Welcome.

Take a tour. Enjoy some free sample content.

How it works

Free Video: CLP Video No. 287: Home Game Bart Reviews His Splashy At $1-$3 Deep Part 2

Free Podcast: CLP Podcast No. 54: Time Warp And Turn Value
New to Crush Live Poker?

Flawed Philosophy Encouraged on This Site?

2»

Comments

  • CalgaryPokerGuyCalgaryPokerGuy Posts: 342Subscriber
    PS. I do think it's a great question
    Thanked by 1luckyspewy
  • FreeLunchFreeLunch Posts: 1,311Pro
    Id like to bring this back to poker and how stereotypes are or are not a valid tool. I think there is a false assumption in luckyspewy's argument. It is false to think that there is no value in adding error prone information to a problem. Adding information that has a high error rate can improve the accuracy of the larger solution as long as the information when right has high predictive power. The fact that there are false positives and false negatives has to be balanced by the predictive power of the data. While we have a high error rate when using stereotypes it does have a high predictive power (sensitivity).

    While we do make huge mistakes using stereotypes (in and out of poker) the fact is that humans overall are mostly really good at generating stereotypes with high sensitivity. If you are on the autism spectrum (not uncommon in poker) then dont even try to get this right. But for the rest of us there is clear value in improving our use of stereotypes, especially if we can figure out when they have high sensitivity.


    Thanked by 1Thehammah
  • ThehammahThehammah Posts: 7,090Subscriber
    edited December 2014
    If lucky wishes to experiment with no stereotypes for a few months and report back then by all means do it.

    Its just my opinion that even though this is a curious theoretical question to ask in live poker I think you are just wasting your time.

    As I have mentioned before Poker for me is a language and sometimes we might not get the coplete dialect but we can for the most part understand what the rec players are telling us.

    As I play with that player longer the better I understand what they are telling me .. that is why we study the game. Not to say that I have to relearn the language everytime I play with a new player.

    As a species we are generally wired for certain actions and as we become either more familiar with the game or become better players we learn to NOT do certain things and learn TO DO certain things. thats why stereotyping is a good place to start. Then you can guage how far along the learning spectrum a player is.

    all of the rest of the discussion is just a waste of time... in my humble opinion of course..

    ww
  • luckyspewyluckyspewy Posts: 299Member
    Thehammah wrote:
    If lucky wishes to experiment with no stereotypes for a few months and report back then by all means do it.


    all of the rest of the discussion is just a waste of time...

    What concerns me is whether this is in fact as easy to do as it sounds. If we begin to internalize a propensity to stereotype individuals at the poker table, do we run the risk of applying that process in our daily lives.

    I believe that the discussion needs to be had, as it is clearly a readily utilized practice on this site. The underlying moral validity is necessary to examine and question.

    @Freelunch, you're point is very strong, and when applied to poker seems absolutely valid to me. As long as we are preemptively assume the data to be error prone, then we are approaching it with a skepticism and examining the validity of the assumption actively. But you start by drawing the conversation back to poker exclusively. I get it this is a poker site and that's what people want to read/talk about. However to not admit that this form of stereotyping is harmful and leads to very dangerous generalizing and essentializing in our daily lives would be naive. So we have to ask whether or not it's a process of thought that we can just leave at the table.

    Also you add a caveat, that people with autism should abandon the practice which I assume is because they might become locked into that way of filtering the empirical data, and if the filter itself in this case isn't fluid and adaptive, the resulting data is inaccurate. Mostly what I've read in responses is; "I just use it as a starting point, my perception changes with evidence" (paraphrase). However I've read no concerns as to whether people worry about getting locked into this perception of the opponent and proceeding with confirmation bias.

    I suppose I worry about that with myself, and wonder about others.
  • neverlearn2neverlearn2 Posts: 2,862Subscriber
    1 stereotype for sure is if the player speaks broken english they are bad players.
  • luckyspewyluckyspewy Posts: 299Member
    1 stereotype for sure is if the player speaks broken english they are bad players.

    Exactly right! Like Isildur and Patrick Antonius!
    Thanked by 1TDF
  • neverlearn2neverlearn2 Posts: 2,862Subscriber
    luckyspewy wrote:
    1 stereotype for sure is if the player speaks broken english they are bad players.

