18 Jul 2024 A-game discipline mindset We often hang various post-its on the monitor or wherever we look. And since even semi-professional poker is a job that requires a lot of discipline, it will be very valuable to place some kind of reference points right in front of your eye. And today, Phil Galfond, a well-known high-stakes poker professional with 20 years of experience will share 5 important reminders that he writes on his sticky notes. Some may find the advice obvious and even stupid, but Phil will try to explain his thoughts and goals in detail. If someone doesn't like them, he can always come up with something of his own (and it will even be better that way). However, it won’t be superfluous to take into account the advice of a professional. Further - in the words of the professional himself. Post-it #1: It's so simple... This post-it is needed to remind me to focus on the game I was preparing for - and not the one I might be inclined to by the perception of my opponents' play. Whenever I play, against every opponent, in every heads-up, etc., I always have a plan for the upcoming game or individual hand. This plan is also influenced by how I prepared before the session: I study the approach to the spots that interest me in solvers - as an optimal opponent, and as I learn the game of a real opponent, I introduce the appropriate exploits. Sometimes in the game it happens that I begin to see patterns (characteristic lines of behavior / individual actions). Despite the fact that recognizing playing patterns is usually extremely useful for a poker player, often relying on what you see (with your imperfect brain) can lead you absolutely in the wrong direction. So, I planned to play the session in such a way that when I see that a lot of draws are missed, and the opponent is inclined to bluff, then I will overcall him with bluffcatchers, even on an expensive river. We came to the river, the opponent in position checks behind, and now I see the hand with which I expected him to bluff in 100% of situations. Now I have logical questions like this: «Is my plan still good or did my opponent adjusted this way, knowing that I’ve been doing this for the last couple of sessions - calling him?» I'm starting to pick my brain. For example, if villain check-raises 3 paired flops in a row, then it may be that he has come up with a plan to attack the flops like this, and that I am obligated to do something about it (not always obligated). The problem is that, first of all, often these notes/reads in the game are generated by fear A voice in my head says: «The opponent is attacking and trying to exploit me in spots for which he previously saw me as unprepared. Yes, it comes precisely from fear.» In practice, of course, the opponent could adjust like this, and then I need to react to it. But the catch is that between sessions I have so much time in which I am not playing that the very voice in my head that is based on emotions is now silent. - At this time, I can calmly look at the stats, hands and showdowns, and name the most optimal play. In addition to this, I can fairly accurately infer the likelihood of my opponent's adjustment by formulating a counter-strategy if the adjustment is obvious. Therefore, in the game I will not only analyze it worse - I don’t see objective information clearly, but I also don’t have time for quick and accurate readjustment - almost all my attention should be in the game and dozens of other spots, and not focused on a specific , which seems offensive. I can still do a good job of countering a perceived leak or pattern, but it is much more effective in terms of EV to do it outside the game - in a calm state and with normal perception. Another thing is that variance can affect a lot, and based on individual showdowns we will draw too far-reaching conclusions. After all, it is possible that the opponent actually had his own «3» all 3 times in a row on a paired board like 33x, where he simply raised for value. Or he could have that three of a kind twice, and once have the perfect hand for a bluff. Or in general, all 3 times it was a bluff, and he always plays like that. Therefore, it is very important not to overreact to such tiny samples. Especially when you are even a little bit tilted. Let's go back to the spot where I was preparing to call my opponent and was expecting him to bluff. It is also likely that my perception of how my opponent looks at this board and sees his range does not quite correspond to how he actually looks at it all. It may also be that the opponent is not in the mood to bluff today, or at this particular moment, because he lost a serious pot before - on any table. There may be a lot of explanations, even slightly unusual play of opponents at a tiny distance. And therefore, I am convinced that reacting to almost complete uncertainty by «shooting in the dark» - out of emotion, at random and in an overly persistent manner - can only lead to large losses in EV. Technical unpreparedness to fight back The final reason why I think we overreact to how the session is going is that it often feels like you are not technically prepared for a strong pushback against your aggression. Let's return again to the example where opponent check-raised a paired flop three times, and we meekly folded three times, having complete airball. The feeling that you lack the skills and braveness to resist this and that you are not ready for a tough rebuff is quite typical for us. But if you have somehow prepared for such a move (coach/solver/stats - whatever), then your plan becomes close to ideal, and not very