Contact us





Knowledge Fights Deception

The purpose in this text is not to mock Vito or other such players. It is to find what can be learned from other players' perceptions of him. I think that admitting him as a poker winner and being scared by him, suggest a vital subject: Education in poker theory decreases one's propensity to illusions which can intervene with the good play.

It means that knowledge in poker theory not only helps you to determine the right plays but also helps you prevent misperception which can encourage your decision and judgment at the time you play.

The reason is that many players who are well known with Vito were deceived by the deception that he was a winning player. Even though, you should consider accurately how well your rival plays and what sort of mistakes he makes so as to play them perfectly. Because these players misperceived Vito's play , overlooking his errors, they were not in a position to play more against him. If they fail to see that he bluffed a lot, they would not encourage the benefits of letting him bet their hands for them so frequently. If they fail to see that he raised too loosely before the flop, more with hands he should not even have played, they would not think to re-raise him sometimes with several hands which they would fold if dealt with a raise from a tight player.

Preventing buying into deception as Vito's rivals did, we will first see at how they occur. There are three elements which look clearly to have contributed to the deception that Vito was a winner. Firstly, Vito had undergone to some stage to conceal his losses. He did all he could to appear to be a winner. He stacked his chips so they were tough to count, was huge-discreet about buying more chips and always kept extra chips in his coat pockets which, when his stacks got low, he furtively kept on the table when he thought no one was noticing. (How better do I know? After observing many times that his chip stack looks not to get smaller after he had lost many pots in close succession, I conclude that he had to be doing this. So I observed discreetly one day after he had lost over half of his initial buy-in.

At the time of a hand where Vito was not involved, just as the dealer spread the flop and all eyes expect mine were on the community cards he removed about ten chips out of his pocket and kept on the table as easily as a magician palms a coin when the audience looks in some wrong direction. One friend started referring to this routine as Vito's "sprinkling holy water" on his chip stacks, miraculously healing their reduction.) The outcome was that his losses were tough to detect and his wins looked higher than they were.

Another basic element involved the social pressures inherent in groups - the group around the about poker table without any exceptions. In group situations, player does reveal their certain judgment (example judging that a color is bluish against greenish) if it has been revealed by others around them. This is correct even if the judgment is wrong so encourage by a group is basically common knowledge, almost different from common sense. It has been investigated through experimental research in the field of social psychology. The propensity to such influence changes broadly based on the individual and conditions to which he is referred. Its importance is that such pressures may include the propensity to assess incorrectly the skills of a rival. When the basic reason is that a player like Vito is a winner, another player may refer, "Everyone thinks he's a winner; I think he might be."

One more significant thing in this deception was that most of his routine rivals lacked adequate knowledge of poker theory to ascertain Vito's play on its own benefits. They did not have much poker knowledge to be certain of his mistakes or their severity, so their main focus was drawn to variations in his stack size - the incorrect data.

As this was the very deceptive indicator in Vito's case, they willingly judge the incorrect conclusions about his results. Unsurprisingly, when I pointed out few best players I know, they had no doubt that Vito has lost at online poker. They had a sense to know incorrect, unprofitable play when they saw it. But I asked one of these players what he thought of Vito's ability he rested for a moment, then giggled and said, "If he banks cash at the end of the year, I'll be monkey's uncle!" If those who see Vito as a winner had done their work on poker theory, they also would have swing by his deceptive chips practices, and the social pressures at the table. Further, he had seen Vito's play more precisely, and had played against him more profitably. I think it is to Vito's attributes that he was able to sell himself as a winner to so many of his rivals. He definitely lost little than he would have had they all seen him convincingly.

It is just a short and simple test of your poker knowledge to see if you can exactly ascertain another player's play. If you have learned and understood poker well, then you should be in a position to state specific reasons why a person is or is not a winning player. Then you will be able to deceive by the Vito of the poker world. You can then play well against them.

Continue Here: Some Of The Erroneous Belief In Poker

ages/new-poker-2.jpg" alt="holdem poker" width="120" height="200" border="0" />