    Exactly right! Like Isildur and Patrick Antonius!

    If they ended up in the card room I play in they are confirmed busto.

  • AesahAesah Posts: 1,048Pro
    is this thread related to ferguson
  • Topset1610Topset1610 Posts: 280Subscriber
    Aesah wrote:
    is this thread related to ferguson

    I believe most people in Ferguson will be pretty poor and not have a lot of money. Therefore they will probably be pretty tight and you should fold if they make an aggressive action.

    Accurate Stereotype?
  • FreeLunchFreeLunch Posts: 1,311Pro
    Topset1610 wrote:
    Aesah wrote:
    is this thread related to ferguson

    I believe most people in Ferguson will be pretty poor and not have a lot of money. Therefore they will probably be pretty tight and you should fold if they make an aggressive action.

    Accurate Stereotype?

    Ha!. Actually no. My stereotype would be they are living week to week and the ones with gamble are actually ok with losing a weeks pay (aka their life savings) and are more likely to gamble it up as the pain of another week with little to show for it is well offset by the chance at doubling their net worth in one hand.
    Thanked by 2Arenzano BradleyT
  • ArenzanoArenzano Posts: 1,464Subscriber
    FreeLunch wrote:
    Topset1610 wrote:
    Aesah wrote:
    is this thread related to ferguson

    I believe most people in Ferguson will be pretty poor and not have a lot of money. Therefore they will probably be pretty tight and you should fold if they make an aggressive action.

    Accurate Stereotype?

    Ha!. Actually no. My stereotype would be they are living week to week and the ones with gamble are actually ok with losing a weeks pay (aka their life savings) and are more likely to gamble it up as the pain of another week with little to show for it is well offset by the chance at doubling their net worth in one hand.

    i agree with this because, having no money is a vicious cycle and if you can hit your hand, it theoretically puts ahead.

    why do so many poverty stricken folks play the numbers? because they are chasing the dream even though the numbers rarely ever hit.

  • iLikeCaliDonksiLikeCaliDonks Posts: 932Troll
    edited December 2014
    Poker should be looked at as an odds game first. Then look at how dumb people play then you got your answers.

    Showdown hands is the only complete information we have. Stereotypes are just smoke. Why do y'all think online players who play live laugh at tells. Because their technical game is so on point they dont need tells or stereotypes. Thats when you know your game is on point. You put in the work on pokerstove, line recognition and average frequencies. So you can recognize donks instantly.
    Thanked by 1luckyspewy
  • iLikeCaliDonksiLikeCaliDonks Posts: 932Troll
    Also you judge a book by its cover is a leak. You gonna run into someone like me. Who looks dumb but has the highest poker iq at any llsnl table.
  • luckyspewyluckyspewy Posts: 299Member
    Aesah wrote:
    is this thread related to ferguson

    I guess. Im from there. I get mad when I read shit about how Asian players play this way, or women play that way. it's reductive, and people are often just flat out wrong. im probably more sensitive to that at the moment.
  • AesahAesah Posts: 1,048Pro
    edited December 2014
    It's not wrong. I would gladly pay you several hundred dollars to crossbook a 5/10 table full of unknowns based solely on appearance for 8 hours- so if you truly believe there is no edge, then let's do it next time we meet up and that should be free money for you right?

    Of course we would run out of unknown players eventually but yea, thoughts?

    Just to clarify, when you say "people are often wrong", you're not talking about like in the sense that I would be wrong if I folded to a river shove and get shown a bluff, correct?
  • luckyspewyluckyspewy Posts: 299Member
    How would we go about isolating the information?
  • AesahAesah Posts: 1,048Pro
    edited December 2014
    it would be pretty difficult to do yea. maybe on LATB or something lol
  • pokertimepokertime Posts: 2,194Subscriber
    This is really just something you do when you first sit down and are sizing up the table. You have to adjust to everybody no matter what. You will play "old-man-coffee" types who actually used to play big and are good but prefer to relax and play 1/2 - 2/5 in retirement. If you play them like other "old-man-coffee" you might be in trouble. Establishing hard stereotypes and always acting on them will get you in trouble in all walks of like.
Sign In or Register to comment.