Poker skills: Playing against the odds is a rational way to win
Success isn't about finding one great way to achieve something and sticking with it. It's about looking at all the possible options and computing success through analysis.
Maria Konnikova is the New York Times bestselling author of The Confidence Game (Viking/Penguin 2016) and Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes (Viking/Penguin, 2013). She is a contributing writer for The New Yorker, where she writes a regular column with a focus on psychology and culture, and her writing has appeared in The Atlantic, The New York Times, California Sunday, Pacific Standard, The New Republic, WIRED, and The Smithsonian, among numerous other publications. Maria is a recipient of the 2015 Harvard Medical School Media Fellowship, and is a Schachter Writing Fellow at Columbia University's Motivation Science Center. She formerly wrote the “Literally Psyched" column for Scientific American and the popular psychology blog “Artful Choice" for Big Think. She graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University, where she studied psychology, creative writing, and government, and received her Ph.D. in Psychology from Columbia University.
Audience Question: You had a very interesting point that a successful strategy is not really about optimization, but it’s about computation and deviating from optimization.
And to me as a chess player, the reason I’ve always liked chess is precisely because there are no elements of chance.
You, on the other hand, are always in some ways a potential victim out of chance, so how do you kind of weld those two things together, how do you deal with the vagaries of chance to make sure that you can always manipulate it favorably?
Maria Konnikova: Well, you can’t ALWAYS manipulate chance favorably, that’s I think the bottom line. But what you can do is actually try to just maximize what you can control.
So what I always do, what Erik has always taught me to do, is make sure you’re making the right decisions for the right reasons.
And so I might play a hand in a very strange way because I am exploiting someone who I think is being— because I’m female one of the things that often happens is people become much more aggressive against me, because they think they can get me to fold a lot of hands and so they’ll 3-bet me, which means raising my opens much more often with a lot of weaker hands, or when I’m in one of the blinds so I have to be in the hand they’ll raise me much more widely, so they’ll do things like that.
And then sometimes I’ll have a horrible hand and one that I would never in a million years 4-bet, but I’m going to 4-bet, I’m going to actually re-raise them with garbage because I know what’s going on, and sometimes I’ll run into a really strong hand, but more often than not I won’t.
So that’s what I meant by exploitation, I’m still not going to be able to get away from the chance elements that happen in any hand, so what Erik is always very careful to tell me is never—he doesn’t care actually what happens at the end of the hand, he doesn’t want to know if I won or lost.
Like once the decision is done, it doesn’t matter, and so the outcome—you have to divorce yourself from the outcome.
You have to say, “Am I making the right decision? Am I thinking about it the right way at every single step of the hand? Can I defend why I’m doing something, even if I’m doing something really weird that I wouldn’t normally do in a spot like this? Do I have a reason for it?”
And if the answer is yes, and if the reason is a good one, then I play the hand to the best of my abilities.
And it actually sometimes helps when I’m in a tough spot to know that I’m going to be explaining this to someone, that I’ll be explaining it to Erik or that I’ll be explaining it to Phil or to someone, then I know that I actually have to think through my reasons rather than just act reflexively, which can be very easy to do.
Sometimes you’re like, “Oh I always do this here, I’m just going to do it quickly.”
But to actually stop and question it and then happen what may—It can still be really tough when you make the “right” decision and then you end up losing; it’s not pleasant, but you have to try not to think about that and to remember that you just made the best choice you possibly could given the information that you had available.
And it’s easy to criticize other players when you see them do something really weird, you’re like “How could you have done that there?!” But you have to remember that you see all of the information, you know what hands other people have because you’re watching this on TV.
They don’t see any of that and they’re actually just acting based on the information that they do have.
But all of that said, it still really sucks to lose.
Success isn't about finding one great way to achieve something and sticking with it. It's about looking at all the possible options and computing success through analysis. It works brilliantly in poker, and it works well in life, too.
Taking time for thoughtful consideration has fallen out of fashion, writes Emily Chamlee-Wright. How can we restore good faith and good judgement to our increasingly polarized conversations?
- The clamor of the crowd during a heated discussion can make it hard to tell who is right and who is wrong. Adam Smith wrote that the loudness of blame can stupefy our good judgment.
- Equally, when we're talking with just one other person, our previous assumptions and knee-jerk reactions can cloud our good judgment.
- If you want to find clarity in moments like that, Emily Chamlee-Wright recommends practicing the presumption of good faith. That means that we should presume, unless we have good evidence to the contrary, that the other person's intent is not to deceive or to offend us, but to learn our point of view.
Americans consume the most toilet paper in the world but it's a very wasteful product to manufacture, according to the numbers.
- Toilet paper consumption is unsustainable and requires a tremendous amount of resources to produce.
- Americans use the most toilet paper in the world and have been hoarding it due to coronavirus.
- Alternatives to toilet paper are gaining more popularity with the public.
What factors explain the gender pay gap?
- The report was conducted by the investment firm Arjuna Capital, which has been publishing the Gender Pay Scorecard for the past three years.
- Only three companies — Starbucks, Mastercard and Citigroup — received an "A", as defined by the report's methodology.
- It's likely that discrimination explains part of the gender pay gap, but it's a complex issue that often gets oversimplified.