot think, explain, it here how can my game know what it needs to know, when it needs to know it in the moment, the moment of truth?

      Baffling ideas, living alone with a vision, learning from the team of one but having others that are trusted to give help when knowing the questions, or knowing how to ask for help, only one person is responsible against the many of one’s, one hand, one of many visions, one table, one game at a time, not looking for fortune or fame. Is this a true vision of a player, of a player with nothing to say about nothing that has not already been presented by how humans have used the English language since its conception?

      Then what is the concept of poker, a search of an answer of the nature of who we are? Fragments of a moment, a fragment of truth as it moves into the absolute, the truth has to acknowledge the absolute so, without the absolute how do people put their money in against a made hand on draws without knowing the absolute of the conditions of the others hand, the cards that come on the turn and river when all the money goes in on the flop with no other bets to be gathered after making the best hand?

      How would the person know the cards coming on the turn and river? A person knowing the turn and river would be a mythical or fantastical person in control of an event that would bring forth this person as responsible for all humans to know the cards about to come out? If this exists then bringing this paragraph into existence here, would then push back against creation?

      Because just like a draw playing against a made hand it takes additional movements to see the actuality of the draw becoming the absolute, the absolute best hand? So, from this why does putting someone on exact hand pre-flop or at any time seem like a mythical, fantastical event, in these spots my game knows the absolute when the conditions of psychology meet the conditions that philosophy needs to explain what the opponent has for a hand?

      Movements for the truth to come into existence that will eventually acknowledge the absolute, a fragment of the absolute until the hand is over then a person will visually see the absolute as to give a visual record of the absolute, then the game resets itself back to a sum 0 game then the next hand is dealt?
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      The dogmatic thinking of the blog, a person could view an open mind my mind being closed to only my thinking, thus, my open mind is closed to all other thought of the truth, only my view point has merit within poker, the definition of a self-righteous prick perhaps?

      Because the response given to my post was solid advice that has no argument but only to find flaw in what was typed, this is my natural course of understanding of another, the same standard this player will hold his game too.

      However, when blogging, playing what this player is trying to accomplish; to find the flaw in thinking in the moment especially my own, trying to gain position, perspective from position that allows the other player(s) to define, give up their position first.

      For example, my moments of truth is based on already knowing the read, my game just needs the bet in the moment because of already been in these moments many times that it becomes a nothing, a simple routine that is just merely repeated in a moment of truth, the truth of having experience many times over good and bad eventually the moment becomes a nothing in my mind from this the truth presents itself, the rest is just muscle memory that has already played out many times over?

      The objective to knowing this in the moment to induce an enigma upon the opponent if the opponent does not understand the possibility of a mistake now comes into existence. However, the burden of knowing is still upon my game to recognize which opponent this could manifest itself into them making a mistake then their game on the river looks like a genius i.e. the suck out.

      Individual dynamics, overall table dynamics, having conditions before this hand that have been set into motion leading up to this situation have to be met, an ethical moment before entering into the religious of a read, all of this still has flaws but order of existence will have its own light the burden of proof will present itself without my needing to prove the truth but only what is false in the moment.

      Then leading back to the moment after the hand to see if my game proved what was false of my opponent or what was false about my read? The truth does not need to be proved it always has its own light because of it already being proved prior to this moment.

      This player is working on being a better researcher of the game; this allows my thoughts to be that of a person experimenting with observation a qualitative measurement about the game, opponents, and my game.

      Trying to remain un-bias about my thoughts but to understand my flaws the flaws of others because of us all being human full of sinfulness, mistake fullness. This to further my journey so, to bring forth all of my game that my thoughts, reads, posts, tools, can use in the moment to create a better game that has reliability, validity, from always learning, learning the best way to stay un-biased as possible within a game with inherited mistakes. Because we are all flawed, hypocrites when explaining the game in some form or another; from this all of our games in some ways are flawed as well. The mental game, the mental muscle that will continue to brick and mortar, build to help with all that is flawed within life, poker.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      After expressing thoughts on a page, now more background of my career to date, as this pertains to America’s Card Room, four years ago deposited $70.00 USD. Ran this up to around $200.00 then gave my game a raise by depositing $100.00, then later another $100.00. Moving my bankroll up to $1250.00; this amount took around a year and a half to build with no withdraws because the point was not to withdraw but to crush levels.

      Crushed the micro’s then moved in low stakes, my games started out with $1.50 one table SNG, then after reaching my max to date, then was playing $5.00, $10.00, SNG’s. MTT’s max buy in was $10.00, 0.25/0.50 NLH cash. Sustained this for about a year, year and a half but something was not quite right.

      My game was starting to just break even, my opponents at the low stakes were starting to adjust to my game that my game had no adjustment to counter them, my game was winning because of good variance more than my ability to win hands more without winning hands being dealt but rather my hands making the best hand. So, what ability does my game produce that offsets the better players?

      The honest answer it did not have an answer thus, my bankroll eventually goes down to the line in the sand that my game designed to know when to move back down to lower stakes $600.00. Ego, pride, all of the negative emotion that was a result of good variance now looks ugly to admit that my game was not that good but had good variance to hang my hat on. In my book that is like kissing your sister, crushing levels is what my game set out to do and come hell or high water my game will find the path back to the low stakes even though, my game is now being crushed at the micro level.

      I have the means to deposit back to the low stakes but making back to the low stakes through the micro stakes is based on principle of repeating something my game has already done except this time it will be more on ability than good variance.

      However, my mental game has flourished amidst all of the chaos. Cause and effect, chain of events, all of the chaos is starting to make perfect sense. Personally listing results, money, personal accomplishments is overrated. However, the need to admit that my game is not what this player thought or envisioned to ever having to admit but personal growth mentally is needed to see this in print.

      This is part of why originally I clicked on to this site and read what wonderful ways people were describing poker, it was refreshing to see others describing poker with abstract thought about the non-measurable tests of thought that a quantitative measurement cannot produce. My game hopes it will find its way back by stopping by in this forum as part of my journey to gather other information from better players; again I thank this forum and its members for the chance to get better by just observing.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      The original question, post by Frozen Elf, the skill of recognizing your opponent’s skill. Since this is an older post I decided to post here but give credit to a great question as to introduce here what I am going to extend further about The concept of one bet on a later date.

      Because the context of the original question is still viable one today because the thoughts behind the question no matter the climbing of levels or stakes the need to know skill for the “self” to run the game properly for the recognition of other players in the moment.

      The mechanics of the nature of skill because of what we are, of who we are in any moment as this relates to defining the skill of an opponent in the moment. However, others have stated not to underestimate the other by labeling, to recognize the “self” better to work on this part, to then recognize the player of choice in the moment.

      Add this ingredient by knowing our own abilities do we know the proper approach for consistent reads that our opponent will willingly give away because of our action leading into them, then does position matter if I know the answer before asking the question by leading into them pre, post? The concept of one bet?

      Limit poker, limping in the majority of the time allows others behind me to start the climb to cap the betting pre of four bets. No limit, limp in for opponents behind to raise the limper, punish the limper. This allows my game in the moment to then have the hammer to cap or call to end the betting round pre or option to open the betting again or fold?

      Why? Opponents by limping in knowing all of my game in the moment to bring forward to this point by what was stated leading me to post this part or at the table to know in the moment what to expect from other players because of my opponents view from a limp in front of them by limping in OOP, most cannot resist the urge to isolate the weak play. On its face this is why I absolutely limp in.

      The better my game becomes the deeper my game can use the concept of one bet. The challenge that faces us all to keep our game fresh and not be predictable moments because of knowing the moment prior to this then use information we already know the answer to as to expect certain actions from opponents because of knowing our reads.

