Coaching Poker Forums

This statement actually touches on the point of conversation -- but is completely unrealistic.

No person who is getting training/coaching for the first time -- is even going to know -- let alone have the guts to "FIRE THEM". Never ever seen it happen (in any sport) -- unless it was a kid's father managing the situation -- and even then, it normally isn't a comfortable situation for those involved.

If you hire someone and you do not like the way they are doing the job and you still keep them, that's a shame. There is an advantage of those who don't "have the guts" to fire someone is simply not paying for another session! And yes, it may take 2 or 3 sessions to figure out if your a fit but that is OK. I'm sure that most if not all coaches have something to offer the majority of DC members - it is how that info is communicated, listened to and adjustments made by both coach and student. As far as it being "uncomfortable" - you are paying for it - take control of your life.

If you hire someone and you do not like the way they are doing the job and you still keep them, that's a shame. There is an advantage of those who don't "have the guts" to fire someone is simply not paying for another session! And yes, it may take 2 or 3 sessions to figure out if your a fit but that is OK. I'm sure that most if not all coaches have something to offer the majority of DC members - it is how that info is communicated, listened to and adjustments made by both coach and student. As far as it being "uncomfortable" - you are paying for it - take control of your life.

It seems that when you are talking about "a fit", you are talking personalities/styles. In that case, yes of course -- "take control of your life." The older and more experienced someone gets, the easier this is -- trust me. But unless, someone is a complete jackass, breaking a financial commitment with a teacher/trainer/coach is always a bit "uncomfortable" for a Freshman/Beginner/Fish who doesn't really know for sure what is correct.

Anyways,(if you read through the thread), you will find that no one is talking about personality fits. The main part of the theme is regarding beginners not having the slightest idea blah blah blah -- and therefore cannot be expected to be good judges for themselves blah blah blah. A good example was Jason Ho (stox). Apparently, people were begging for more videos/training from him (good fit?)...even after he was outed as a bum (at least that is what I read).

Agree or disagree, that is a big part of the debate/conversation. Can beginners judge for themselves? This in turn, leads to the more delicate conversation regarding a coach's resume/skillset/qualification/hourly-rate.

Ok I just stumbled accross this thread and came to this post. (I haven't even read further) Seriously no offense, but this ptr link is shocking to me. And im sorry but the sample size defense is not valid. I'm referring to the 200nl and 50nl.

As far as tubasteve, I can vouch for the guy as he was my coach when i was at 50nl and a damn good one at that. He has also showed me his graph of iirc 100nl and he crushed it. although this wasnt recent I'm confident in his coaching abilities.

Just my honest input.

Did you read Martin's (ambtndplyr) post above? Check out his blog as well: http://www.darndao.com/

Martin is from Germany and plays most of his hands on non-PTR tracked sites. This is why PTR does not often tell the full story.

Martin is from Germany and plays most of his hands on non-PTR tracked sites. This is why PTR does not often tell the full story.

It so often does though, and to come back to the same point- there are so many coaches out there that there's no reason to hire a guy who may or may not be good at poker. In a perfect world there would be some kind of a third-party disinterested "ratings agency" for coaches. I think someone mentioned that already.

I'd be suspicious of this guy personally because he plays 5/10 but coaches for 120 / hr? I got burned like that already. His PTR is less relevant as that's a year ago and with hard work you can come a long way. It sucks to be so cynical by default, but with my experiences, the incentives for b/e players to become coaches and the numerous scandals I really think extreme skepticism is the only defense.

If you hire someone and you do not like the way they are doing the job and you still keep them, that's a shame. There is an advantage of those who don't "have the guts" to fire someone is simply not paying for another session! And yes, it may take 2 or 3 sessions to figure out if your a fit but that is OK. I'm sure that most if not all coaches have something to offer the majority of DC members - it is how that info is communicated, listened to and adjustments made by both coach and student. As far as it being "uncomfortable" - you are paying for it - take control of your life.

You're still missing the point. Pokerkatz, I would prop bet you that I could give you two coaching sessions- one where I gave you bad advice and one where I gave you good advice and you couldn't tell which one was which (I'd need a small overlay though as your chance in picking at random is 50/50.) I'd fall for this too- if Krantz gave me a lesson and talked total bullshit for 2 hours just to mess with me I would still take every single thing he said to heart and do everything I could to make the math agree with whatever he said. That kind of blatant deception doesn't happen in the poker coaching world, but getting coaching from a guy who sucks isn't all that different.

"Fit" is not what we're talking about here. We're talking about the fact that the poker coaching world attracts a lot of breakeven players that can say fancy poker words and fool noobs into thinking they can put those words together to form a winning game plan (and in their defense these b/e players sincerely believe they can and are helping people, it's not like they are evil I just disagree with their logic), and separating those guys from the guys that are legit isn't easy for anyone.

Oh and I wanna echo what a few other guys have said and say major props to DC for keeping this thread open. I've received a lot of PMs from people saying how much they have learned from it, and on a lot of other forums this thing would have been cut off immediately... so thanks for that.

