first published ‘Two Plus Two’ magazine – February 2012

Leo Margets: “There’s no difference between excellent men or women players although each will have their own style. It’s my observation that with lesser skilled players, men will make more mistakes being too aggressive in the wrong spots and women will be too passive.”

Stereotypes

Despite stereotyping getting a bad name, it is an extremely important part of people’s psychological make up and without stereotyping, it would be impossible to function. Stereotypes are natural, vital and helpful. If with each person you met you had to begin from scratch filling in their characteristics, you simply wouldn’t have enough time in your life.  Stereotyping allows you to fill in the gaps. It gives you a pretty full initial picture that allows you to add to, refine and remodel as you get more information.

For instance, you sit down at a poker table and you’re playing with players you’ve never met. One of these is a hotshot Scandinavian and another, a young blonde girl who doesn’t look old enough to get into the casino. I suspect you already have a different strategies planned for each. This may not be a conscious decision, and you may well think that you are approaching the game with a totally open mind, but that would be practically impossible. You will have already formed some stereotype, some “fixed, over generalised belief about a particular class of people”.

The assumption you have will be based on a number of factors including your upbringing, culture, media, beliefs, personal experience, etc.

In an interview Gus Hanson, Scandinavian player describes his stereotyping experience:

 “Every time I’m at a table with 8 players I’ve never seen before, they might have seen me on TV. They kind of already have it in their minds that the last time they saw me I was bluffing with 2-4 off-suit and called all in with this and that. So naturally they will give me a little more action because those are the hands that they’re seeing me play. But they might not have seen the fact that I won a big hand with kings a day earlier or whatever, so it definitely gets me more action that’s for sure.”

Your assumption of the young blonde girl who didn’t look old enough to get into the casino may be along the lines of Daniel Negreanu who writes about his first experience of playing poker against Jennifer Harman;

“I had my strategy all figured out: I wouldn’t bluff the crazy young kid, but I’d attack the poor little blonde girl. I thought, what is she doing playing so high, anyway? Well, she probably won’t last long, so I’d better get some of that money before it’s gone. That annoying little blonde girl was crushing me! Every time I raised, she reraised me, and every time I bluffed, she called. I was now stuck a little more than $9,000.”

Origins

Jennifer Tilly: “We are raised to be polite and honest. We are not raised to be most of the things that make good poker players.”

The typical stereotypical traits of a woman poker player are: passive, polite, non-competitive, honest, likely to fold in the face of any raise, quiet, slow….

There’s a fair amount deal of truth in a lot of this. There has been a great deal of research carried out in some relevant areas around gender differences. The research is fairly consistent and has been carried out over many years from a variety of sources. The most interesting from a poker playing viewpoint lie in the areas of competitiveness, problem solving and self esteem.

Competitiveness

Annette Obrestad “I’ve always said that girls suck at poker. I say that because they do. Maybe they just aren’t as competitive and don’t try to learn from their mistakes.”

This seems to be true, or at least, partly true. It does however, only tell half the story. Research by Hoygena and Hoygena suggest that women frequently compete as vigorously as males. However, there is an inherent stigma that seems to prevent women being seen to be competitive. This appears to come principally from centuries of social conditioning.  Throughout history, women have had to adapt to be taken seriously in a ‘man’s world’. For instance, the world of arts and writing has primarily been a male-dominated arena for centuries. The only way for some authors to get their work published has been to adapt. Mary Ann Evans had to change her name to George Eliot, and even recently Joanne Rowling was told by her publishers to use her initials J.K.as they felt boys would not read a book written by a woman.

It’s also been proven that women are significantly more likely to compete where they are unlikely to be discriminated against and where they believe they have an equal or better chance of succeeding. Highlighting this, one study by Robinson-Staveley and Cooper found that females outscored men in an isolated competition but men exceeded women when other people were present.

This would explain the influx of women to online poker.

Victoria Coren explains;

“Internet poker is the best thing ever invented for women. Everything that didn’t suit women about live poker was removed at a stroke. It allows you to be as competitive as you like and you won’t get men giving you funny looks. Live poker, broadly speaking, is a more masculine activity.”

Reframing

The stereotype of a passive woman is very strong. Stereotypes tend to be. Even in the face of contradictory evidence, people will cling to their stereotype. One way of rationalising this is reframing. Even when a person acts totally against the stereotype, others rationalise it.

In an interview Vanessa Selbst gave with Kirsty Arnett, she tells of her experience at the final table of a WSOP event. In the hand she was dealt the 52. She raised preflop, got re-raised and then she pushed all in. Unfortunately, she was up against a pair of aces and lost. She continued;

Vanessa: “I got a ton of flack for it. I still get a ton of flack for it.
Kristy: “When I watched that hand, I was thinking, she is second in chips against the chip and leader, and this is absolutely brilliant and ballsy, because he has to fold almost all hands!”
Vanessa: “Yes, exactly. If he has A-Q he folds, and I look like a genius. If he has aces, I look like an idiot. That’s the way it goes.”

In a televised High Stakes Poker game, Phil Ivey played a hand that ended with him going all-in with 5 -2 against Lex Veldhius. This was described as “one of the greatest bluffs in the history of HSP”.

Problem Solving

It has long been established that men are more risk prone than women. Women tend toward a strategy of risk aversion and accept risk as a last resort. They would prefer to take a risk ‘when the benefits are maximised and costs minimised’. Men are generally more comfortable with risk-taking. Men tend to want to rush to a solution whereas women are more likely to spend time longer conceptualising a solution and then implementing it. In their research on competition, Daly and Wilson found that women tend to “develop elegant solutions”, rather than ‘good enough’ solutions.

