30 Oct 2025 Intermediate This material is for medium-skilled players A-game discipline downswing mental game mindset If you want to get more money and/or positive emotions from poker, then this article will help you open your eyes to several expensive and destructive misconceptions that are most likely holding you back from the things you want. Chances are that these beliefs have been sitting silently in the back of your mind for too long, unquestioned and uncontested. This material will shed light on what is really important in poker and will help you finally start achieving your goals. The article is suitable for low and micro stakes players online and offline, which are full with fish. Belief 1: «If the story doesn't make sense, it's probably a bluff» In general, it sounds logical, right? We, poker players, are always trying to put all the pieces of the puzzle together, like good detectives, checking street by street the integrity and logic of the story that the opponent «tells». But there is one serious misconception that I want to draw your attention to and demonstrate in the next hand. Typical hand where you can lose a lot of money $1/$2 game. Preflop, the opponent opens with EP, and you call on the BU with . On the flop, the starting pot is $23, and the cards come . The opponent checks - you do too. The turn is , and again check-check is played. The river is and ... the opponent suddenly wakes up, betting 400% of the pot - $92 into a $23 pot. What should you do with your bluff catcher? Solvers say that this is a mandatory call, and logic says that we block the opponent's straights from A4s and 46s (which usually should not be on EP). The opponent should have bet overpairs and sets earlier in the hand in order to collect value in the usual and most common way through the bet-bet-bet line or something like that. As a result, we come to the initial conclusion that the opponent's line does not make any sense in terms of collecting value. - Well, what value combinations does he portray to us? What is the idea behind his story? Does the opponent open the hands that he portrays to us from early position? Indeed, he should have very few value combinations with which it would be logical to check on the flop and check again on the turn, and then bomb an overbet x4 on the river. Therefore, we consider his «story» stupid and our hand instinctively pulls the mouse to the Call button. But, at the same time, we should consider his story for the logic of playing like this with a bluff. How likely is it that a typical $1/$2 or micro stakes player online would actually play a bluff like that - extremely passive, sneaky, and reveal his intentions on the river with a 4x pot overbet when he has a bluff? We don't know a lot at first, and we learn critical information over time and experience: our own, others', or through research. Experience shows that this is almost always done with some kind of slowplay, and then they try to get back the value they missed on earlier streets on the river. The river is the most expensive and honest street in the hand, and you should usually trust excessive self-confidence on the river. Otherwise, it will eventually cost you your bankroll. Remember that we are now on the river, and no new cards will come out. Here we have a typical situation when the bluffcatcher gets hit by a huge overbet from the opponent. And we need to compare our equity with what is needed for at least a minimal profit. But first, we need to understand how much equity we have in general. To do this, we need to divide the number of combinations of his bluffs by the number of all combinations in general that he is so motivated to play. Let's assess the number of value combinations The story is murky, because collecting value in this way does not seem logical, but the opponent showed great confidence and even indifference to what could call him, thinking in the usual way. I think that he has very few value combinations, but they are there. 1-2-3 combinations will be found. And what about bluffs? Most likely, a micro-limit player will almost never bluff like this. If he has showdown value from , then he will almost always prefer to check and win a small pot on SDV against an abundance of missed broadway and complete garbage in our range. An overbet of 400% of the pot is not placed in a bluff. In total, he has about 0-1 combination for bluffing. Now let's plug that into the equity formula: We won't win a spot like this anywhere near the required frequency - just to break even. And to make a good profit, we need a much bigger edge over that number. Put the thinking aside - you need it for other spots, and in spots like this, just fold your bluff catchers without a twinge of conscience. I'm sure that those of you who have experience calling huge overbets in these situations remember well the consequences. As a rule, it was the nuts and you lost a large part of your stack, or even all of it. Belief 2: «Studying doesn't matter» Poker players often have hands, sessions, and even longer periods of play where it seems as if no matter what they think or do, everything is predetermined. For example, when you can't seem to get over a long card-dead situation, when you lose all-ins in tournaments or get cooled for another stack in cash games, when draws don't close and bluffs don't work. Or, quite the opposite, when everything works out, no matter what thought process is going on in your head. It seems that there are upstreaks and downstreaks - this is an indisputable fact, and sometimes variance really does play in one's favor. But the catch is that a person remembers much better vivid events in which he experienced rather strong emotions. And the less noticeable hands, which are 10 times more numerous, pass by memory because nothing special happened there. - But this is only visually and at first glance. In fact, it is these thousands of unremarkable hands, where «everything was as usual» that form a significant share of the total win rate. Coolers and all-ins in large stacks plus or minus return, because there really is a lot of luck in terms of who was dealt and how. Today you took a lot of money - tomorrow you will take it. Not necessarily from these same opponents, but on average - you will take it. The ability to play poker is very clearly manifested in these very many hands with small and medium pots - there the role of luck is minimal, and the role of skill is maximum. Student Hand Example A $5/$10 live game with a standard deep stack. The opponent is probably an amateur. Preflop The opponent opens UTG to $60, and Hero calls in the SB with . Flop 7s5c5h The initial pot is $135. The opponent makes a small overbet of $150, and the student with middle pair and BDFD decides to call. Turn The initial pot