      My opponents see my movements as predictable moves pre and post to continue some form of unpredictability as not to be tracked or read in any given moment. Then prior results good or bad either keep the action coming back at my game because of negative results or them not knowing because of range of play and hands made in prior moments that give abstract, miss-readable actions in these moments.

      Good or bad my game knows the reads, abilities of my opponents based on a simple approach that does not remove the abstract part of my game to make my approach a nothing, and when it does either way my actions are not based on educated guess but knowing instead.

      It becomes simple fold or continue based on my opponents ability only this is the measurement of what they are, of who they are in any one moment.

      To read the skill of another the mechanics and sequence have to be known then lines of play up to the line as not to cross then only to cross based on the skill of the opponent. To define this to an example of a hand in the moment is still only based on our abilities and the abilities of our opponent in the moment. To be consistent in the short term knowing our abilities the abilities of each opponent have to be known by having them define what our game can read in the moment by consistently having the last read option by three prong approaches.

      Bring out the play of an opponent by what we know, the ability to bring out information pre, to then outplay as an option post or when making hands maximize the bets by what we know as readable movements by our opponents. The more complex the options the better our abilities to perform vs. what we know of our opponent by what we read because of what, how we expect them to play in each moment.

      From what we know of the "self" of our abilities and the abilities of our opponents for the "self" to recognize itself in any moment.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      This is why I endure the hardest part of poker, to put the brain in spots to give myself headaches to figure out the moment, over and over until it becomes clear. Leaders and lovers will come and go but to figure out how to untie the knot that is forever, to let outside forces you cannot control become a nothing. Poker will put my mind to the test, it will rail my game, you need to get right back into the game, I have learned life is a lot like poker, you never know what is around the next corner, next hand, but I have also learned that with faith anything can become possible anything at all.

      The concept of one bet, when our game has progressed to the point, the point when our moments become ABC; meaning how we play our hands, bet our hands, from betting first, rearising then why not trust this in reverse?

      Call bets from our game first just limping in from any position, because of the above information. Call their defining bets from them having position, this allows others behind the initial raiser over our limp to just call or open up the betting because of this move looking like a ABC squeeze trust this to happen then have the foresight to have suited connectors or the top or our range. Disguise, deceive, and give ourselves the hammer in each case with a vantage point our opponents have over looked in the moment. This helps to set up dynamic switches off aggression back to passive or passive then a dynamic switch to aggression.

      Trust our game to create other dynamics of what we usually do to give other dynamics balance in our game from the illusion of action perhaps one bet? Each bet is a dynamic change; each round of betting also furthers the dynamic switch.

      Thus, the sum zero game is always in the moment when abstract skill then combines with the abstract game to then erase short term, long term, make them a nothing within the thought of the game that could lead a person to otherwise, feel the need to build start and stops in their game.

      Accept no matter the approach it all can be exploited to some degree however, the player who can exploit the abstract of the opponents thoughts that cannot be measured by a quantitative gathering of the moment(s) will be greater than those who cannot compete within these moments that are not defined by the cards.

      The base of one bet that produces a small moment that creates a line of play that when I have learned how to untie the knot, the moment in the future can be extended by what is already known in a small moment from the genesis moment before making movements towards the absolute or by finding out the next part to then extend a new line while using the first line as well in future moments. It becomes a game of give and take away within a sum zero game.

      The read is of the opponents mechanics of how they play, so, putting them on exact hand is not necessary at first because the read is where is their game is going to cross the line? When being three bet pre, when I stay in the hand pre, then on the flop I check good and bad hands. The opponent will almost 100% of the time have to put in a bet on the flop this bet now represents the mistake of putting in more bets regardless of them having or not having a hand while my game is at the minimum of bets that is lost to this point, thus, a line in the sand or the genesis of the moment is created to then extend a moment at my leisure. My hand, my play no additional information is given away even if the opponent deems my play weak because of my actions on its face of the moment.

      What happens when limping in OOP, my hand will lose value early however, later rounds value comes back because of how the moment plays out prior to moments when not making the best hand then does the opponent just merely repeat what is being put in front them to react?

      This is where the amount of limping now starts to counterfeit the moment by limping because just as I limp over and over the amount of bad hands leading up to a moment has to give way to having hands so, just like the opponent punishing my game they will also not have premium hands to raise with just as I will not have bad hands all the time when limping.

      It takes a better hand to call or know what type of hand to call with to counter this play than it does to raise by what is determined to be a weak play or player by the play of the opponent in position.

      Then when knowing my moments to get value then conditioning of future moments are now in place to start bluffing for value because of no real read unless my opponent has a real hand in which they will define in a much clearer way to read, working on this simultaneously helps to take down dead money pots that my opponent in position will give up because of their mechanics, the sequence of play when having or not having value in these moments.

      Delayed steals with delayed value bets from back to the start of the hand because of the delay of defining the moment for the opponent when needed. This is another way to create and exploit the illusion of action.

      Board texture then becomes important for them more than my game because of knowing my moments better than my opponent knows my game in the moment. Eventually the opponent will unknowingly give away information because most will bet the strength of their hand based upon comfortability of their game to define their moments for me by punishing my game.

      Patience and discipline of how to play my moments is a must to not overplay my hands in the moment or patience to wait for future moments. When other moments do not come to fruition in these moments to make movements towards, or within the light of the truth brought into existence to exploit my opponent.

      Know also learning how to be a better call station than my opponents as well, this furthers the worst of my game in the moment to be miss-interpreted in the moments as well. Calling in position the reverse of being OOP, to keep hidden until needed or go away with no information of what I was in the hand for?

      This continues the exploitation of my game in ways to eventually gain control of the abstract because of just mirroring my opponent just as the person will continue to put bets out on the flop because of having the lead it is the opposite of check calling or check raising when OOP. Again the moment will extend out at my leisure and also to gain value from the start of the hand later in the hand as well with having the hammer in position. A rainbow of continuous play then recognition of additional movements for the pot of gold to become an actuality.

      Poker is give and take, give and take away from my game to give away only to take back perhaps more than was given within any moment to show a profit.

      When finding inspiration to continue, to fully know that this post can be looked at as the worst or this cannot be a positive approach nor can this be achieved to any success. Good things take time, success happens all at once. To then being away from the game to discover stories from two individuals that are referred to as “soul surfers”; an emotional connection not having met either person, this goes beyond us towards a divine feeling of inspiration because of their journey to greatness.

      Bethany Hamilton, Jay Moriarity; reading about both, watching both of their stories that were based on the truth, both separately are known as soul surfers, and I just found out the reference made to Jay in an article. The inspiration of how they had fun doing what can only be described as passion for what they truly loved and were born to compete within the sport of surfing.

      What moves me the most is the connection they had spiritually with Jesus Christ my savior, the emotion that will always be connected with them. Bethany enduring an arm being ate by a shark, Jay chasing mavericks at an early age with the help of someone he did not know they built trust, a special relationship that many never get the opportunity to have even if it is just for a little time within a finite amount time we are here on earth.

      Their perspective, the actions, that were result of passion that they shared on their face, the many years, hours a day to compete, train to become the soul surfers they eventually became. For Bethany, the struggle to learn how to become a champion without an arm to regain what she was close to having claimed before the accident.

      I know my path has to be my own because both people surfed as their journey; Jesus was there with them both especially in their time in need. Giving glory for my abilities that is expressed here that goes beyond the “self” because of the “self” recognizing faith in another even though, I have not met any of the people mentioned, and this goes beyond us all.