exploitative for your opponent. Again, should I have continued on these 3 check-raises on a paired flop with my trashy hand in any situation? - More likely no than yes. - Folding trash is still the best action for a hand of this class. In this tiny sample, I can think and feel that my opponent is exploiting me, but in reality I will have many worthy hands with which I myself will fight back: my trips, overpairs, top pairs, FDs, combo draws and others. And now I don’t need to do anything about it. In the moment - after these 3 folds - the feeling that I was being exploited here should be considered an illusion, and not an already exploited leak. I recently played a match against an opponent who simply wasn't making big bluffs. And I knew it even then. He could bluff inexpensively, but I didn't see him making big bluffs. When we checked to the river and he had nothing, he could still bluff to try to win. Or he called on the flop, and after check-checking on the turn, he again tried to bluff on the river with missed draws, etc. For him to triple barrel the flop-turn-river as a bluff on blockers - I only saw this 1 or 2 times in the entire match before this hand. This is especially true in spots where I can easily have a big hand, because in my estimation, my opponent will be even more afraid to bluff there. Hand example I no longer remember the specific board, but I remember the action clearly. He opens - I 3-bet - he calls. I check the flop - he bets 3 barrels in position, in a hot pot, pushing his stack on the river. After a long thought, I called him and... won against a hand that I didn’t expect to see in life: without good blockers, it’s complete nonsense, as they say in our circles. I was hoping for this, but realistically I never expected bluffs there. My plan was to overfold the big pots, and I was determined to follow it. But I couldn’t resist. - However, I won the hand. The reason for calling was that I was afraid (of the illusion) that my opponent had noticed my overfolds earlier and was now trying to take advantage from them. And I was also afraid that he would seriously change his mind. if I continue to overfold as well. Therefore, I decided to risk my stack this 1 time, so that my opponent would probably change his mind for a long time (even hypothetically) to bet on me as a bluff in big pots. Fortunately, we didn’t play many large pots with him then, in which such a situation with my initial knowledge and repeated temptation could have been repeated, and that’s why I ended up with a profit in the end. Oddly enough, having studied that hand in the solver, I was very surprised that it approved of my opponent’s bluff - with such a hand I myself would not have thought of starting my triple barrel as a complete bluff. In short, that very opponent’s bluff was exactly an adjustment, and a good one at that. In this he was noticeably ahead of me then. I came to the conclusion that I shouldn’t bother at all with complicated drawings of such spots, where you can change your mind a million times, based not on known and objective information, but on your own raised illusions and crumbs of information, which I could also perceive emotionally. It’s better to play the session according to a pre-prepared plan - away from the tables - and worry as little as possible about what’s unpleasant in the game, where in a short sample a lot is decided by variance, and not by my desire. Exploits should be based on proven information, and by default there should be a solid and proven game that already brings a nice profit. This article can be useful: Decision-Making in Poker: Strategies for Success Post-it notes should be simple You will not read text that is spread over more than one line. And the font size will not be very important here. The more distractions, the more time you are «not in the game itself»: You're slightly losing track of the game The thought on the action in the hand is interrupted, And then time and concentration are wasted on re-entry into the hand flow, As a result, the efficiency of the game drops a little. In addition, reading and comprehending a long phrase overloads the brain, which is already more than busy for a conscious poker player. Already during this session, you will most likely stop looking there - already unintentionally, because the brain does not want to receive unnecessary stress. What to say about subsequent sessions? At the beginning of the game, you will again look at the post-it(s), take it into the account what's written there and your gaze will flash 1-3 more times during the course of the session, but after that you will most probably forget about them. Therefore, the inscription on the post-it should be extremely concise: capacious, clear and pleasant. Post-it #2: Discipline. Power. The elements by which I evaluate my played sessions are: discipline, power and focus. With the last one, everything should be obvious, but I will explain the first 2 in detail, although everything with discipline is also quite clear. I'll tell you how it happens for me. Discipline There are many situations where I still play on autopilot. For example, I have a good bluff catcher and several outs to nuts, and I get a big bet on the turn. I am sure that now, in theory, there is a clear call, and I automatically press this button. Or a spot on the river: the opponent makes a small bet, and I, again, have a cool bluff catcher. And here I also don’t go through the process of reading the hand in my head, but I also press call automatically. Then I clearly understand - this is a lack of discipline. When I know my