is $435, and the board has become completely rainbow, but a possible straight from A3s has closed. A pot bet flies - Hero calls it again. River The initial pot is $1,305. The student has two pair and decides to block bet 1/3 of the pot for thin value against overpairs. Now the pot is $1,740, and the opponent raises it to $1,300 - now the pot is $3,040. This is not a pleasant situation - even top regular streamers often go into a tank in this situation, because they don't know what to do in the moment, since any decision means either losing a colossal pot, or losing the rest of the stack and giving the opponent much more. Analysis of this hand Let's think about how we could have played the hand better. First, we shouldn't have called preflop against an open for 6 bb in the worst position and with terrible prospects of winning money, even if we get to a flush or a straight. In addition, We will too often get a hand that is far from 1st nuts in a very deep stack, which will mostly result in us losing that huge stack rather than doubling up. On the flop, we also shouldn't have defended against an overbet with second pair. The opponent is an amateur, and probably plays according to the strength of his hand, which means that most often this is a simple, greedy and clumsy collection of value from the student. At worst, the opponent looks at his cards and understands that they have good equity in a deep stack - I mean a possible draw hand. In general, check-calling an overbet with a second pair and a BDFD is not the end of the world, but it is too marginal a move, which in the long run brings a lot of stress for zero profit. Or even negative one. You have to understand that an overbet in live poker is mostly evidence of having a big hand, as well as online. After all, the opponent needs to justify such a bet size with its frequency and range polarization. On the turn, we are egged on by the fact that we have an open-ender and the desire to turn it into a made straight. On the river, we fail to get a straight, but two pairs are formed. And in fact, it does not matter how we react to this raise - we lost the hand once we faced it ... on the river. Because even though the opponent seems to be showing us very few value hands, he will have even fewer bluffs. If they are there at all. The EV of a check-call in such a situation usually does not exceed zero, and therefore it should not be done. Especially in offline, where to play the distance is many years of regular and focused play, and perhaps even decades. With all the swings in the cash and emotions. In general, I choose to fold here, but I would not have ended up in this spot at all, especially having invested so much money in the pot. And what the student did there, unfortunately, I do not know. It's easy to overlook a lot of the more mundane details in small pots that end up totally wasted, without realizing that it's often due to the hero's poor play on earlier streets of the hand. The problem snowballed: a bad call on the pre-flop led to Hero getting sucked into the hand and leaving a ton of money in it. The student here simply had to: Fold a problematic hand of 65s, playing in the worst position, Fold second pair against an overbet on the flop without much of a bonus, Exploitatively fold a clearly beaten hand against a recreational player. Not play out of position at all with poor prospects and without a clear understanding of where and how to play. If the student studied more diligently, he would certainly be able to avoid getting into bad situations and would learn to get out of them earlier, if he made the first mistake, not letting the whole ball of them unravel for the whole stack. And besides, Studying poker strategy helps us effectively distract ourselves from moments when things are going badly: we are temporarily not up to a downswing and card-dead, and at the same time we find something new and promising, which will subsequently help us win much more. We learn to play well already in the early stages of the hand and in small pots, entering more important situations in a much more correct and effective way, so that the rest of the hand, in general, goes in one of the branches of the plan we have thought out. And then everything goes well. Belief 3: «I have to do something when I'm card dead» For your reference: Card dead is a period of the distance when a player is almost not dealt playable cards for the situations he finds himself in, and he always has junk cards in his hands. During such a period, there is really no pleasure in playing, and all the player does is fold and watch, including how the game passes him by. And many players have big problems with this. This period is often perceived as if from now on this will be the norm and nothing will change in the future. If you think in the spirit of "How much more can I be dealt only junk?", which does not imply that such a period is only temporary, then this will lead to the fact that the player begins to force his participation in hands with what was dealt - as they say, as long as the spot is suitable. For example, make a squeeze with A7o on one of the blinds, get your squeeze called and blow the rest of his stack postflop because «Say A - say B», «There is a range advantage», «My story should look convincing» And so on. Players base this approach largely on the fact that they have acquired a very tight image due to sitting out of hands for a long time due to being card dead, and start playing the way they think a nit would play if he finally got dealt the nuts - mainly by running suicidal bluffs based on how they are now supposed to be perceived. It must be said that this is, in principle, logical and really works when the players at the table are sensitive to how others play - they observe, draw conclusions and adapt to the information they receive. But most of the time, your real opponents will not care what your image is, because they are only concerned with their own cards and how they interact with the board. In other words, they are not even close to the level of awareness that the player expects, and they play with their two cards. So with these players, kamikaze-style deep-stack bluffs won't yield much increased fold equity compared to normal. Yes, it's a fact that you can be that blind when playing for real money - even if you don't believe it. Bluff when the spot is good at realistic ranges, not when your image has become super-tight, you're bored, and you want action. And remember that Opponents will get into their card deads just like you, but in their own time. And you can get a big advantage over them if you play your card deads better than they play theirs. Where opponents start to lose their cool and go crazy, playing trash or semi-trash in bad spots, your