      Their smiles, the love of what they could do, accomplish this cannot be measured because it is having your heart full each day to prove to yourself that with faith anything, anything can be possible to then be accomplished. Their stories are a reminder no matter the challenge, the will to become who they are, the will to succeed, and the soul of who they are; this connection will push me to succeed because their journey was so much more than I could have ever endured within the game that I love.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Part of my process is to go back through this blog and re-read in order to the last post while also reading the response as well to my original post because the origin of the concept of learning goes back to the point of origin of the blog itself.

      Understanding what others have took the time to post is important especially when identifying by how people respond to posts or blogs by the time taken of in-depth response to a question or through theoretical abstract games of mental thoughts back and forth within the moments of an abstract game or a concrete game like chess as per movements but the mental abstract game from back and forth techniques based on abstract thought of a said strategy.

      By strategy of their approach that is different than my game the origin of game theory or a laser focused question that needs an answer in which the origin was laser focused the answer will read the same as examples.

      Re-reading others responses will hold my game my honest thoughts to this standard each day to prove myself here balance to how my approach will be at the table based on mood, behaviors, techniques of game theory at the time in the moment.

      This mental measurement will allow my game to become as well a manager of emotions instead of a fallacy of control of any said emotion, to accept who we are allows the growth of who we should be but it still takes additional movements to achieve rather than just stating them on a page however, it is important to post my thoughts here as another example to achieve increments of growth as per the additional movements to be brought into its own light as another example.

      Tonypmm, took the time to write a great response that I re-read often for example, the advice on game theory and compared cash game with his thoughts about MTT even though, my original concept of anxiety was done for different reasons the information has paid dividends because it led me back to the cash tables, while leading my thoughts back to the concept of one bet because this is the killer reason now after reading his post time after time.

      I started applying his concepts, theories to my theory about the concept of one bet. Again my absolute respect, appreciation for his response allowed my thoughts to advance my game based on who I am for example. There are no monetary gains that can be put on his thoughts because the information is greater than any money won that my game will produce thank you Tonypmm.

      I bought poker tracker in early February to track information as well as building my hand base because I had no re-player that would format with WPN network for Americas Card Room but really my search for what I was trying to do could have fallen short because technology of finding information is out there because it was simpler and easier than to exhaust all avenues.

      Before deciding on a purchase just this part of resolve allows for weakness when things get tough as just to spend money as the final option always rather than test one’s resolve as for a teaching moment as an example to start a positive routine towards finding out the most informed information before a purchase as an example.

      Cash games through a small sample has led to positive sessions of growth for my bankroll on small scale of a $ 2.00 or $ 5.00 buy in. One cent two cent NLHE or two cent five cent tables double my buy in approach or assessing by the line in the sand of a number of bets the minimum to lose.

      Then taking an honest look at my approach by knowing is the seat the problem, parts of my game a problem, the game is to tough today then leave the table all together either to find another table if it was not my game but the dynamics where the problem of my game making unforced errors as some examples of my thought process.

      This has the concept of one bet with the confidence of reading in other moments to then show the worst of my game to allow for unconscious thought about my approach the long term of needing to prove this that will take time to show good techniques about the approach even though, it is completely on its face to be a negative ev approach but knowing more about the opponents movements of how they will play then balances out the approach over time.

      This when my “A” game is ready to set there to continue to then be patient and disciplined at the point of origin to the line in the sand of one bet; or have success all at once because the objective at these small stakes is to double my buy in all at once.

      To have instant success or sit there in the long term and prove my techniques to myself and then analyze my mental approach to measure my success of staying true to whom I was. By what I was reading about my opponents abstract thought techniques by how they handle limited information and make decisions as an example.

      I love the response in which Tony used akin information about chess to certain aspects or even focused aspects of his game because this also matches the philosophy, psychology approach for the mental game for my game while playing.

      Final thought playing live in a home game from time to time, having only played live with this group five times so far. The concept of one bet applied from the same way I read online poker produced more than double of the buy in of their cash game and finished third in the small tournament before that paid two spots from the same concepts and reads of my online game.

      The previous four was solely reads and making hands, not changing gears and reading their prior movements to change dynamics because of knowing their thoughts about my game they gave away this freely so… But after focusing on the concept of one bet allowed for confidence to change gears because of the mental model of the previous four and then knowing my moments the same way as I do online.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Concentrating on nuances of one bet concept based on reads.
      Two point’s opponent bluffing OOP in blinds.
      Bluffing in position when I am OOP.

      They are based on the nature of who they are in this particular moment. It is an esthetic observation of lack of action from my game, my point of view, the lack of action is an undefinable in-action based on knowing the in-action is going to create them bluffing in these spots because of my game leading up to this spot, the moment their game crosses over into a complete bluff.

      In the moment, making a three bet knowing this simple dynamic switch, anticipation of the opponent leading out on the turn in most cases because of my in-action of checking; the opponent injected their game into a spot of comfortable bluff because of tight passive actions on the face of my game. Their game is comfortable to exploit in their view cards do not matter here. Most likely they will tell a similar story to justify their actions as one example.

      In these moments I am not holding a hand but waiting for my opponent to cross the line because of reverse dynamics when my game was in this spot on the turn OOP in the blind leading into an opponent waiting for me to make this move without a hand only having to fold when faced with a three bet.

      The first bet the opponent made in position in these spots however, some were made hands waiting on an opponent to catch up OOP when holding a monster then others playing off the first part of having a hand in later spots of these similar moments when making a value bluff of a predictable ABC moment on the turn; the OOP opponent leading out on turn because of the in-action. Knowing they only bet the flop OOP leading into the opponent in position when betting draws or weak made hands.

      Their check on the flop is the genesis moment, a read of weakness. The three bet is made to make them define their hand in the moment because my game already knows the answer to the question of the bet to my opponent in this moment before they fold or call. The call is just like a fold because it will go check fold almost 100% of the time especially when a blank on the next street of play, board texture will not affect actions or change the read of weakness of the OOP player leading out.

      Unless their game in this spot is more advanced then the hand could take a different dynamic switch towards a different routine of their game as an example. Sum zero has built in give and take of situations that will fall into moments of actions that are out of our control to understand or know because of the abstract of the game as well as the vastness of poker. How each individual has unique routines that have a direct impact on the degree of mistakes of human error or to induce human error of an opponent?

      Bluffing in position from my opponent when my game checks good and bad hands OOP on the flop, from the above information now it becomes the same read in this spot instead of reading the OOP bet of my opponent in position now this a reverse moment from the initial moment a transfer of dynamic reads to this moment.

      This now becomes the same read when my play has produced gathering bets prior to these moments then applying the above conflicts from in position play of my opponent.

      This also has other nuance reads of my hand calling with the best hand while allowing the in position opponent to bluff at the pot with A high for example when exploiting my limp pre. Or when not hitting the flop my game is at the minimum bets the line in the sand, my game is afforded the last action, fold, call, re-raise.

      The same way as being in position from the above information when facing OOP bets either on the flop or turn; depending on the dynamics of the hand as more examples. Putting my opponent on a hand when they are in position in these weak appearance spots of my game by understanding how AK would bet their hand in these moments, as well as pure bluffs either or the continuation of this line of play or dynamics of this moment my game reads well just as if my game is playing in position instead of the other way around.

      Psychology of the moment from how the ego will allow the in position player to overplay the hand whether they have a hand and my hand is too weak to continue or they are bluffing and I know what they do not have as more examples. This understanding is my experience when not knowing how to handle this dynamic within these moments when my game was actually searching to become better within these moments.