Totally agree with Otis here. The problem with the argument that people who don't think a coach is good should just not take coaching from them is that they are misunderstanding the relationship between the coach and the student. Students do not approach the coaching relationship as consumers who are selfishly looking out for their own interests. They are looking for a mentor. They are paying for a service and the service is the person's knowledge, which assumes that the student believes that the coach will know more than they do. So how can we then say that the student will be able to easily step out of that mindset and be appropriately critical?

So if I'm paying for something I would like to think that I'm a smart person and I will try to trust that what I've paid for is a good investment, even if I don't believe that deep down. This is the basic description of cognitive dissonance. My mind will try to justify investment of resources into something that wasn't worth it by convincing me that it was worth it. These processes are largely unconscious so I wouldn't know what was happening unless I took the time to objectively evaluate my investment. Obviously the average person will not do this, so most will go on lying to themselves by believing that they got what they paid for.

To piggyback on what jk3a said though, what makes a good coach is entirely subjective. Each person needs to put forth the effort to study and decide what they need in a coach. Most poker players that have come to me for coaching are looking for the easy way to get better. If that's what they are looking for then they would be better served taking the money they spend on coaching and training sites on lottery tickets.

Totally agree with Otis here. The problem with the argument that people who don't think a coach is good should just not take coaching from them is that they are misunderstanding the relationship between the coach and the student. Students do not approach the coaching relationship as consumers who are selfishly looking out for their own interests. They are looking for a mentor. They are paying for a service and the service is the person's knowledge, which assumes that the student believes that the coach will know more than they do. So how can we then say that the student will be able to easily step out of that mindset and be appropriately critical?

We're talking in circles, but poker is not some magical mystery completely unknowable to non-experts. If Michael Schumacher told you the best way to drive a car is to step on the gas and the brake at the same time, you don't need to try it to know the car won't go anywhere (unless it's a Toyota). There's nothing specific about poker that someone can piss on you and tell you it's raining and you are too stupid to figure out it ain't rain. Otis did it. He fired a coach after one lesson because he called bullshit. And not to disparage otis, but it's not like he's some sort of genius that only he can do that.

I mean, have a little self respect. You (general you) may not be god's gift to poker, but if you have reasoning skills, have a little faith in them.

I'm not going to bet on it, but if otis wants to make those two vids, one with good advice and one with bad, I'll happily watch and try my hand and picking out the good from the bad.

We're talking in circles, but poker is not some magical mystery completely unknowable to non-experts. If Michael Schumacher told you the best way to drive a car is to step on the gas and the brake at the same time, you don't need to try it to know the car won't go anywhere (unless it's a Toyota). There's nothing specific about poker that someone can piss on you and tell you it's raining and you are too stupid to figure out it ain't rain. . . .

Sorry Razor, but your analogies don't really work. Of course, if a coach said something like, "Go all-in every time - and you will be a winner", any person with common sense should get scared shitless and cancel all classes immediately lol (about the same as the gas/brake analogy).

I've always found that the smarter the person is, the easier they are to fool. Why? Because they are usually experts in what they do -- and blithering idiots at common sense. Supposedly even Einstein could be fooled with simple math (like grocery change).

Just step outside of poker, and take a look at any sport/hobby school. Can you honestly say they are all churning out wizards in their given discipline(choose your field)? No, and many schools/instructors are blatant ripoffs -- but students are loyal almost always (I've even been guilty of this). But regardless of the discipline, many schools/instructors make a lot of money, regardless of the quality.

__________________
DAMN. I wish DC would give us preview in the forums.

Otis did it. He fired a coach after one lesson because he called bullshit. And not to disparage otis, but it's not like he's some sort of genius that only he can do that.

I think for myself much more than your average guy here and I think I try much harder to catch myself in standard cognitive biases than your average guy here.

I mean, have a little self respect. You (general you) may not be god's gift to poker, but if you have reasoning skills, have a little faith in them.

It's not that easy, it's just simply not that easy.

I'm starting to think you're pretty new to all this poker stuff, these are some very simple concepts that you're just not getting. Is it on purpose? What limits do you play? How long have you been playing poker? Your thought processes just seem so ridiculous, there's no way you actually make much money at this, I just don't even know why I keep replying to you.

No, and many schools/instructors are blatant ripoffs -- but students are loyal almost always (I've even been guilty of this)

One cognitive bias that shows up here as well is that when someone spends a lot of money on something they don't want to think that it sucks even if it actually does.

I'm not going to bet on it, but if otis wants to make those two vids, one with good advice and one with bad, I'll happily watch and try my hand and picking out the good from the bad.

Cool, I'll spend hours of my time trying to prove a point to some nanostakes guy who has already made up his mind 100%. Great idea.