job is to keep your cool and manage your money wisely. And even if your opponents are patient, you still have to endure them in terms of not getting into bad spots, and in the spot where your opponent spends 3bb, you should spend even less. Over the long term, this all adds up and grows into huge differences in the amount of money saved between your opponents and you. To summarize this point, although we cannot influence how the cards are dealt outside of us, we can still control ourselves from the inside: emotions, thoughts and actions. For example, Regularly check the quality of your game - are you still playing your A-game? Are you fully observing what is happening - both at the table and inside you? Do you notice any particularities in your opponents' play and opportunities to exploit them? Or maybe it's time for you to take a break and go for a walk / refresh yourself in a different way? While you don't have much to play with, you have plenty of time to observe and adjust. This is the best time to play relaxed (not to be confused with the adverb «loosely») and prepare yourself for the time when the cards start to go your way. Or maybe there won't be a single calm hand for a while, because you will always have something to play with. Belief 4: «This shouldn't happen to me» Specifically to you personally. That it's not fair. - This is another belief that also costs a lot. However, when you start playing poker, you sign up for all those painful things that are inherent in it and actually happen in it: That there are periods when the game is not going well, That you will be coolered, sucked-out or actually outplayed, That you can lose to the same opponent over and over again, That you will find yourself in big losses from playing with specific hated opponents, And also that in a specific session you will be dealt the worst possible and you will lose a lot of money in it through no fault of your own ... All these facts and feelings inside are familiar to any player who has played at least 10k hands. Unfortunately for us, poker has enough injustices and unpleasant things that we pay for the opportunity to earn in it and in the long run live freely. Having started the game, we immediately implicitly signed up for all the accompanying difficulties. At the same time, most players are sure that this should not happen to them personally and that they do not deserve it - neither in the game, nor in life in general. Or, at least, not to such an extent, as they say. As is known, everyone has a personal pain threshold regarding some unpleasant feeling or event after which we begin to lose our temper. For example, 2-3 coolers per stack in the first 100 hands will seem like a working moment for one, and for another it is clearly too much. In fact, the second player did not sign up for this - and he will behave accordingly if he does not change his attitude, perception and expectations. Randomness and our perception By nature, we have a poor understanding of randomness and an even worse perception of a cluster of negative events over a short period of time. To illustrate this more clearly, it is worth giving an example of tossing a coin. As is known, the probabilities of getting heads and tails tend to 50%, because the coin has 2 sides. Not counting the extremely rare stops of the coin on its edge (but if it is thin enough, then falling on it is extremely unlikely). And why I applied the verb «tends» to the probability - this is because the final result will infinitely approach the figures of 50% on each side, but on the same infinite sample of tosses. And we can not guarantee anything here. So, on an infinitely large number of coin tosses, we will have results of 50% on each side. - Okay, the brain accepts this figure. - But not the time / quantitative sample! - After all, you are unlikely to seriously believe that in the first 10 tosses the coin will definitely land 5 times, either heads or tails, in a clear alternation? That's exactly it. - We can develop this example further, but you will certainly agree that there will be series of heads and tails, and of unpredictable duration. And also that as the number of tosses increases, the sum of heads will approach the sum of heads to a minimum (or even become equal). In general, we perceive many events that are subject to randomness as unfair. Suffering and acceptance So, we perceive and predict randomness poorly - this is a fact. However, in addition to the logical element, there is also an element of suffering in our attitude to the negative outcomes of random events. You have probably heard this word from philosophers and those who think in a similar spirit. The main thing that contributes to suffering is mental resistance to what is happening. For example, in a game. And in fact, in any other activity in life. So, every time we add a layer of belief that «This shouldn’t happen to me,» we only increase our suffering. Just observe your mind the next time it is in a similar state - the next time another unpleasant event occurs. And see how your mind reacts to it: does it increase the suffering or does it try to get used to accepting it. Does it make you feel better because you complain about what is happening, or does it only make you more difficult and uncomfortable? Try to let go of the explanations with the story and just be with what is happening, without any of the commentary that usually comes in response to this unpleasantness. You have to come to accept the fact that poker is a long-term game and that variance (and its consequences) is built into this game. You need to mentally allow bad events in poker ... just be in it. If you got up on the wrong side of the bed today, are irritated and not ready to calmly accept what is happening, then it will be more profitable to end the game for now, you must unwind, reboot and only then return with a clear mind. It will be useful to experiment with what remains inside you after you manage to let go of what happened. And in addition, let go of your mental resistance to what happened. After some time of accustoming yourself to this attitude, you will begin to calmly treat everything that happens in poker and regularly derails the game of your opponents. - Not enough? - Then here's another thing: It will become much easier for you to play, and there will be less and less delay before the start of the session, You will begin to find new creative techniques that would not have occurred to you in your usual state, You will practically stop emotionally getting into those hands that should not have happened at all. And you will become much more balanced in life, because this habit applies to everything. This article is based on the Win More at Poker By Changing These Beliefs video by PTO Poker (Youtube).