      Philosophy of this moment the “self” recognizing itself in another within any moment, from being on both sides of these conflicts in moments when my game was weak in prior moments; now it is just playing like a wounded fish for the shark to take my bait. My game is looking to ram the shark in the side, to surprise, then the shark rolls on its side, and this will drown the shark.

      A technique of the Killer whale to kill a shark as an example; trust in the dynamics of individuals, faith in the techniques my game has worked on for the “self” to recognize itself in another, from readable bets because of certain definable tendencies, dynamics in other opponents.

      Create false dynamics to gain the edge in the moment, this from observing the two to my right and left then moving the dynamic reads to the rest of the table when needed, tendencies of others to gain the information given away by others in a journey of moments that have give and take away in this journey. For example, does my opponent have a hand they will call with but will not bet with or do they have a hand they will bet with but will not call with?

      These are just a couple of dynamic questions for a starting point towards dynamic lines of play, tendencies that opponents will give away information they do not know they are giving away in moments. This comes from understanding limit poker first then moving these dynamics to no limit.

      Then to have confidence when the moment counts that comes from faith, not knowing the first time when making moves based on tendencies from failing in previous spots without winning this moment or other prior moments; because of failing first, to then make additional movements second, then the transfer of knowledge, then to intelligence of the moment third to then become better at not failing in future moments, practice to become better at extending the moment as my game becomes better, the small increments of visual change of my game, my moments.

      My game has to be patient, disciplined as not to rush the moment, the dynamics, disciplined to trust the read whether if it is fold, call, raise, re-raise in the moment as more examples. Does position matter? Can position become a nothing because of the dynamics of the moment being extended over the course of a personal journey?
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      When observing play of what they are in a way we knew what we knew by the way the absolute was read. This to reference play that was not an anomaly, play without pattern, for the anomaly to work the play for how others read their own play has to be done by the absolute. Could this be why players at the micros bet the strength of their hand when they know to bet the strength of their hand as the absolute?

      Then the change to trap would also be observed as the absolute, this now is just a transfer of change to another existing absolute from trap’s vision of the absolute need to change from a opposite absolute from strength perhaps aggression? This towards non-aggression to trap players willing to play by betting the absolute by aggression over perceived weakness in the moment of a fragment of the absolute?

      Binary decisions should not just be a one way street within a game of many roads of choice, one decision can exist within many possibilities of choice by memories of moments. However, just to systematically choose only one choice over and over or to say there is only one way will get run over both ways on a one way street in either direction by not pursing choice. Innovators, visionaries will see choice to think differently, hacks will ask for a show of hands.

      The operation system, standard operating procedures will have to eventually come back to choice if the initial choice equals, produces a bad product as a result of the wrong decision. The innovator will then have the final say of how the company will be run, if forced out of the decision making from not thinking the same way, that ousted him originally, but will bank the company by understanding the companies down fall, the lack of producing the absolute, by more than a binary choice of a one way street? Eventually the operating system will have unlimited choices by thinking differently by eliminating the one way street mentality?

      To then use the word anomaly by not patterning my thoughts here as well as at the table. The pressure is then removed, made a nothing by allowing the micro players to identify their absolute for me. This process includes the micro player, to then allow their thoughts of their operating system to be closed end to end with only communicating absolutely with other closed operating systems of the end to end mentality.

      A binary code of playing the same way, one choice at a time without prior thoughts about play of others only what they know in the moment. This system is easily hacked because they are hacks in the moment because of not understanding how an anomaly is recognized in others, but only recognizing a standard operating procedure from a closed ended system.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      It is easy to litigate the past, is it hard to litigate the real time decisions? To smile at the unknown, to let outside forces we cannot control become a nothing. Leaders, lovers come and go; can anyone see what we cannot control? Faith in something beyond our control? Do we believe in something we cannot see? Results of decisions after we relinquished our thoughts we could control in the moment knowing or not knowing, the fragment of the truth of the nature of what we are?

      The absolute being of existence that defines the results of our actions, this being has no control of how we seek freedom by obtaining the truth from free will until the time we are judged by what the absolute see’s as the absolute truth of a result? Relinquish body, mind, soul, to something greater than us all, help the brain relieve itself from itself the very thing decisions are made from, the source of its own information the brain has accumulated over time, or is it we assume we make our own decisions unless it is the wrong one in-spite of freedom itself to make our different individual choices?

      Does doubt after the fact weigh on what we believe on visual results of X or Y? Faith of something we never see but know it exists? The test of one’s own faith, faith can be a heavy weight to fend off when being tested by what we cannot see but have faith itself, which it does exist even in our darkest moments? Is it possible to see actions, even though, we cannot see the existence of the esthetic appearance of a being?

      Let your senses ignite then be wide open, may your problems be blown apart, may your thoughts be pure of heart, all of the actions come from the existence of the very being of a thing, a being of a force that cannot be seen but learned from of all abstract knots to be untied in the moment?

      The heart of a champion is not a goal to be obtained? But rather an existence that has relinquished its existence of the unknown, and then relinquishes the known barriers our brain has had control over to then become a nothing to not exist within, for each existence an individual existence each existing as to manage them in the moment as individual moments within the context of a random hand; as emotion is used or stops our thought process in the moment that would block my game from brining into existence the heart of the champion in the moment?

      The word champion has other movements that need to be made before using the word champion that come from conquering the unknown because now it is known? Otherwise these are all just statements and not existences to perform as a champion within, to perform within any random moment first then to become an absolute champion as the result of X or Y second? Would this represent recognizing when observing a mistake in real time at the table or explaining a path of learning how to manage the mistake away from the table to then manage within the moment at the table?

      Each session of this path represents change by how this explains individual small movements to then equal change after these movements are observed in the moment when before my game made a mistake that led me back to this point until? Change? Then a visual of this change second? Practice of mental thoughts prior to change that now can be seen with esthetic existence at the table to then confirm the mental growth of the abstract in the moment?

      The smile that replaces the hard work from the heart being full each day? The smile is the champion because of why, where does the smile call home? Our heart, brain, unknown feeling of existence that has faith of its own existence because of the very thing that exists but we cannot see outside our own vision?

      But yet when analyzing a result we form control by litigating the past from math, the concrete of what is by what is already happened in the past? Then relinquish faith of the moment every time by litigating a result after the fact as to show what exactly? A way to justify what if I? Or a way to justify I need to work on this, but only to repeat failing in the moment? The justification of actions as a way to avoid the truth of what we are the nature of who we are in any given moment?
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Left brain, academics, analytical, S.O.P., Math oriented skills; an order of existence by the brain’s pattern of existence within these small examples of the left side of the brain. Just part of what makes up parts of the micro player.

      Right brain, creativity, options, emotion, personality, skills that are harder to measure because of the abstract content within these groups; this helps when the micro player changes by using this side in other situations that help see the change by this understanding.

      As some examples, the measurement comes from the methodology of observation from using qualitative, and quantitative measurements of how the left side of the brain uses many micro players in situations leading up to the time of not using the brain in situations prior was not needed. But, when facing the opposite style the opposite is needed but when not knowing or being blinded by one’s own hand then…, will you know the rest of the story.

      The story is the story but balance allows for many stories from both sides of the brain.

      Approach approach conflict, this happens when we have two choices, and either choice results in a positive outcome. For example, when having to choose between two vacations either going to the Florida Keys or the Bahamas? And either choice will result in a positive outcome. For poker, when our opponent has two choices calling or folding because pushing is not an option in these situations, and either choice the opponent makes will result in a positive outcome for our game.