In poker, as in life, there is generally a time limit around problem solving and quick, successful risk taking is widely admired especially in public. In strict time limit situations, men will more rapidly identify and select a ‘close enough’ solution and implement it. Women may feel more anxious and have performance issues, at least initially.

Both parties can learn and adapt to the situations. The better poker players are either instinctively more flexible in their approach or can learn quicker and adapt more effectively. In general, men have an advantage learning poker in public arenas. In many situations it is almost a mark of honor to play hyper-aggressively even if you lose big. Women tend to be more risk averse and initially at least, handle failure more personally.
Kathy Liebert talks about her strategy in the 2007 WSOP heads-up event;

“You have a series of events in your head already planned out at the beginning of every hand. So, if you see a line from a player, and it winds up being similar to how other players play the same hand, it makes it easier, especially heads up. You’ll see spots where it is pretty obvious someone is going to bluff, or where someone raises and you know they don’t have x, y, and z hands, or whatever it is, just from experience.”

Self Esteem

Clonie Gowen: “To be a successful player, you need a lot of confidence”

Another aspect of the female stereotype is that women lack confidence. There is a great deal of evidence to support this. This seems to emanate from childhood.

Studies on school children have found that girls’ performances are often strongly influenced by the way boys perceive them or the way the girls think boys perceive them. This will greatly affect their performance in the classroom. Many times, girls act naïve or hide their intelligence and abilities because they think this is the way to be socially accepted and popular with boys. Also, it has been shown that even when female college students have the same intellectual results as males, there are frequently huge differences in their perceptions of themselves. A recent example seems to indicate that this perception continues beyond school;

A senior management role was advertised with a salary of £55,000 a year. The advert did not attract one female applicant. However, when the same post was re-advertised for £35,000 a year they were overwhelmed with applications from women.

The way of building self-esteem seems to be a fairly reasonable and well-documented one. The way to build self-confidence is not by throwing them in at the deep end and hoping they can swim. The approach is a systematic series of small steps and confidence building.

Maria Ho: “I would have to say it was online poker that I credit with being able to jump so fast. I’ve always felt more comfortable playing higher online than I did live… I think I was just intimidated in the beginning. So playing online really helped me like get over that intimidation because once I became a winning player at the higher limits, then the limits didn’t intimidate me as much, so I was able to take that into the live arena.”

Finally

This, of course, isn’t true for all men all the time, or all women all the time. There are numerous examples of uncompetitive male players, females that make snap decisions, etc. However, the evidence indicates that there is a degree of truth in the stereotypes.

However, the learning is about playing the person, not the stereotype. For poker players, stereotypes can be dangerous and the better players will take advantage of them. Female poker players will happily play to this;

Kathy Liebert: “Most men treat women as stereotypes at the poker table, not as unique players. This makes it pretty easy to play with men that have never played with me before. Certain types of men check a strong hand because they want to be the “nice” guy. Other types of men might try to bully a “weak” woman. Whatever the case, I win bets. This is a huge advantage to me. There is less advantage against regular opponents of course.”

For women players, the learning here is that if you don’t feel confident playing poker initially, you’re not on your own. Online poker will help some people. Women-only tournaments will help some people. Ultimately, women are different from men, really. Whether the reason is genetic, cultural, behavioural, it really doesn’t matter. There are psychological differences. This should be recognised and acknowledged as it should be for all groups of people. Lucy Rocach’s thoughts on women only tournaments seem to be some of the most sensible on the topic;

“In any activity dominated almost exclusively by one group, there has to be a case for positive discrimination. In the case of live poker, the whole casino experience can be intimidating for the lone uninitiated woman, where the gambling industry is geared towards men. If you can get women used to going to a cardroom and have an enjoyable night out in a non-threatening atmosphere, half the battle’s won.”

It was a tough ball school to join - and a tougher one to leave

Undoubtedly the worst look I’ve ever seen on a golfer’s face came a month or so ago at Bargoed Golf Club. It was a normal friendly, tense, bickering, frustrating, but very entertaining Saturday morning Ball School. There were 4 in our particular group and, as is the custom, it was a stableford competition (For non-golfers Dr. Frank Barney Gordon Stableford a Glamorganshire club member invented the system and first tried it out on fellow members of the club on the 30th September 1898. He later went on to join Royal Porthcawl Golf Club. His system meant that golfers get 2 points every time they complete a hole as they should – subject to all the bracketed conditions further on).

Having played for many years the handicaps had sorted themselves out and we all tended to finish pretty close, most weeks. On this particular day, however, we had a newcomer, a brother of a friend of someone who worked with someone who was married to someone who knew my cousin. He was young, keen and excited. He looked out of place.

However, he was a very nice lad (i.e. anyone under 40 at our club is a lad) who had just taken up golf and was playing off 28. (For non-golfers you get awarded a handicap based on your current level of skill, honesty and ability to put up with the taunt ‘bandit’. If you have a handicap of 28 it means that Tiger Woods and you would be evenly matched on a round of golf if you had a 28 shot start…. Well not exactly as Tiger is probably off +10 or something, but theoretically a scratch golfer would give you 28 shots and you would tie).

None of our Ball School were scratch golfers although one of them, the one with the face (which I referred to earlier, and will come on to later) was playing off a handicap of 9.