It so often does though, and to come back to the same point- there are so many coaches out there that there's no reason to hire a guy who may or may not be good at poker. In a perfect world there would be some kind of a third-party disinterested "ratings agency" for coaches. I think someone mentioned that already.

I'd be suspicious of this guy personally because he plays 5/10 but coaches for 120 / hr? I got burned like that already. His PTR is less relevant as that's a year ago and with hard work you can come a long way. It sucks to be so cynical by default, but with my experiences, the incentives for b/e players to become coaches and the numerous scandals I really think extreme skepticism is the only defense.

Martin plays 5/10 live.

Martin plays 5/10 live.

His coaching bio says his regular game is "400 and 600 NL" then it says he plays "600 NL and higher." So you're telling me he doesn't play 5/10 online?

I also figured he played 5/10 from the hand on his blog since for some reason it said "ongame" but also because maybe I had him mixed up with some other guy mentioned here. So Martin, if you are beating 5/10 NL, give yourself a raise. Hell, if you're beating 3/6 NL at a decent clip, think about it.

I stand by my point that skepticism should be the default assumption and is hugely important when choosing a coach.

I think for myself much more than your average guy here and I think I try much harder to catch myself in standard cognitive biases than your average guy here.

lol. I don't know what's funnier, the arrogance or the broad insult at everyone. We hoi polloi may only be able to marvel at your cognitive powers, but even in our thick heads is some reasoning power.

I'm starting to think you're pretty new to all this poker stuff, these are some very simple concepts that you're just not getting. Is it on purpose? What limits do you play? How long have you been playing poker? Your thought processes just seem so ridiculous, there's no way you actually make much money at this, I just don't even know why I keep replying to you.

Sweet! Now it's my turn. And this time your assumption about how much money I make is based on even less. Now we can prop bet on how long I've been playing. Someone we both trust can handle it of course. What stakes do you play? I play between 50NL-200NL depending on withdrawals from my roll.

Cool, I'll spend hours of my time trying to prove a point to some nanostakes guy who has already made up his mind 100%. Great idea.

If it takes hours and hours of your time, maybe you have some cognitive dissonance about your cognitive powers.

Sorry Razor, but your analogies don't really work. Of course, if a coach said something like, "Go all-in every time - and you will be a winner", any person with common sense should get scared shitless and cancel all classes immediately lol (about the same as the gas/brake analogy).

Hey Sneakers. The analogies were exaggerated for effect. Another one would be if you were looking for a coach to race SpecMiata and he started by telling you you'll be racing front wheel drive and the techniques are quite different than what you may have learned, you walk away because Miatas are rear wheel drive. Or if he told you to ride along with him on course and said you didn't need your helmet because he's only going 7/10ths just to show you a few things, then you walk away because safety first and not wearing a helmet will get you thrown out of there.
You might've guessed driving is another hobby of mine, and I've done a few track schools. Couple I liked, one I didn't. In every case, my instructor was a better driver than I, but that didn't stop me from disliking one. That one, I didn't like some of the advice I got. At another, I had two instructors. One told me to lift off the accelerator at one point on the course, and I did. I did it twice, then I stopped doing it because it didn't make sense. So I stopped lifting and got faster. I came back off course and he told me to lift again. I told him I was faster without lifting. He said it was to settle the weight transfer from the drive wheels. I didn't argue, but I had plenty of grip from the drive wheels to accelerate which was proved by my times. I am no otis-level genius at auto racing. Yet I was able to decide for myself if what the guy said was right or not.

lol. I don't know what's funnier, the arrogance or the broad insult at everyone. We hoi polloi may only be able to marvel at your cognitive powers, but even in our thick heads is some reasoning power.

No, that's not true. A lot of people here don't have any reasoning power, there are a lot of fanboys and a ton of people that aren't good at poker or never will be. So long as I'm not in any of those camps I'm definitely on the right side of the bell curve here.

Sweet! Now it's my turn. And this time your assumption about how much money I make is based on even less. Now we can prop bet on how long I've been playing. Someone we both trust can handle it of course. What stakes do you play? I play between 50NL-200NL depending on withdrawals from my roll.

I already told you I play HU from 1/2-5/10 depending on where I get action.

I play from 50-200 "depending on withdrawals" is kinda lol-worthy, I'm sure you're withdrawing literally hundreds of dollars. I'd rather prop-bet your winrate. I'm gonna guess if I looked you up on PTR you are under 2.5 bb for any stakes > 50 NL. Yeah?

If it takes hours and hours of your time, maybe you have some cognitive dissonance about your cognitive powers.

What, were you suggesting I make a 10 minute sweat video? These things take time to setup and to actually play, render two vids, then upload it? Sure I'll do it for my normal rate of $175 / hr. LOL at any other suggestion.

This was a quality thread with some good debates so everyone please refrain from turning it into one that gets locked and stop the bickering.

This was a quality thread with some good debates so everyone please refrain from turning it into one that gets locked and stop the bickering.

GET EM' TECMO!!! THE TRIBE LEADER HAS SPOKEN.