      Avoidance avoidance conflict, when a person faces a situation in which either choice will have a negative outcome for example, facing a big fine or prison time and in real life running could be an option but not for this situation. In poker, a player either folds and lets a big pot go or calls and pays off the bet, and the option of shoving was taking away in this situation because of the opponents choosing because of how prior to and how this hand is being played, and by what this situation represents in the mind of the opponent. Either choice now has a negative outcome in their game, a situation that I try to recognize and hopefully minimize as much as possible in my game.

      Approach avoidance conflict, this conflict happens when at the beginning a decision was made with positive outcome in mind, but as time grew closer for the decision to become real; reality of the situation became one that when following through; when at the beginning the decision was positive but the reality of the situation, the actual decision may have a negative outcome instead.

      I also have added avoidance approach conflict because of poker having a –ev hand at the beginning but by the end of the hand became a + ev hand now the opportunity to gain max value has presented itself from understanding these situations as well.

      For example, in real life just from the above situation instead the person at the beginning the decision to start their own business being excited; this situation had anxiety at the start of the situation. However, this changed because of prior failures in life they sought out investors to help with the startup money but they are silent partners to allow the person to run, start their business by their own business model by the end of this process, and now they are excited, positive emotion because what started out negative, negative emotion now has a positive outcome.

      Another example, starting a business at the beginning this choice was full of positive emotion and the person is looking forward to having their own business. However, as time grew close to signing their life away because of having to take out a loan to get their business started the reality of the situation; their decision now could also have a negative outcome as well.

      In poker a person starts out with positive expectations of getting max value out of their hand pre-flop but by the time the river bets happen they are wondering if the decision to stay in the hand now will have a negative outcome because of the situation changing because now their expectations changed from when the hand started.

      Poker will put the player in many abstract situations, the player will then face many conflicts that require mental muscle to find the absolute because of not knowing the absolute, the truth of the situation, and so, knowing this why would a player overplay their hands when facing this type of conflict without knowing the absolutes of the other?

      In a theological example, Adam and Eve, existed within their own thoughts then was tested from the tree of knowledge even though, warned not to partake from the tree, but Adam and Eve did anyway. The box of sin was now opened, knowledge flows without intelligence; absent was the ability in which to perform from which prior to that moment was no knowledge, but now has knowledge in a moment of weakness or searching for the unknown? Without knowing if Adam and Eve had the proper intelligence to use the knowledge gained?

      The book Concept of Anxiety from philosophy, explains that Adam and Eve were the first to sin but the world we live in is already inherited with sin, so, if Adam and Eve are different from other historical human beings then Adams first sin was not a human event. But rather a contradiction to creation itself; which then the observation is then categorized as mythical event instead? So, to explain this even further Adams sin must essentially be a human sin to explain whatever is the sin of one explains the sin of all.

      In poker a sin against the game could also explain a mistake because making a mistake could be perceived as a sin against the game?

      The nothingness of the game from which knowledge is absent then gaining knowledge without intelligence could be the realm of explaining mistakes because without intelligence the player would not know the absolute in the moment even if they were making a sin against the game at this first stage the person would only understand the inheritance of mistakes?

      Intelligence would demonstrate how knowledge of sin, the mistake is the first stage of just thinking about the mistake or sin, and then guilt would come after making the sin or the mistake demonstrating sinfulness, mistake fullness?

      The concept of inherited mistakes or inherited sin within the game of poker that has inherited mistakes since the inception of the game, and then could be explained in this manner of inheriting a game full of mistakes, sin? To explain the mistake of one could explain the mistakes of all, because of not knowing as of yet the root of the mistake but a mistake only?

      This stage is recognition of the self, in itself, and as we encounter the vastness of poker over time, this path is to show how the brain tries to find its own reality or existence within an abstract moment before or after the mistake, before or after the sin?

      Because a mistake has variables in which could be measured as different degrees of the mistake; for example, the first mistake could be seen as bad –ev starting hand but by the end of the hand this –ev hand could switch to a +ev hand by the way the opponent played their +ev hand then made a mistake(s) by the end of the hand that is worse than the original mistake of their opponent.

      Conflicting thoughts about conflicts within poker, the balance about the game, its foundation, a sum zero game, a game about abstract thoughts while playing an abstract game.

      A game that has both luck and skill that is visually demonstrated at the table whether we are there to observe this happening or not; a game that has inherited mistakes from the beginning of its conception the game already was giving mistakes away because the game is abstract, the brain does not do well thinking about a game that miss-information then make absolute decisions.

      For example, if a person would look at each hand even the person who wins the hand at showdown or not there are varying degrees of mistakes that can be observed depending on the ability of the person observing the situation.

      However, currently at the micros and low levels my experience is all players will over play their definition of the absolute, this is part of how I am trying to remain unbiased about the account of my experience.

      The absolute only happens either by seeing the actual hand or by having the opponent(s) hand so dominated by quads for example. Everything else is not the absolute but we have absolute movements in these situations by abstract thought about the situation without holding the absolute.

      Stages of existence, esthetic, ethical, religious, and faith; philosophy offers this because of the understanding of how the self will achieve faith.

      The two beings of existence, the existence of being for itself, the existence of being in-itself and the brain is sending us information when playing poker about memories of both existences within situations of not knowing the absolute, an abstract thoughts of a situation that has no clear path.

      How my mind’s eye will comprehend abstract situations at the table is a mixture of the above paragraph and simultaneously using abstract abilities to comprehend the absolute about my opponent in the moment.

      This exercise has to be demonstrated, proved each day to have consistency about an abstract game that is based on abstract thought about varying degrees of mistakes that are not defined in the moment absolutely.

      Every unforced error will have other mistakes within the mistake of which can be defined in the moment with practice.

      Researchers, scientists, writers have to practice their varying styles to become better at demonstrating their style, but the greatest researchers, scientists will practice their path to the absolute which in their minds is the abstract and they will demonstrate this part better than their peers in the moment from practicing their own unique thought process.

      Limit poker is the essence of an esthetic and ethical existence because of the existence of being in-itself with tactical strategies, sequence betting, and many other thoughts that will demonstrate this types of existence.

      This existence is short and long term thoughts about bets won and lost. Results are embedded in the brains memories about situations that could become emotional.

      Simultaneously having to float within both beings of existence for and in-itself to recognize the mistakes of another because of the self then recognizing itself in another; the self is also recognizing a mistake that itself has made that is observed in one or perhaps many ways including similar situations with varying degrees of the same mistake.

      Then the being of for itself will then go towards the religious and faith when knowing the absolute about an opponent that does not require being dealt the absolute best starting hand.

      The better at putting together the puzzle the more confident I become and the less dependent on what I hold to make athletic moves at the table; the more practice the better at demonstrating this at the table longer my game will have better flow, the ability to play clusters of hands with certain expectations, balance for the table to now think abstractly about what I am doing in the moment.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Now forming triangles in my mind to represent two different points of information the third representing the moment at the table or away from the table; depending on which is being used or thought about?

      The brain when trying to remember items at a grocery store for example without a list, three items is the normal when remembering however, the brain can with some training make up stories to remember extra items the same way people remember the order of cards by making up stories about each card as another example.

      Three is natural and the more natural the existence to help accomplish more without adding extra thoughts I am not at that level as of yet so, I have to avoid unnatural acts I cannot repeat in the moment.

      My mind’s eye can see levels of three with each of the two options representing one side of the coin and opposite of the one side with all the options versus the third option of what is in the moment, starting from the fragment towards the absolute of the hand on the river for example.

      Information from both sides of the brain, balance to strike the right decision made from all other existences becoming a nothing just focus from the management of emotion for focus in the moment.

      As table dynamics switch from who is playing and sitting at any one time from a natural course or course correction through dynamic switches.