opponent quite well, then taking into account the runouts and his actions, the conclusion is clear: he is not bluffing enough in this spot. His range is too strong for me to be profitable in calling him. In this article I am playing with fairly nitty opponents, but it is with them that so many expensive spots arise where you need to show discipline in practice, and not in imagination. We recommend watching: It's Boring, But Will Make You Finally Win at Poker Against aggressive opponents, I need discipline precisely to call them off. But usually, even when my play is not very disciplined, I find these +EV calls against aggressive ones, but not folds against passive ones. I personally lack discipline in spots against small bets on the turn and river with any hands. And also when I get bets on the flop and turn I have a weak value hand that can improve like TP without a kicker, but with draws, or second pair with a high kicker and also with draws. Then I call too often and sometimes get punished. Power This word is not self-explanatory. The meaning I'm putting here is characterized by the words «intensity» and «relentless execution». If what I called simply «Discipline» is discipline, so to speak, in a defensive manner, then “Power” is discipline in attack, which I called in one extremely capacious word. When I don't have enough Power during a session, I often don't adequately exploit those spots where my opponent bets with a fairly weak range on the turn. For example, if I check-raise on this turn and then push on the river, my opponent will overfold heavily. And I know that this will be a very profitable game. But when I don’t have enough Power, I simply don’t dare to take risks and try to take the bank right here against the opponent's weak line. So I occasionally shy away in low-powered state of mind. Usually at the beginning of my sessions there are big bluffs and equally big calls (but less often) that give 1-2bb in EV. But a little later this rage passes and I’m playing a much more relaxed session. And there is one problem with this. When I play against tough opponents (and I almost always do), if I have a value hand that wants to check-raise the turn and shove on the river, then I do it without any hesitation or fear. After all, having such a strong «insurance» as doper+, it is emotionally simple to make this scary-looking check-raise on the turn and then push on the river. And the problem here is that when I’m in a low-powered mood, I start to greatly under-bluff in similar spots where I usually bet or check-raise my value hands. If we are talking about the river, then in a particular situation I should bluff 33% of the time, but now I bluff only 12%. I won’t dive into the calculations, but off the top of my head, if I spend half the time of all sessions in low-powered mood, then my total frequency of bluffs on the river in spots similar to the original spot will decrease from 33% to 22%. And this frequency can be displayed in opponents' HUDs. And in general, they can notice it or simply feel it. The important thing is not that opponents can understand my current frequencies, but that by under-bluffing (and, therefore, over-value-betting), I myself leave a lot of money in the long run when I play in a low-powered state - my opponent will invariably overfold against my entire range, because at this time it is becoming too strong for him to call. Then my check-raising range with such a skewed tendency and rate of betting is greatly weakened by bluffs, and opponents often realize this and overfold. For those of you who don't hesitate to bluff to win, this article should be interesting: How to bluff perfectly in poker - Tips from Jonathan «JCardShark» Little Power is one of the hardest elements for me to maintain at the proper level on a regular basis. It’s always easy to start a session quickly and aggressively, and after a couple of hours, having spent all my fervor at the start of the session, start playing much more calmly, leading my opponents to think that now I will play, for the most part, honestly. Power is also wasted when big banks are lost and everything else that affects my emotions. Post-it #3: Hand Read As corny as it may sound, this is exactly what I wrote on my 3rd sticky note. This doesn't require much explanation. Hand reading is simply the most important skill in poker and one that I always want to remind myself to strive for perfection at. After all, in any session you can easily slip into playing on autopilot. Then, when you get to the river where all possible flush draws completed and get a bet, you can usually not continue to play thoughtfully, but start thinking in the spirit of «I have a blocker to the spade, so I’ll call.» Or «I don’t have any blockers to my opponent’s value-betting range, so I’ll just fold and not think about anything.» When I'm playing my best, in every single spot I'm trying to figure out What was the opponent's range preflop? What was he like on the flop? How - after my active action, etc., considering what I already know about him. I reason: «Given the run-on that came out, how likely is it that the opponent is having a hard time finding enough bluffs? How likely is the opposite? How good are my cards as valuable blockers to his range?» Often, even one blocker on the river in narrow ranges can change the situation by as much as 15-20%, making my call of a big opponent's bet with a bluff catcher more profitable than folding. When I don't worry about things like river blockers, I'm actually being lazy and getting the results that go with it. Why am I saying this? When