Position
Boy can we wax poetic over that word. And it is valid to do so. It is one thing that transcends all the blind based games – maybe just to a degree with O8 at times. We talk about it almost ad nauseum. There is another position many ignore.
The position that I am talking about is tournament related. It is placing yourself in a position to win. At first blush, that comes across as a real DUHH! Mr. Dumb Blogger, isn't that why we play. Yeah, you are right in a way but it is an easy failing to see occur and reoccur.
In the other day's blog, I went on about the importance of the style that was what I'm talking about. It is embedded in the small pot preaching that Daniel Negreanu is always talking about. That shouldn't have been as much a final table factor; but, because the blinds weren't abusive, it was. The table was able to play more like it was the second hour of an online tournament where average and somewhat below usually retain a fair amount of play.
It is at those time where you must consciously keep positioning yourself to win. Everything in tournament play resist doing that consistently. While you can build a decision tree that comes close to playing an A-game -- as can some of the bots around -- you cannot just design computer code for the position to win part. It is very analog and all the instruction books (Harrington somewhat excepted for the better readers.) have a difficulty in getting across the idea.
You can watch Mike and Vince discuss a hand just played. It will be one of those extolling what a great fold of a huge hand took place. But, often it doesn't get across that it wasn't as hard a decision as it would appear. It was just using that position to win mantra. It was done with all of us knowing the down cards. So we make it into something that it isn't. It was a fairly easy – ok, damn hard – fold for those who understand being in a position to win.
Harrington's earlier books come closest to explaining the concept. It is there because he is always describing the situation and then the cards. That is position to win but still in the moment. But, there is more of the concept there than in all the rest I've read.
Online we embrace other aspects more. That's a lot more fun than this position to win stuff. And it is binary in decision making. It is should I call/fold or whatever. Vince and Mike reinforce that with their lauding the coin flip. Yet, we see people online and even more so in live that are consistent in that positioning to win concept and are around more than the rest when the play moves late and the money approach or is there. You don't get there with just your A-game. That's what I've been trying to get across.
ADDENDUM:
This was a tournament related post. It is a stupid idea to try to translate to ring play in its entirety. You don't make -EV decisions in ring play and prosper long. That's part of the reason many will poo-poo this as female body part way of playing. Position to win comes from a different angle at ring and is one many thinks translates to tournament. Some will occasionally pull off such play. It is the super agro that can haunt our table at times. They'll even win at times but they will – at ring and tournament – be high variance players. That doesn't translate well to consistent tournament success.
The reason I don't play a lot of tournaments any more is that I can't follow my own advice. I call it my boredom tilt but it is really an unwillingness to maintain the discipline necessary. I'm hardly the only one with the problem but might be on the limited list of those who recognize what's happened. I just can't maintain the discipline like I might have in the past; so I limit myself to far fewer tournaments and even Sit n Goes. It hard to ignore the online ability to jump into the next one but that is the real -EV. I just can make the juices flow to make it +EV.
Related posts:
Recent Comments