The morning was progressing steadily and the scores were pretty close between our 9 handicapper and the newcomer. The rest of us suffered with the usual mixture of hangovers, bad lies, bad luck and over-optimism. After the 13th our 9 handicapper was on a steady 26 points, a few points behind the newcomer who lead the way with a worthy 28. The 14th hole is a fairly unremarkable but quite narrow par 5, stroke index 10 (For non-golfers all those numbers must sound a bit odd. Basically they mean that this was the 14th hole out of 18 , the target for a scratch golfer was to complete it with 5 shots and it was the 10th most difficult [stroke indexes relate to difficulty – Stroke index 18 being the easiest] hole).

The man with the face played the hole exceptionally well; nice drive, long iron, pitch and 12 foot putt to get his 3 points (for non-golfers, see Stableford bracket – keep up) and announce it calmly; “4 for 3” (i.e. four shots and 3 points). He now felt he had a distinct advantage, especially as he had seen the newcomer hook into the trees from the tee. We had all gone a-searching and found the ball under a branch. Somehow he managed to chip it back out onto the fairway. He then topped a three wood that still trundled 150 yards before it dived into the rough. We found this for him as well. He somehow managed to hack it back out onto the fairway. The next shot bent like a banana, looked like it was going out of bounds, hit a branch and plopped in the bunker at the right of the green. He found that one himself. He managed to get it out of the bunker by some means and it rolled and rolled to within a few feet of the flag. He strode up and confidently missed the putt by inches then backhanded it into the hole with a groan.

As we walked away from the green our newcomer was counting his shots. He counted them in the traditional golfing way by looking back up the fairway and mentally replaying the scenic route he had taken. We moved on to the next tee with the newcomer still counting. Our inane chatter stopped as the 9 handicapper strode to the tee, placed his ball and made a few practice swings. The newcomer looked up from his scorecard and quite calmly, quite loudly and quite shamelessly announced that he had still scored a point even though he had played the hole as badly as anyone ever had in the history of the game. His actual words were “8 for 1.”

The 9 handicapper stopped and turned around. Then came the look. The look was one of utter, utter disbelief. The face that had seen 52 years of pain and anguish took on a new expression. The face that had seen highs and lows, weddings and funerals, death and destruction was now resigned to life just not being fair and there was nothing he could ever do about it. It was a face that questioned God. He was practically in tears.

The remainder of the round he never scored a point. He spent the rest of the time wandering off into far flung corners of the golf course looking for his ball muttering under his breath. All we could hear were semi-crazed mumblings and the occasional manic laugh, “8 for 1; 8 for 1; 8 for 1.”

Colleagues Wishing Me Good Luck With My Drive On The Tricky 6th

It’s easy to forget that other golfers are often people as well. Frequently all they appear to be are slow moving, exasperating, megalithic obstructions, arrogant youngsters or grumpy old committee members. They are frequently real people, just like you, I guess, with their own fears and concerns, handicaps and hang-ups. However, it is easy to forget this when they’re on the green a hundred yards away from you clustered around the flag marking their scores. Or when one of them is ambling back to the tee after they’ve duck hooked one so far left that the only question is whether it’s in the same post code as the fairway, not whether it’s in or out of bounds. Why didn’t they just play another one off the tee? Were they hoping for some divine intervention? Did they think that a dove would swoop down and gather the ball in its little beak and drop it back on the fairway? Why can’t they get a move on? Why don’t they just take up bowls?

Preposterously the people behind you have the shameless temerity to complain about you for slow play. Granted it was getting dark when you finished and the group in front of you had finished, showered, had a three course meal and waved sarcastically as they passed you on their way home. Yet, you need to align yourself correctly, don’t you? You’ve seen all professionals stop when something disturbs you and you go through their whole pre-shot routine again. When you have to look for a ball it’s inevitable, you can’t play golf without a few mistakes otherwise you’d be off scratch and anyway even Tiger Woods has to look for his ball now and again.

And another thing, how come, when you play with your ‘friends’ they say the most stupid, more ludicrous, most hurtful things. It starts on the first drive on the first tee. Before you’ve finished your follow through they’re whispering “bunker”. There is no way they can know that from your swing, unless they’re putting some kind of group hex on you – again. From a greenside bunker you thin it and the ball whistles across the green head high like a tracer bullet. It stops 50 yards away. You’re greeted with a less than sympathetic, “Well out”. A few shots later and your on the edge of the green. Your hard putt hit a sprinkler climbs vertically for a few kilometres and plops back to earth further away from the hole than you were 3 shots ago, “looked good in the air” comes the less-than-helpful quip.

There are times when your friends can be cruel for instance the time you’re in the middle of the fairway on the 150 yard marker and ask politely, “Can I get there with an 8 iron?”

“Depends, “ comes the reply

“On what?”

“On how many times you’re planning to hit it.”

I did get my own back, just the once. I had eagled the long par 5 3rd for the first time in my life and couldn’t resist it. I’m not proud of it but it had to be done. When would I ever get the chance again?  As we stood on the next tee I took a driver out and asked politely, “Did anyone get a two?”

Golf used To be fun

Preface

Golf originated in the 12^th century in Scotland with shepherds knocking chuckies into hawls with crummocks.

800 years later the chuckies may well now be titeliest Pro V and your “relief “crummock could have a polymer cord hybrid black grip. Yet essentially it’s the same game;

your task is to get the pebble into the rabbit hole with the least number of  cloots.

” ……..an for thaim efter enjoyin the gemme o gawf “

Movable Obstructions Grazing

 I promise it will not have an opening chapter about your grip, a chapter dealing with the 10 most common faults or chapters entitled – “Putting – The Game Within A Game”, “Understand Your Swing” or “Warming Up Before Your Round”. It won’t contain a foreword by a famous player (the best I could hope  for is Bradley Dredge as my mum knows his mum, slightly).

