∇xB

It has been a long time since I updated this and in the last month or so I've barely had a chance to do anything poker related.  Being added as a coach to DC actually came around the same time I was hired at a new job and was trying to get certified for another.  I also moved during that period.  Between picking up several new students, studying, moving, and the general sort of shenanigans that are associated with having several friends graduating college right now, I have been overwhelmed.  Things are starting to settle down again and I want get into some routines, and blogging is one of them.  I feel like I largely founded my poker "brand" on the quality and content of my forum posts, and I'd like to continue to expand myself to the greater deuces cracked community by providing entertaining or informative blog content.

I recently read "How We Decide" by Jonah Lehrer.  The book was particularly interesting to me because it used poker players as an example of people making high level decisions in a somewhat glorifying manner.  I fully recommend anyone interested in the workings of the brain pick it up, as I think there is a lot that can be garnered from understanding the building blocks of our decision process.  The book discusses rational decisions compared to emotional ones, and whether we should be rationalizing or going with our instincts.  Specifically he elucidates which kinds of decisions should be rationalized, and which kinds of decisions we can just go with a read, so to speak.  The book goes on to further discuss when our mind fails us and what sorts of triggers cause these failures, as well as when our mind is capable of great creativity and problem solving in situations that seem impossible.  Finally he amalgamates the results to give a framework for using our decision making ability to its best while avoiding its short falls.

In particular I was interested in a section that discusses the maximum number of things we are capable of keeping track of before we overload our brain and inhibit our decision making ability.  The book said that we basically have the capacity for 7 ideas plus or minus 2, depending on the person.  This seems relevant to the common practice of online multitabling.  After all, if we can really only process 7 things how can we play 8 tables?  Doesn't our decision making ability decline?  How can guys like Nanonoko exist and still crush the games if he is playing 24 tables.  More importantly what is the different between a Nanonoko and a break even SNE grinder 24 tabling?  I am fairly certain it comes down to the scope of their focus.  I feel like it would not be unreasonable to make a blanket statement and say that most SNE grinding mega tablers just use standardized lines to make all of their decisions.  Even then most of them are break even to slight winners, which seems to correlate with the hypothesis that we have a limited number things our brain can focus on at once.  Where I think Nanonoko differs and is able to get all this thin value is that he seems to view playing 24 tables as irrelevant, and that he is just battling the same regs across multiple tables.  I would think that allowing his brain to lump multiple hands together as a single point of focus since they are all against the same player gives him the free brain space to make these close decisions and free him from using only standard lines.  I recall Improva talking about something similar and how he can more tables at higher stakes because there are more familiar faces at the table.

Anyway that was just something that occured to me while reading.  If you play 9+ tables and are actually thinking at each of them let me know how you do it, or if you are never forced to make more than a few decisions at once.  I'd recommend checking out the book though.  You can find it here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0618620117/?tag=ddcomp-20 .