      The sequence of play will then become analytical, math oriented on how they bet their hands especially post flop but the bet pre would be one of needing to see a flop by how this switch took place. That from before this was more unnatural way of playing more on creation through over playing hands? Based on emotion rather than systematic thought of an exact bet?

      As multiple triangles are brought into direct connection with a visual of these moments there are certain moments and triangles of information to either switch a dynamic, play for the nuts, this will represent their stack, and this would allow a certain dynamic to continue. When to switch or allow the dynamic to continue?

      When opponents switch voluntarily especially OOP, questions of why the switch, triangles now appear as defense or perhaps knowing this switch allows for the next line of play to re-raise this switch because of past experience of players who fit this part of needing to know how strong either their or my hand is in the moment?

      So, know going back up three paragraphs and bring the image of the player in question down into this moment away from the table, to break down future moments at the table. Was the player playing over playing their situations leading up to this switch or was their no switch but just a continuation of the same of waiting to make their hands before betting?

      When observing players who are on a rush of good hands then switch their pre-flop approach to betting hands to see flops then this would be the genesis of the moment in question otherwise, they would still seem to be on a rush or out of control by observation methodology of moments.

      The variables, would they simulate these situations looking for players such as myself whom might be paying attention to switches or trapping play as couple of examples, and if I am saying this here will I need not to out think such an opponent but play straight forward into such a player as an example or stay out of their way until they become prey in another situation.

      When the model of the other player will allow for re-raising then more of the moment is known from prior moments of good and bad results then the pressure then can be put back onto the opponent with some expectations of them folding or calling.

      And then check folding on the next street unless the board texture favors them or by having them on an exact hand to then observe their hand getting better, the esthetic bets would then become ethical in their appearance and meaning within the moment.

      Just as I understand when the opponent is within the first two levels, then the religious and faith is where the opponent would be more in the example to stay away from but some of what is religious to my observation is closer to ethical and religious then other movements past the example would then be observed to go towards movements of faith that would represent their play in the moment as an example.

      Triangles allow for all thoughts from both sides of the brain to co-exist together for stronger moments that will perform at the level of unconscious competence and then adjusting to what is.

      Then levels of competence then would be used in the triangles to help understand when the opponent is using my play against me or when the brain is using its pattern of existence of memories to drop my level of unconscious competence to conscious competence and below as some examples.

      For more options better moments, what I am working toward is moving the triangle to the shape of a diamond with three points of information with the fourth being what is…
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Now the extension of the above post, forming setups by old competition of pitching to help detect opponent’s switches or continuation of bluffing for value at my play.

      Understanding how to set up batters from a variety of speeds and location then observation of what is, this being the ability of the batter to hit my pitch.

      Poker when the player uses value as a bluff to get me to fold or pay off their bet when holding made hands then I have a big problem they have an approach approach conflict in their favor and they know it too.

      By reading in this forum, forgive me, as I have forgot exactly who said this but their avatar was Einstein a black and white picture as I reflect on this mental visual. This person was talking about how to bluff many barrels while leaving the right amount for the third barrel. The mental visual of this lead me to understand why the ethical bets from a math oriented approach that has the support of psychology.

      The very math of the exact ethical bets with a psychological feel of these bets succumbing to this moment over and over was now defined by the behind the scenes approach of how and why this has a great affect both visually and mentally on my game.

      So, now the ignorance or the innocence is removed but fear always kept what was not true from being discovered through natural dynamics of situations because most times the moment of a person doing these actions did not require a hand.

      But a busted draw at the beginning was a strong draw, to then make the last move seem to fit any board texture by always having the second best hands from the brains pattern of existence. And within these moments of paying off these bets instead the dynamic switch of me folding the best hand to their bluff, This has now been discovered from another’s post by just observing and not trying to look for anything just existing in the moment of reading.

      The math of the bets by the % they represent of the persons stack left behind, on each street with the amount left behind for the big river bet for the play with a busted hand to work. However, the person making this play would also recognize the feel of psychology before attempting this in the moment.

      But demonstrating the ability to be a call station now does the person have the same ability to pick out when I am calling to call all bets with an already made hand or am I just calling to make a hand to call the river bet with the nuts or fold when I miss? Do they demonstrate this ability with other opponents?

      This keeps that play at arm’s length, this also puts options back into my game when recognizing the switch or adjustment by the other player because if the player does not like using certain tactics against call stations I will read this and also see the better players adjust one level above by making the extra movements in the moment by my observation of their dynamic switch. The merry-go-round continues until someone makes either a sequence mistake, tactical mistake, or emotional mistake. This is where I smile at the unknown of these future moments.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” (Søren Kierkegaard).

      This is my maxim at the table.

      It is better to shear the opponent because you can only skin them once.

      Actually it is the first movement to fool them, then a movement to only value the kindness of strangers rather than to take them out, by wounding them mentally.

      As to let the table witness the moment then use psychology, to then use this moment to help with psychology of opponents who choose to view the esthetic as concrete of their own reality.

      Their brains pattern memories of that moment in future memories of past conditions that influence thought of their play vs. what happened to another in a moment they can relate too.

      This is why I play the flake.

      To hustle players, growing up with pool table, then learning to play pool with a chair at age 6, then having a competitive family of pool players, and my dad hustling pool after working all day, this was his way to relax. For me a recipe of getting hustled growing up.

      The Color of Money, a movie about hustling pool, this is my to relax in poker, push the odds of winning down to nothing then playing them on a string to allow the comeback. Allow the give and take to then gain an advantage of all dynamics of players in heads up or multi way pots.

      This from the concept of one bet.

      What is right? Tight is right? TAG, this is my style, but it is of the majority to play in this manner because it is the best way to be profitable. However, to be the best TAG against others that are better than me at being a TAG; well then it becomes increasingly hard to either outdraw their range when behind or hold on against their range to out draw my hand in another moment.

      As the way being beat becomes a pattern to witness this in the moment to now analyze the timing of negative emotion from bad fortune against other better TAG’s.

      How to change this dynamic?

      Limping in EP, looking to play the flake, allow the punishing of limpers, a memory by all who see limping as a weakness.

      Build a multi way pot because of the reads of many opponents, this is needed to build odds of 5-1 for me to call OOP to then allow my game to chase with the proper odds, then make movements to make hands that will get paid off either by opponents over valuing position, their made hand, bluffing as a way to continue the punishment.

      Because of them being card dependent to their hand by not observing board texture changes because my game is looking for combination draws against this type of dynamic pre flop.

      This now becomes a binary choice for my opponents when my game has made a hand with two types of board texture, flush and straight boards, two types of straight boards hi and low made straights.

      When becoming aggressive OOP, which type of hand did I make a straight or flush?

      Or because of the amount of dead money am I bluffing because of certain dynamic switches either I have set up prior that in this moment I might be bluffing?

      The third dynamic is set up by memories of the opponent because of them bluffing in the moment that allows them in position to represent what I am holding.

      The flake plays the opposite with balance of suited connectors (not one or more gaps unless the dynamic changes to allow my game to open my range of connectors to include gap suited hands) up and down the spectrum, or big pocket pairs.

      Then have discipline to fold when not hitting the flop or having to fold because of reading the texture of boards vs. how people play their draws, made hands, bluffing.

      I can get my chips back so, laying down AA, KK post flop is not hard, or pushing my small edge against more than one opponent pre flop. Doing this by either having them covered or looking for spots to at least double up as to continue to stay ahead of the blinds.

      Even scenarios of playing weak with big pocket pairs then fold pre because of too many opponents playing their little games; I can also fold pre because of getting my chips back later.

      It is a tug of war because of getting dealt AA, KK pre then positive emotion of winning past pots then becomes negative emotion to fold these hands pre.