There will be no colour illustrations of me, or Bradley, shot on a Spanish golf course standing in a gorgeous yellow sandy bunker looking wise. There will be no drills from me, pretending that I’m the first person who has ever suggested it, telling you to; “hit your putts at a ball marker, not at the hole”, “on bunker shots hit the sand 1 inch behind the ball” or “ practice swinging with your legs tied together to improve your balance”.  

None of this ........

.... nor, thankfully, this

 The point of the book will be;

 1.  To give people a chuckle

2. To teach golfers (and any real people who stumble over this book) a little about themselves, how they think, why they do what they do, what motivates them, and offers them alternatives.

3. To remind everyone not playing on the Professional Circuit that that golf is a game, a pastime, a diversion, an entertainment….

The Bradley Dredge Formation Putting Team in action

What reviewers won’t be saying about this book;

 “This goldmine of ideas teaches you how to generate the most power from your swing, hit your irons close and stop three-putting”

 “This masterpiece of simplicity offers a fast track to a lower handicap for all…each chapter offers fascinating insights that are guaranteed to save you shots.”

“This eye-opening tutorial will empower golfers… a fast track to a better game.” 

“When I started reading this book I rarely broke 100. Within a week I was playing off scratch. By the time I had finished it I was on the professional circuit…… I can thoroughly recommend it.”  

Movable Obstructions at play

Angry spectator at par 4 12th

It’s time to seriously think about change…

when you put your drive for the 10th on the motorway; when they refer to the sand trap on 14th as Byron’s Bunker; when your woods really are made of wood; when no-one dreams of giving you a 6 inch putt; when a 4 ball medal match plays through your friendly 2 player match play; when your putter carries the name of a long-dead, hardly-remembered golfer; when your 3 wood has the word spoon inscribed underneath; when your preferred ball is a Spalding Executive; when Titleist sponsor you….. to wear Nike

- it’s time to think about change.

What about your swing? Maybe it isn’t quite working. It’s reasonable most of the time, not quite bad enough for you to get a lesson and change , so you just carry on. Perhaps it’s developed a hook. So you start compensating and begin aiming further and further right, until you’re practically aiming at your playing partners on the tee – it’s time to think about change.

Psychologically people tend not to want to change. There are a hundred theories why this is so. Perhaps this stems from the time we were living in caves and any change was dangerous to our survival. In those times change was difficult. If you wanted to change your swing there were no driving ranges, no nets to practice in, very few indoor practice areas. So change was only made when the price of not changing was so drastic, or life-threatening that  you had to. Maybe you were slicing so much you were worrying velocoraptors. That would make you work on your grip.

It is now almost universally agreed that people don’t like change because we simply like the comfort of routine, custom, habit. This seems to be true for most aspects of our lives. All our daily life we tend to sit in the same seats in the clubhouse, park in the same place. We tend to read the newspaper from the back, even though the sports pages are rarely at the back anymore. We leave a half inch of tea even if we have never used tea leaves for 20 years. We take a driver off the 8th tee although 9 times out of 10 it ends up in the rough.

However, would you change if your life depended on it? As a betting man I would lay odds that you wouldn’t. This is based on a report by Dr. Edward Miller on the future of healthcare. The report showed that people who undergo heart surgery are often left with a choice; in stark terms the choice is ‘change or die’. If they lead a healthier lifestyle after surgery they could avoid pain, further surgery and stop the spread of a variety of diseases before one of them kills them. However, only 1 in 10 patients changed their lifestyle. It seems that they would prefer to die rather than change.

Although this is initially difficult to believe it seems that people get stuck in defence and denial and simply refuse to accept it. This sounds ridiculous but when you think of people like George Best, James Belushi you wonder. You look  at other people who get trapped in a potentially disastrous lifestyle that they simply can’t seem to change; Tiger Woods, Michael Jackson,  Bill Cllinton and you believe it a little more. Then you look at the swing of Jim Furyk, Jeev Milkha Singh and you definitely agree.

So it takes a fair amount of pain and effort to change – so why bother? You approach a bunker with the same enthusiasm you display approaching a rabid rhinoceros. Yet you rationalise it away by remembering the one great bunker shot you played on New Year’s Eve 1987. And, you add, how often are you in the bunker – once or twice a round if that – it’s not worth bothering. So you don’t and you carry on…

What would cause you to be sufficiently fed up with you game that you’d actually do something about it? Well, if you did actually hit your playing partners on the tee with that hook you keep compensating for, or you were making more and more bizarre excuses not to play in medal competitions then this would indicate you are getting dissatisfied enough to actually do something about it.

So, if you seriously think about feigning injury and walking in rather than play out of a bunker that should help raise your level of unhappiness and help you start thinking about change. Although you probably won’t feel like it at the time – this is a good thing. This is now making you face your demons and do something about it.

How do you deal with a bad beat? Do you shrug or tilt?

Phil Ivey or Phil Hellmuth?

Gus Hansen answers the question, “How do you handle a bad beat?”

“Some people don’t, but the best way is to just go ahead with the next hand, don’t worry too much about it, it’s just cards. It happens to everybody and sometimes you take and sometimes you give. Don’t worry too much about it,  just try to play as good as you can the next hand.”

Logically

1. You know you’re going to lose some time

2. You know it’s going to be unfair

3. You know you have been upset in the past when this happened

4. Therefore you are likely to be upset again in the future.

It’s not a surprise that you will have a bad beat at some time.

People will be upset. It has been happening for over 2,000 years;

“Is any one surprised that he is cold in winter? That he is sick at sea? That he is jolted about on the highroad?” – Seneca – ‘On Anger’ AD 41

Seneca believed that a great deal of unhappiness was caused by ‘magic thinking’. People refuse to accept the inevitable;

You know something will happen yet still get upset when it does – it’s not rational. Deal with it.