you play a 6+ hour session, your concentration is much lower than at the beginning of the session. And even in the 2nd hour it is a little worse than in the first 15 minutes of the game. Therefore, when I see such a sticker, I automatically «wake up» a little and this triggers my processes of re-focusing on what is happening at the table. Then the results from the game become much better. Post-it #4: Game plan. No protection. With the first one, everything is clear - always figure out how I intend to play the hand with what was dealt and formed. But with the second one, I’ll explain what I’m putting into it. This means not making autopilot bets to protect your hand on the flop and turn - as most people do. Many people ask me: «Why are you against these bets? Isn't this part of the game?» - A detailed answer to this will take a separate, considerable article, and therefore I will try to give a short, thesis-based answer - and you take my word for it. So, Defense is a very small part of the reason to bet on the flop and/or turn. But in practice, people greatly overestimate this. I overestimate the bets for protection, perhaps less than anyone in the world, and I still stuck this note on the monitor so that it reminds me that I should not abuse them. See how almost all players think about betting for protection, and what's wrong with that way of thinking. A friend and I were once playing through a hand where I was deciding whether or not to continuation bet with a weak value hand (TP or something like that) on a very wet board. But my friend didn’t like my intention to put it there for the purpose of protection. I said, «My hand is pretty good right now against his continuation range. But on a lot of turns and rivers with this hand it will be very uncomfortable both to value bet myself and to play against bets on such boards.» A friend gave me very valuable advice: «The reasons you mentioned will not lead you to success nor will add peace of mind. Then, if you bet with an adequate size, you will still allow your opponent to see cards that are scary for you (and maybe even scary for him?), on which he can complete draws, and you will not bet on the next street, showing your «weakness», then it’s not worth dispersing such a bank. The same applies to his probable bets on your checks - if you are not ready to continue against them, then why not try to pot control right away?» In this case, your hand is not worth betting to protect it. To defend a hand, you need reasons and confidence to consider it worthy. We're talking mainly about boards that give a lot of draws to your opponent's ranges, and not about FDs even without a gutshot. This is a slight simplification, because we always have a lot of important variables, but this advice from a friend helped me a lot. I began to evaluate the strength of my hands differently - for the entire hand - and not just for the current moment, and I stopped rushing things in many tricky situations where I had played actively before. Post-it #5: Patience. Some pots aren't mine. Exactly. I accepted many years ago that in poker it is not possible to win every hand. For me it works like this - I'll give an example here. Let's say I called a 3bet in PLO and a low straight board came out. The opponent checked - maybe because it was a very bad board for his range. And I have a trashy hand myself. And here my thought process might be: «Now is the moment to act. If I don’t bet now, I won’t be able to pretend to have anything serious in the future street(s). I can only c-bet a 1/3 pot and try to take the pot right now against a ton of hands in his range. Come on, I’ll still try to win the pot.» But it should often be obvious to the opponent himself that my own range is not suitable for such a beta. I spend all my bluffs here, thus taking away the bluff range from my checking range on the turn. This means that I won’t be able to try to take this pot later if I’m playing with a fairly smart opponent: there are hardly any more value hands, and bluffs can only increase in number. => Then I will get a call from him. Delayed aggression is a very useful thing on boards that are not good for both of you. It's unlikely that your opponent checked twice with a hand that was worth more. And I regularly remind myself of this. Previously, it often happened that I clearly understood: my opponent’s range on the flop was excessively weak, and instead of calling his bets, which almost shouldn’t contain many SDV+ hands, I immediately counterattacked him with a raise and often saw a call... But my bluffs almost ended with this raise in position on the flop as the cheapest street. Now I wait on my own until my opponent bluffs cheaply, and then I try to take the pot away with the float on the turn. Or, if the turn is check-checked, I'll bet the river into a still fairly weak range. This note reminds me to think about how to make the most money over the long run, not about how to win the pot. Sometimes this means that it is worth giving away a small pot so as not to lose a big one. Summary The role of post-its for us is this: the thoughts written on them are designed to lead us in the right direction, pre-thought out in 100% common sense. I personally find these 5 things very useful and simple for me to constantly and naturally review. Many people don’t use post-its - well, I hope my thoughts were useful to you anyway, and you will invent something effective for yourself. In the end, it's not about the post-its on the monitor. This article was written from the The 5 Post-Its Stuck to My Monitor video by Vladimir ABVIPlus.