      Then using position out of the blinds, understanding my opponents who choose to play OOP in the blinds, are they using OOP in the same manner as my game?

      Are they thinking about how to get my game to pay off later in future moments as they sacrifice this hand for that hand of abstract thought?

      Can they get their chips back after losing a small or big hand?

      Do they show emotion in defeat or from success that could be used in a negative, psychological manner against them in future hands?

      Answering these questions then allows my game to have flow, put my opponent on their heels or allow them to put my game on its heels as well.

      Either way this is fun for me because I hate losing more than I love winning, my game will figure out what it needs for each moment because I can state contempt of my game without losing management of my emotions.

      Do my opponents understand how to play the flake or recognize another flake? Do my opponents know their moments in this manner each day as the rainbow of competition continues?

      Sometimes the sheep will slaughter the butcher.

      My moments will eventually produce pots that will have at least a triple up vs. a heads up situation. Producing pots without showdown that will produce a double up of dead money at the very least. The other side of the coin, is coming up short in these moments.

      However, by having 5-1 at each street(or close as possible), or eliminating opponents as the river nears.

      By knowing the turn is the key by how pre-flop was played in each moment. Pressure of folding, emotion of negative outcomes comes at the turn more because more people fold on the turn.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      From the above post, now think of two beings of existence, an existence of being for itself, and an existence of being in-itself.

      Being for itself, this existence is looking for something greater than itself. It will search towards tomorrow, go back years ago, back into other histories, other worlds, and other existences. An existence of being for itself will push the “self” towards not falling behind its own expectations.

      An existence of being for itself will always exist where it is supposed to exist at any one time of shared space and time with itself, with other existences. This in fact only ceases to exist is if I in-fact cease to exist.

      Being in-itself, a being of existence of in-itself is like a rock because a rock is a rock it will never change. The rock is the very being of a thing, of an existence, it will always be a rock.

      The only way the rock changes its existence is to be kicked to another spot but this is just a change of geography, the existence of the rock continues, this being of a thing, in-itself it is still a rock.

      From what has been posted prior, poker can measure how my opponents view my image then I cross reference thoughts of two existences both against each other, both in contrast to each other, each within its own existence, each has to exist or this will push back against creation.

      Without this can the existence of basic common ground of thought about both beings of existence within the moment that moves toward logic of moments now in fact will exist as well in my moments.

      Then new thoughts arise from basic understanding of movements of existence through expression of bets that are defined by past, present, and future bets of moments.

      Just as I have Lee Jones starting hand chart as a base, this model of existence is in concert with starting hands that move from this towards throwing this aside because of not having to think about these basic models to then free up mental muscle to focus on what is happening in the moment.

      This will allow for the minimum of losing in situations based on bets won or lost vs. situations with combination draws against one pair hands, then vise-versa of this scenario.

      The mental muscle is then being moved forward with all of mental thought about how models are being presented.

      Also by how to read the opponents story, the basic is understood then it becomes; are they playing for itself or being in-itself by the line of play, by expression of movements of existence of past, present, and future moments.

      I have to be able to play a being of existence for itself as well as an existence of being in-itself to understand dynamic switches that are being read, stories being told.

      Then to know whether an existence then is being false or how to bring out the truth of which existence, of any moment, is being true to its own existence, within any moment of existence.

      This expression came from taking notes on people who were making my poker existence force barriers upon my game.

      I have many basic notes on opponents that read, they will call with a hand they will not bet with in or out of position, and they will bet a hand they will not call with in or out of position.

      Then defining how they played weak, strong hands, how they mix up play because of my not understanding their being of existences, then making movements towards understanding by experiencing negative outcomes.

      And when they are playing me without my knowing how to exist within a shared time of, of shared space, of moments. This will then become known after a sample size that is not known as of yet but will come into existence with experience.

      Sometimes you have to be the rock and sometimes you have to kick the rock to understand how to morph into an existence as a being of an edge for itself against my opponents in the moment.

      Philosophical thought that moves towards philosophical debate even if it is between for itself, and in-itself to create better beings of existence at the table.

      That can be debated with me within my own thoughts, an expression of views, with opposite view points to stimulate and create better critical thinking at the table.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      This third deposit of thoughts to go with the two above posts; how does value now look, work, and perhaps why?

      Value of how to read value that is given to my game free by how opponent interacts within each street of play, each bet, thoughts of why this was witnessed with some certain order of expression from how the opponent exists within each hand played.

      Give and take of how my game shows information that I want them to see rather than my opponents showing their hand because of how they played position in or out.

      This happens when they miss a bet in or out of position because they did not know the strength of my hand to then bet accordingly.

      This understanding comes from them not knowing where I was at in the hand by the sequence I chose to put them in whether I am in or out of position.

      The question then becomes who is going to adjust from this point forward?

      This abstract value, with knowing more about the miss-information then a line a play has been subtly put into play by what I have witnessed because of them giving their position away by showing me their hand without thought of future moments.

      The only way value comes from the above statement was also having bits of information abstractly that now can also be put together to then make a broader model from real time abstract thought, past experience from positive results.

      The question now becomes, do they have the ability, patience, discipline to adjust because of setting my game up by allowing the information to be seen for future moments, so they can gain an abstract advantage?

      This is why when I am also waiting for premium hands the sequence in which I use the tools of checking, check-raise, re-raise, raise, limp, min-raise, three big blind raise, shove, fold, any action as part of the sequence that brings out information to then know what value to use next?

      Bet or call or any tool that would limit or bring extra value needs to be done with little action with many abstract thoughts about future moments from prior tools of existence.

      So, being patient as not to give away how I play hands, discipline to stay or get away from my hand because of sequence, subtle change from my opponent, but show many ways to lose or gain bets by how my image is looked upon in any moment of existence.

      Especially on the river by not putting my game at risk to be bluffed by this two prong approach, micro players play many crazy starting hands, playing for the absolute then backing off on how the strength of their play matches past, present, future hands by how they exist in each moment.

      So, as not to risk being bluffed by board texture by their ability to bluff board texture that I have to be right when being put under pressure with a higher rate of frequency to justify calling so, the timing of the moment needs to be right if I play past this sequence.

      This is one of my weaknesses, to show without attempting to gain value, or perhaps show down the winning hand, then abstract thought about why I did not bet the river now is put into abstract play, how do they adjust?

      I have enough experience while allowing thought of inducing bluffs, or read these plays as value if they change subtly in the moment.

      This now comes into play that can be observed easier, plus not knowing why I just checked more abstract thought is being forced upon my opponent’s game to put barriers that shut down thought in future moments or perhaps make an emotional decision?

      So, at any one time why would I pay off because of already knowing why, or run them off hands, missing extra bets without thought of the strength of their hand?

      Thus, knowing the strength of their hand without knowing their exact hand allows for small value bets.

      As this abstract merry-go round continues in my favor or when I choose to test the resolve of my opponent because they willingly allow my game to play the abstract game better than them. The mental battle at the table eventually should swing into my favor.

      However, if I do not give my game the chance to stay around then all what was thought about was done in vein or was it?

      Each battle, each sequence, each session, plays a part to keep building a model for itself by interacting with in-itself to build a better “self”, a better model of play that can be taken down re-built within the moment or thrown out to play off the cuff, or perhaps just to smile and have fun.

      No matter the outcome because the existence of mental barriers that have been forced in error upon my game now can become a nothing in the moment.

      Because of philosophical debate with myself away from the table, then to have a real time debate abstractly in the moment this is as much fun as the expression of I hate losing more than I love winning as a way to express the love of learning. Because of working on how to be a better abstract player than that of my opponent in the moment, a bigger percentage of the time.
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      The final installment of thoughts from the above three posts, about where value is also being seen?