Rationally you should have a process for dealing with this.

Why It’s Not Good to Tilt

TheYerkes-Dodson law shows that performance increases as anxiety/ arousal  increases to an optimum point beyond which performance declines rapidly. i.e. you perform better as you deal with a difficult situation until you reach a point where you rapidly decline. You manage the stress and anxiety well – then there comes a tipping point.

A strategy

You need a strategy – a strategy for dealing with failure. The strategy is about honesty and realism. The measure you use is ‘increase the speed of recovery’ – How quickly can you get back to full speed after a setback.

The strategy needs to be about honesty and  realism.

 Managing your anxiety

The more anxiety you can manage the better your performance, the better you can progress along the Yerkes-Dobson curve.

Anxiety is defined as the anticipation of pain. It’s not the actual pain. Poker players get anxious, a lot. The anticipation of a bad beat can often be worse than losing itself. So;

1. focus on NOW. Try not to think about 10 minutes ago or 10 minutes in the future.

2. focus on others – not yourself.

Both these strategies make it easier to take the pressure off yourself. You can regain control of the situation. No-one can  make you ‘tilt’ – only you can do this to yourself.

It won’t be easy – As you and Seneca know you won’t get it right first time. So, don’t be hard on yourself. Try gain – it gets easier.

This article first appeared in ‘Poker Shark’ – November 2011

I'm fed up waiting and I'm coming through.. OK?

I read recently that 3 ‘great tension reducers’ were; golf, swimming and fishing. Well I’m not an expert on water based activities but I can’t really say golf has reduced my stress levels very much over the years.

“Relax and play golf,” people say. They could just as well say “I hear that your uncle’s been eaten by a tiger. Why don’t you take your mind off it and take a trip to the zoo?”

There should be tips about reducing your stress whilst playing golf, not assuming that the very act of playing golf will somehow automatically reduce your stress. It is nonsense. Luckily, I’ve carried out a little research and have examined the top tips for reducing stress and tried to apply them to golf;

Tip 1. Reduce your stress levels by not setting yourself unrealistic targets

Sounds like a good idea. In principle I would be delighted to shoot a few shots under my handicap each time I play. However, when I’m playing the stroke index 3 par 5 and I’ve hit a glorious drive leaving me 200 yards from the green it would take the combined strength of Samson, Hercules and Geoff Capes to get the 3 wood out of my hand and give me a mid-iron. The overwhelming majority of golfers play golf because of those rare, rare moments when they hit a shot as good as a Phil Mickelson or a Bradley Dredge. Most of us know that a 7 iron, wedge and 2 putts will give us lots of stableford points but that really isn’t the game is it? There are those amongst us that calculate the chances of success at each shot and play the percentages. These people often win tournaments and are ‘good clubmen’ (they will be men). However, they are sad, unloved, boring and their mothers’ dress them funny. Their only aspiration in life is to be in the top 10 % best handicap secretaries in the South Wales region (valleys area).

Tip 2. When you have completed a task take a few minutes to pause and reflect before you start a new one.

It seems that many golfers are already doing this judging by the amount of time it takes 4 people to walk 10 yards to a tee and hit a ball each in the general direction of the next green.

Tip 3. Address problems as they occur. Don’t let them build up.

This seems to be based on ‘the green shield stamp syndrome’. For those who don’t remember green shields stamps they were the physical embodiment of nectar points. Every time you bought something you were given a few stamps which you put in a book. Then, when the book was full you cashed it in. This was illustrated to mew one day when I was working in London. I was not in my usual bed in Wales I woke up in a hotel ( 1 stamp). I couldn’t find a taxi (another stamp). The day was awful (many stamps). I had to stand up all the way to Newport on the train on the journey home (more stamps). My book is getting quite full now. I go in the house and my partner had bought the wrong cat food for the cat. I went ballistic on her, “You stupid ***, etc etc.” Waking up in hospital I reflected on the dubious merits of cashing in all your stress stamps at one time.

In golfing terms let your stress out as you go along – If you miss a putt … let it out. If you top a tee shot… let it out. Don’t save it all up and go home and kick the cat. I did see someone on the 7th par 3 at Dewstow cash all his stamps at one time. He was having a bad, bad day after a number of bad, bad weeks and after topping 3 titleists into the pond followed this us by sending his bag and golf club after them. He stormed across the course toward the clubhouse. He had only gone about 100 yards before he turned back and walked sheepishly back to us. He walked right past us and into the pond. He waded towards his bag where he pulled out his car keys.

Tip 4: Stay in the ‘here and now’

OK this sounds very another lot of pschological twaddle but I really like it. If I were calling myself a consultant psychological sports guru and charged you £2,000 per day you’d listen to me if I told you this. It really means hit one shot at a time. Often we’re hitting a shot and worrying about the putt, or the next tee shot, or the winners speech. When I was very new at the game a pal of mine who was also new, and quite a good player was always wide on par 3s. He eventually told me that he was worried about getting a hole in one and having to buy everyone a drink as he was invariably skint. So,hit the ball. Find it. Hit the ball. Find it…..

Tip 5: Avoid all drugs including tobacco and alcohol

Oh please….

