One of the most consistent trends I spot amongst people who are putting time and effort into learning poker and improving their game, is that their inputs into the game don’t match their outputs. In other words, what they put into poker doesn’t match what they get out of it. That’s a broad statement to make, and it might seem like it’s kind of hard to grasp, but I’ll explain in some more detail.
By ‘input’, I mean the time and energy they spend learning the game, and the time and energy they spend putting their existing knowledge into practice by actually playing. An input into the game can be loosely defined as any poker-related decision that is not made in ‘real-time’ – anything that’s done without time pressure being placed on the decision. In short, anything done away from the table.
By ‘output’, I mean the quality of decisions that are actually made by the player – the product of their existing knowledge, and of all the time they’ve spent away from the table trying to improve their on-the-table performance. There’s obviously a strong connection between these two factors.
The various types of input
Inputs can include a huge variety of activities, from researching theoretical concepts, to analyzing hands, to watching training videos here on TPE, to spending time analyzing game selection concepts, to scheduling their sessions, to preparing for playing time, to actually playing and focusing on making good decisions. Your input creates your output, and if you make no input, you can’t expect improvements in output. In fact, you can’t really expect much output at all.
Some forms of input are more effective than others – there are effective learning techniques and ineffective ones, there are effective pre-game preparation techniques and ineffective ones – and it seems obvious that better input efficiency will produce better output. However, while it’s reasonable to assume at least some connection between input volume and output quality, it’s input quality and conversion into output that really makes the difference.
Converting inputs into outputs
When it comes to converting inputs into outputs, there are many things that can improve the quality of the process. However, by far the most important part of this procedure is to identify specific flaws in your thought process or mental game that will become barriers to improvements in your actual decision making over time, or by efforts to incorporate an unnecessary or unfeasible degree of complexity into one’s strategy.
For example, a common difficulty for many players is recognizing the appropriate play in a given situation, but lacking the confidence to act on this perception as a result of previous negative results. If you made a big bluff on the river one hour ago and got called, you may find it difficult to pull the trigger the next time if you are too focused on the negative outcome from the previous instance. You may also have ten previous hands you remember that cloud your ability to execute your basic understanding of the spot – some results were good, some bad – and it makes everything more complex and more difficult.
In order to overcome these issues, we must first focus on identifying the mental game weaknesses that are forcing us into difficult positions, while also developing new input processes that can enable us to passively improve the quality of our outputs through greater knowledge. Even if our output quality is at 20%, for example, if our input quality is at 80% then we will find it easier to see improvements in our output quality regardless. However, if our output efficiency is still low, each hour we spend on input improvements is less effective then it may otherwise be.
Low output efficiency can often be caused by mental processes influenced by factors outside of poker. For example, our ability to translate two or three hours of work on a specific topic related to aggression will be negated by our reluctance to show aggression in game, to the point where it would have been more effective to spend 1 hour developing an understanding of why we find it difficult to play aggressively in the first place. This reluctance to show aggression could be caused by a generally timid personality, or a lack of focus, or poor bankroll management decisions leading to risk-aversion.
The most common weaknesses
There are two particularly common weaknesses in these areas. The first is an inefficiency in study processes, one of the most important forms of input. Many players are so focused on analyzing previous hands that they cripple their ability to further their theoretical knowledge. This focus on analyzing previous hands is often based on a desire to reassure oneself about the quality of one’s decisions, people are naturally inclined to want to know that they did not make a mistake in a previous situation.
This reassurance allows them to build confidence, which is natural, but it may not be as valuable as an improvement in their understanding of why their play was good in the first place. Using previous hands to increase your level of confidence actually harms your development in some instances, because it reinforces your existing perceptions around the game, which may not be completely accurate in the first place.
The second major inefficiency relates to how we try to change and develop our thought processes. Many people focus purely on how to gradually build their understanding of the game based on many individual specific situations, and simply wait for those perceptions to translate into gradual improvements in their game. What they do not do, however, is focus on identifying principles that can help them to massively simplify their decision making process in many cases.
A great example of this is when people try to work on improving their decisions related to continuation betting. They look at individual situations and focus on evaluating whether they made a good continuation that in that instance. Then, they move on to the next hand and repeat the process ad infinitum.
However, they may see a greater improvement by spending one or two hours learning about range advantages and developing simple principles for themselves – for example, betting much more frequently when they have a big range advantage and less often when they don’t – then they would from multiple hours of evaluating previous decisions. An even simpler example maybe to identify a principle that says something as basic as ” when I have a strong hand out of position, I should usually check-raise”, because this is true in the vast majority of instances.
In fact, this is even more true at low stakes, and therefore players who spend time focusing on trying to find opportunities to play in unusual or creative ways are usually wasting their time. If you cannot establish basic principles for yourself and construct simple strategies based on those principles, then it is unreasonable to expect that you will be able to build more complex strategies with any significant degree of efficiency.
Developing a plan
So, the last step for us is to make a plan as to how to improve our overall output. Improving our input volume is not particularly difficult but improving our ability to translate input into output is much more tricky. If we focus on correcting these two major flaws, by developing more effective study processes based on improving theoretical awareness and identifying simple principles that will help us put these new perspectives into practice, then we will almost immediately see improvements in our performance.
Reviewing previous hands is nowhere near as important as people think it is, because you can only ever evaluate a previous hand according to your existing knowledge of poker principles. Improving your understanding of these principles is the only way to ensure that analysis of previous hands is actually effective in evaluating your performance.
If you are evaluating your output on the basis of imperfect input, then your conversion will always be at a low level. If your input is high volume and high quality, but you have no established process for executing that knowledge, then your input will not be translated into output.
Success requires high volume and high quality input with a well-developed conversion process, otherwise your input is mostly wasted. If you are a player with limited time on your hands, then particularly damaging to your development, because what little time you do have available to spend on inputs will very rarely be translated into direct output improvements.
Simple principles the only principles our brains can consistently obey with any regularity. Constant adaptation to very specific circumstances is extremely difficult when we do not have a high level of experience and theoretical knowledge, and thus the only way we are ever going to be able to make these adaptations is if we have principles to fall back on if necessary.
The most efficient way to learn these principles is to study optimal or GTO play, but this needs to be accompanied by removal of mental game barriers that produce inefficient outputs. Your brain has limitations, and assuming that it does not is a recipe for wasting your time. Simplifying the demands that you place upon yourself will produce lasting and consistent improvements in your performance. Only after that is it appropriate to begin asking more of yourself. In short, don’t try to run before you can walk.