      From abilities learned, abilities furthered from learning new information, which furthers my game in the long run, from short run gains of playing in the moment.

      Playing 0.55 cent, $25.00 GTD SNG on demand, other $1.00 buy in with two hour late registration, cheap rebuy/add on MTT tournaments.

      All of my learning, applying new abilities, honing current abilities, comes from the $25.00 GTD this is the purist form of MTT micro players that will give their honest reaction that are measured from deeds not words.

      However, they will tell you in chat how good they are or how badly others play, I choose to do the same with proper reasoning to interact with emotion instead of just interacting in chat.

      This had a negative outcome in my game from past emotional reasoning of not having the proper management of my emotions.

      Competition to be the best player, smack runner exists within this purist form of poker; we all believe we are the best at the table at any time.

      This is expressed sometimes with malice, sarcasm, or through not understanding the exact information that is being expressed in the moment, just raw emotion that can give away information that is not intended to be known.

      This game is now starting to produce extra money that will fund other bigger tournaments to give my game, bankroll a chance to make movements in new tournaments, bigger buy ins to challenge my resolve, and then give my bankroll a better chance to grow.

      Then witness my game to then analyze my game as to compare and contrast growing, against some of the same or different competition that have similar abilities.

      So, in conclusion, the rebuy/add on tournaments have low buy ins. However, I rebuy at the beginning to take a line of play as not to put myself in harm’s way intentionally, but to demonstrate patience, discipline to develop the right situation over time.

      This approach was part of my "A" game in the first hour but now is my "B" game, the approach that is necessary to use when my new "A" game approach is not yielding the objective of the first hour as an example.

      Now just the original buy in is needed and then take the add on if I am still there. Less investment higher rewards, this fits my risk/reward model.

      Now my game makes this movement into longer tournaments after what was learned at the $25.00 GTD.

      Knowing this is a one hour late registration by the 50/100 levels the objective is 30 BB at the minimum. Different stages, different size of chip stack is the objective.

      This triggers the information stored from real time, past sessions to be used due to the need to either to start playing after being too tight or the reason I need to start playing because of now needing chips.

      This as a base of basic needs to survive in a long running MTT or shorter MTT.

      Then it becomes expanding my tournaments with the same learning process as expanding my moments they go hand in hand that is in concert with my situation, and my moments.

      This now is starting a journey back to low stakes that is not marred in mental contracts with myself that I have neither the ability nor the control that is outside my ability to control.

      The journey then becomes a journey toward level climbing instead of increments of change because of needing certain types of experience, this is now shown through journaling the change is being witnessed, this again I can smile at, an expression of fun.

      That is why every word said, every action taken has meaning, hidden meanings, as to know where my games existence is either residing or making movements towards?
    • STLfan
      Joined: 03.04.2017 Posts: 88
      Playing the game of the knife cutting both ways, one way that favors a moment of repeated memories the other the line that cuts like a knife. Once what was favoring my game now crosses over because of the action of the other in the opposite direction.

      I cannot change the pendulum once it has swung away from me, and staying in past this point way only brings pain.

      Unless knowing why the pendulum is swinging away from me then it becomes unnecessary to type because I would have described the moment, by the context of words, of what the pendulum represents as a knife cutting my game, but with knowledge now that transfers to intelligence once the knot is untied then poker terms of an example would be the context of the paragraph.

      How do I make the knife feel good?

      Keep playing the flake?

      Conversations recently have made words that cut now represent soothing feeling of what the opponent now puts in concrete terms of why the flake now is listening to an emotional discussion with pointed questions about the context of my game.

      Now for context of prior moments that led up to this conversation. Just as the stories of how my moments produce different styles of the moment.

      Clusters of hands played, in this case 6 plus hands leading up to a min raise on the button with my best hand of this cluster, AQ off suit.

      The small blind folds, big blind calls the one bet. My hand flopped top pair second kicker, with a small straight draw under my top pair.

      The big blind, bets out on the flop with a blocking bet, this is read as a draw or weak one pair hand to balance my range, to help disguise as what they perceive could be the best hand, this move might also take down the pot. Thus making the opponent define their hand, and in this case I just call.

      My hand is strong enough to call not just because of top pair, but prior moments that are the reason I just call because they wanted me to define my hand on the button, my game has been in this position many times.

      As not to run this opponent off their hand because of knowing the strength of their hand without knowing the exact hand.

      The same line of play was taken on the turn and I just call because of a blank on the turn, also knowing my dirty outs. The card dependent opponent defines their moment better without my games needing to find out any additional information, so, see the above line of play by just calling.

      On the river again a blank now the opponent leads out with a bigger bet, there is no need to re-raise this bet because they all along had a hand they will bet with but will not call out of position, and my game knew all of this moment as it was happening, my game is 99.9% right in these spots or spots like this one in or out of position.

      The .1% is why I just call in-case there was a miss-read and then I still pay the minimum river bet because of them catching a wild two pair hand that was undetectable because of my line of play.

      This measurement of the qualitative methodology of moments based on behavior of the opponents that play card dependent in the moment.

      When they do not understand the opponent but see them as a flake.

      What this model builds is more moments that have reliability and validity by knowing more than the thinker in these moments as well as expanding others based of this prior moment, for future being of existence, of an existence for itself, which is exploiting in-itself.

      This is done in the opposite manner because for itself by betting out, thus, is actually a being of an existence of in-itself in these situations. My game which by an esthetic being of in-itself but the "self" acknowledges itself by knowing the opposite, now the ethical part of my game agrees with the esthetic.

      Because of knowing how card dependent players will bet weak hands, draws OOP, then the clusters of hands played with some shown down others not, but no premium hands shown down.

      The image in the moment allows for my game to take this line of play because of knowing the dirty outs then being disciplined because of position, and then observe them changing the line of play because of making their best hand in the moment when the situation reverses itself.

      They now become aggressive as to always run me off the second best hand.

      By not knowing the value of my hand to now know the bet size to make my game then make a mistake in the moment to thus, give the opponent value for their hand.

      Otherwise they would have already demonstrated this ability to bet different, then my story here would have been different, so, their line of play puts them one level of thinking below mine in this moment.

      This always happens in this order of existence, either them continuing their line of play with what is only a bluff with Q high or changing their line of play making their best hand because of being card dependent in both situations.

      So, why would I be afraid of any moment with this knowing of how people play?

      The conversation in which my opponent started, asked “why I could not bet my hand”, and then made a sarcastic comment about the approach of the hand played.

      So, I addressed the first part of his question direct by saying, “If I bet you would not have called so, why would I run you off the hand?”

      Then luck box was used, also they were predicting my game would just shove 28 and lose anyway. This because of showing down a gut shot win against AA because of knowing how the card dependent AA player plays this hand it is also easy to put them on AA when my game needs too.

      Now giving away this information in many circumstances would be a mistake but the polarized flake image backed up by comments about the esthetic image i.e. “the flake” is burnt into their memory as well as the whole table.

      Some become either resistant or hesitant to play post flop or pre flop because of what was seen then what was said.

      The psychology of moments forced upon my opponents by my opponents choosing, they also conditioned themselves to believe or not accept in these moments by their predictable behaviors to read in the moment, all the numbers that represent the opposite is also seen by those who have poker tracker running.

      This is fun for me, I smile at these situations, and I have all of this on poker tracker as well if I needed to bring up those past conversations of past moments. Just never had the reason as of yet.

      The merry-go round continues every day because of these past moments that become increasingly in my favor.