"Don't make me angry"

There are times as a human being, or as a poker player when you will be upset. You may be upset with yourself, your opponents, the dealer, the cards, Lady Luck, just about anyone or anything. The usual time players get upset is when they’ve had a ‘bad beat’;

Some “bad beats” aren’t really that bad—Your AK v 2 3 sounds like a bad beat, yet, statistically AK will only win 2 out of 3 times.  But sometimes a bad beat is a bad beat and this can, naturally, lead to some form of upset. The upset may take form of an internally (bad mood) or externally (a sulk or a rant). These techniques are rarely satisfactory and do nothing to achieve the objective of getting back “off tilt”.

A very useful way of getting off tilt is to understand why you were upset. It may seem straightforward but it really isn’t.

There are basically only 3 reasons people get upset. By understanding the emotion and rationale behind your upset you will be able to adjust more rapidly.

The first cause of upset is linked to a BROKEN AGREEMENT.

This can be written or unwritten, formal or informal, spoken or unspoken. It will include lies and perpetrations. This tends to occur in personal relationships.

If this occurs during a poker game it is usually best to move away from the poker table and attempt to resolve it in private. I don’t mean a gun fight or anything like that, but a discussion. For instance if you believe a colleague has lied to you or broken some kind of agreement you need to resolve it. If you don’t resolve it there will always be a friction and a difficult relationship between you – a “history”. This will invariably put you on tilt against them.

The second cause of upset is UNFULFILLED EXPECTATIONS. This would be the situation where you expect something from the game, people in the game, the organisation of the game, etc. that doesn’t happen. For instance you may expect a player to behave in a certain way at the table and they don’t. This will affect you. You now have a number of options:

1. Address the situation
2. Leave the situation
3. Sulk, tilt and lose all your money

The order of the above is the preferred order.  If you can address the situation—do it. If you need to use others to help—use others. It will continue to affect you even if you think it doesn’t. You may not realise it until you’ve left the game and can think rationally about the situation.

The final cause of upset is BLOCKED GOALS. This is the one that is the most personal to you, and the one you can deal with most effectively.

This situation occurs when you’ve set yourself a goal, a target, and you don’t achieve it. Someone, or usually yourself, has stopped you reaching it. In this situation it is tempting to blame external factors for your lack of success: it’s the dealer’s fault, the opponent, the room, my table position, luck.

Once you’ve recovered from the initial upset it would be useful to look at yourself. Did you set a realistic target? Have you the skills to achieve this? Did you just have a run of bad luck? Do you consistently have a run of bad luck? Thinking about questions like these will give you some ideas to improving your game and perhaps adopting a more realistic approach to your game. It may be that you need to improve on some facets of your game in order to reach the next level. Or you could genuinely have had a run of bad luck. This happens.

If you keep having bad luck, and keep losing when you shouldn’t, you need to break out of that cycle. Looking at the cause of the upset will really help. Remember Einstein’s definition of madness:

“Madness is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”

Perhaps, eventually you’ll be able to handle triumph and disaster as well as Berry Johnston did at the 1985 WSOP Main Event:

“There were three players remaining: chip leader, Bill Smith, TJ Cloutier and Berry Johnston, nearly even in chips. TJ had Berry covered by a few chips, and Berry was all-in with A-K against Cloutier’s A-J,” Mike recalled. “The flop came A-7-3, and a jack came on the turn. TJ won that pot to knock Berry Johnston out of the tournament. I’ll never forget it because Berry handled that bad beat as well as anybody could possibly imagine. He didn’t moan, he didn’t cry, he just shook his head a little bit, ya know? And he got up, shook their hands, and wished them good luck. He walked over to his wife, who wasn’t much of a poker player, and she said, ‘Oh, honey, are you out now?’ ‘Yeah,’ he said. ‘Oh, good.  Now, do you want to go get something to eat?’”

This article first appeared in Blind Straddle – December 2011

Old Entrance for MGM Grand Casino, Las Vegas

Those players identified a priori as being highly skilled achieved an average return on investment of over 30 percent, compared to 15 percent for all other players. This large gap in returns is strong evidence in support of the idea that poker is a game of skill.
- Steven D. Levitt and Thomas J. Miles 2011 – The Role of Skill versus Luck in Poker:- Evidence from the World Series of Poker in April 2011.

The almost universal accepted theory is that poker is a game / sport consisting of a mix of skill and luck. levitt and Miles analysis calculates that highly skilled players win 15% more money than other players. So, one interpretation of the skill / luck ration could be assessed as a ratio of skill / luck as 85% / 15%. This is different from the percentages suggested by another economist, Phil Hellmuth. He calculates that ;“Poker is 100% skill and 50% luck”

Another noted academic and psychologist, Fritz Heider suggests that performing any activity well consists of a mix of external and internal factors. The internal factors he identifies are; your ability to complete the task, and the effort you put into achieving the task. The external factors are the difficulty of completing the task, i.e your opponents play and luck. Heider suggests that you only have limited control of these factors. He feels you can control the internal factors by practicing hard, implementing successful strategies, etc.. but you have no control over the external factors, i.e. your opponents and your luck.

I would disagree with that. I believe you can influence your opponents, (although Heider would probably argue that that would be defined under your internal strategies) and more crucially, and controversially, that you can change your luck.
Heider would definitely disagree with that assertion I believe poker players can influence their luck, and they know it, and their behaviour shows that they frequently act as if they can. Rationally most players will argue this is absolute
nonsense. However, let’s look at the evidence. luck can be influenced and here are a number of arguments to prove it;

Argument 1: 3.5 billion people, or more, can’t be wrong,can they?
Half the population of the world believe in the ancient Chinese philosophy of feng shui which promotes good luck. A number of large Western Organisations are willing to invest a great deal of money respecting their beliefs;
The Disney Corporation shifted the angle of the front gate of Hong Kong’s Disneyland by 12 degrees to align the park for maximum prosperity.
The entrance to the original MGM Grand casino in Las Vegas was inside the mouth of Leo the lion, MGM’s mascot. However many Chinese gamblers avoided the casino or entered the casino through the back entrance to avoid the bad luck they believed they would have entering the mouth of the lion. in 1998 the entrance was changed. The architects of the Crown casino in Australia complex consulted 3 feng shui experts when building the $1.6 billion hotel and casino. it is also lucky for gamblers to wear red underwear. Oh, and let’s not forget the little prayer most poker players mutter when they’re all-in in a coin flip.

Argument 2: Animals can’t be wrong, can they?
Animals don’t believe in luck, do they? in an experiment carried out by B.F. Skinner he proved that animals, in this case pigeons, are superstitious at heart and will carry out a set of rituals, or superstitions in order to give themselves the best chance of success. Skinner set up an experiment which meant the pigeon had to peck the correct button from a number of options, to get some food. The pigeons quickly established this and learnt which button to peck. Skinner then changed the system and rewarded the pigeons randomly whichever button they pressed. The pigeons responded by behaving in an unusual way.
They developed their own mannerisms; twisting their necks, flapping their wings, pecking close to the buttons in a consistent manner in a bid to reproduce the luck they had previously had achieved by gaining food. In the article “Betting With Magic & The Use of Magical Belief Systems in Gambling” Bess Hayes and Dr. Tyler Jarvis conclude,“Despite understanding the probability and independence of events in gambling games, gamblers repeatedly exhibit actions that display their belief in an ability to control the outcome of an event in a game.”

Argument 3: Governments can’t be wrong, can they?
If the highest powers in the land acknowledged that luck could be influenced that would be some proof, yes?;
“He (expert witness Roy Cooke) enjoys poker and agreed that there was skill involved, but he believes that luck prevails every time. He testified that he had seen a television poker tournament in which there was a hand that had a 91 percent chance to win and yet it lost to a hand with only a 9 percent chance to win. He opined that this was absolute proof that in poker, luck pre-dominates over skill.” – North Carolina Supreme Court findings summarizing expert witness testimony of Roy Cooke, July 2005.
Sweden’s Supreme Court Judge Goran Lamberth concluded that “cash games constitute games that primarily depend on luck as in the meaning of chapter 16, article 14 of the Criminal Code.”
In the Gutshot Poker Club case in England, the court ruled poker to be a “game of luck and so subject to the Gaming Act.”
The argument is as follows;
• Poker is a game of luck.
• Luck is by definition not consistent and must eventually balance itself out.
• Some players consistently win more than others over a substantial period
• Therefore these players must have an influence over the amount of good luck they have.

Argument 4: psychologists can’t be wrong, can they?
4a. An experiment was carried out with people who described themselves as “lucky”and another set who didn’t describe themselves as lucky. The test was given to these two groups of people. Both groups were given newspapers with hidden messages. They were asked to complete a task and during that task they could come across clues and hidden messages giving them instructions on how to win $100. People from the “lucky” group did far better than the other group. The psychologists conducting this experiment concluded that feeling lucky can help you it gives you positive vibes and a more optimistic viewpoint. Feeling lucky makes you more likely to see the good side and influence your behaviour.

4b. People can control their luck. Or, more accurately, people behave as if they can control their luck. Ellen Langer, psychologist, describes this as the “illusion of control.”

This illusion of control was illustrated in an experiment she carried out based on a lottery. The lottery is an acknowledged game of pure chance with each ticket having as much chance of winning as any other, obviously. One group of people were given lottery tickets with images of famous sportspeople on them. Another group were able to select which lottery ticket sportsperson they choose. Each ticket cost 1$. When scientists attempted to buy tickets from these groups, based on the excuse that there were no more lottery tickets left, they found that the people who had been given random tickets negotiated the sale of their tickets for on average, $1.96. Whilst the people in the group who had selected their own tickets sold them for an average of $8.67. Therefore the second group, who had chosen their own tickets, behaved as though they had more control of their luck than the first group who’s chances of winning was pre-determined.

4c. in a practical situation sociologist E.G. Coffman found that dealers who experienced runs of bad luck ran the risk of losing their jobs. He also observed craps players in action. He found that people tend to throw the dice softly if they want low numbers or to throw hard for high numbers, after, of course, blowing on the dice.

Argument 5: Sports stars can’t be wrong, can they?
Paul Azinger, golfer, always marks the position of his golf ball on the green with a US penny that features Abraham Lincoln. Not only that but he lines the penny up to ensure lincoln is looking at the hole. Wade Boggs, liked to eat chicken before a game at 5.17pm precisely. He then went and hit exactly 150 balls in batting practice. Serena Williams blamed her failure to win the 2007 French Open on herself: “I didn’t tie my laces right and I didn’t bounce the ball five times and I didn’t bring my shower sandals to the court with me.”

The “Illusion of control” is a great way of summarising the attempt to control your fate. On the one, rational, level it seems absurd. How can having an orange in front of you at a poker table possibly affect your chances of winning? However, one of the most important aspects of poker, or any competitive activity really, is feeling comfortable about it and getting yourself in the best frame of mind. if that means doing a little dance around your chair before you sit down, so what. Do what feels right for you.

“As long as their routine helps them get into that state of mind and doesn’t damage their performance, or that of anyone else on their team, then I would encourage them to do it. When it can become a problem is when it becomes an obsession that can be damaging.” Dr Tony Westbury, lecturer in sport, exercise and psychology at Napier University in Edinburgh. The dangers, as Westbury goes on to add, is that for some athletes, superstition can become dangerously close to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD).

Conclusion
Perhaps the final word needs to come from Dylan Thomas, poet, not someone you would call a “lucky” person. in the foreword to his book of Collected Poems he wrote;
“I read somewhere of a shepherd who, when asked why he made, from within fairy rings, ritual observances to the moon to protect his flocks, replied: “I’d be a damn’ fool if i didn’t!”

This article first appeared in ‘World Gaming Executives’ December 2011

Tenby is a town with a lot of history. Originally a Norse settlement, the town has developed fairly peacefully for the greater part of its life.  The architecture reflects the steady progress of history with some of the finest buildings remaining intact. For example the largest parish church in Wales, St. Mary’s. It is thought that this has been the site of a church since Norman times and the tower of the current church is over 700 years old.  The 15th century Tudor Merchant’s House on Quay Street is the oldest furnished building in Tenby and still decorated with authentic Tudor fittings.  However the most striking features of the town are the walls that were built following the destruction of the town by Prince Llewelyn in 1260 that surround part of the streets and alleyways. The narrow streets in some parts of the town give it an air of cosiness and warmth, at least for a great deal of the year. In the height of summer this protection from invading armies can become quite claustrophobic as the visitors push and jostle their way along the narrow, medieval streets.

This is in stark contrast to the golf course, situated close to the town, where the layout of fairway, rough and gorse give it the traditional links feel of being at one with nature. It embodies the word ‘links’ which literally means the linking of the land with the sea.

The town of Tenby is known in Welsh as Dinbych y Pysgod. This translates as ‘little fort of fishes’ which would have perfectly summed up the town and the surrounding walls for much of its long history where fishing has always been a vital part of the town’s’ economy.

The steady historical progress of the town came to an abrupt turn with the arrival of the double-edged sword of the railways in 1853. The town was seen as a health resort and Sir William Paxton, politician and merchant banker invested heavily in the town.  The Napoleonic wars prevented the affluent Victorians travelling to Europe and soon the area became increasingly popular. This elite trickle of tourists in the first half of the 19^th century became a flood of popular visitors as the railway arrived at Tenby in 1863.

To accommodate the influx of visitors and their increasing desire for sport and entertainment the business people of the town created the golf club. The club was also a focal point for local business owners to relax, play and meet. Although the club was officially founded in 1888 there is evidence that even 13 years earlier the game was played along the coast. In a report in the ‘Laws of Markets and Fairs’ it is revealed that that court proceedings were delayed as the Mayor of Tenby adjourning a case to play.

Tenby is the oldest golf club in Wales. It was established on September 31^st 1888 after a meeting in the Town Hall. At the meeting 6 local residents decided to officially form a club. The first membership fees were 10/6d per year or 5/- per month (equivalent to £280 / year or £130 / month today)

Tenby Golf Club was the first affiliated club in Wales and a founder member of the Welsh Golfing Union in 1895 with Porthcawl (founded 1892), Swansea Bay (1894), Glamorganshire (1890), Caernarvonshire (1890), Borth – Ynylas (1885), Aberdovey (1892), Rhyl (1890) and Merionethshire.

The golf course is as perfect as you can make a golf course. The gently undulating but rugged land running along the coast is perfect for seaside golf. The rough and gorse have been used to its maximum effect. If you hit a good shot you’ll get a good result. It’s a course for thinkers not sloggers. It’s not a long course and each hole is different from each other, and different from the previous day. The wind has a huge effect on the course as it should with a links course. The views across Carmarthen Bay and the monastic Caldey Island are spectacular. The course uses the features of the area in a fascinating contest that echoes the original golfing layouts of Scotland. It especially echoes the course at Prestwick, the setting for the first Open Competition. It can be tough, but always fair. Although there are some blind shots they add to the flavour of an ’old-fashioned‘  course compared to the relative homogeny of today’s courses where WYSIWYG. At Tenby there is still that element of surprise and luck that modern golf architects seem to be determined to take out of the game.

This is no accident. The main designer of the course, and the man responsible for the feel of the course is James Braid. Braid a golf professional and course designer from Fife, Scotland won 5 Open championships at the turn of the 20^th century. However, it was as a course designer that he felt his great passion and designed over 200 golf courses in Britain including Championship courses at Carnoustie, Troon, and Prestwick. He worked on 20 courses in Wales. He was prolific and worked the same way. He kept the greens committee happy by charging a low fee and communicating his ideas quickly and effectively.

James Braid was brought to the club early in its existence. In July 1902 he was paid £6 to inspect the course and suggest improvements. Five years later he returned with suggestions and the course was expanded to 18 holes. This new course was opened at Easter 1907 and has largely remained the same ever since.

The course has had a number of famous supporters; Lloyd George, the only Welsh Prime Minister and keen golfer was a frequent visitor and had a holiday home close to the course.

Dai Rees, the Welsh Ryder Cup captain that took the Ryder Cup from USA in the middle of a period where British golf was dominated by America was also a keen player.

An unusual feature of the course is that each hole is named after a feature. Dai Rees is commemorated with the par 3 3^rd. Other holes include; ‘Monks Way’, ‘View O’Caldey’, ‘The Railway’ and of course, ‘James Braid’.

***

The American writer and golfer Robert Kroeger toured the links courses of Wales and summed up perfectly many golfers thoughts on Tenby golf course;

“Tenby was my favourite course in Wales. The blind shots didn’t seem overwhelming and the drama of high dunes and deep hollows more than compensated for this lack of visibility. The greens, true, fast, and always undulating, were the best we’d seen in Wales.” – Robert Kroeger

This article first appeared in Cambria Magazine December 2011