J
jtrain777
Rising Star
Bronze Level
When you ask a poker player what his goal is entering a tournament, invariably he will say, “To win!”I don’ t believe that’s always true, though. If players were truthful with themselves, many would be saying “To finish in the money!” or “Not get knocked out first!” It seems like a “you-say-tomato-I-say-tomahto” difference, but playing to win and playing not to lose are very much different animals. You should have an understanding where you stand on the issue. Winning psychology Winning is great, but in order to focus on that goal, it must be your primary ambition. Winning strategy will dictate how you play throughout the tournament – getting chips early, playing more aggressively around the money bubble and not being afraid to take chances. In poker terms, if you are afraid to lose, you will never be able to win. Sometimes a tournament’s structure can determine your mentality. Some events are extremely top-heavy, where the winner gets a seat to the WSOP Main Event and all the runners-up get a thanks-for-donating pin. In this situation you must play hard the entire way to achieve the goal. The motivation of ’not losing’ The structure of most tournaments is to award 10 per cent of the field with at least their money back. When you finish in the money, there is a reward for your risk even though you didn’t win the contest. You got close, you gave it the college try, but things didn’t go your way. So you slink home-not a winner, but not a loser either. For many players, finishing in the money is the victory. It is a gauge of progress for new players, or a measure of success for experienced veterans. Sure, they didn’t claim first prize, but they were better than 90 per cent of those other losers who finished out of the money. Therefore, playing passively or limping into the money is the game plan when the bubble is close to bursting. I think I can, I think I can . . . Unless you’ve entered a re-buy tournament, no one looks to bust out on the first hand or the first round. There is some credibility to ranking systems where players are rewarded for consistent tournament finishes, even though they didn’t win. This is entirely different from say, a heads-up tournament where there is a winner and a . . . non-winner. An optimist would call it second place, and being called a loser has such negative connotations, so the politically correct term would be “runner-up.” Some players are happy finishing in the money because they understand their requisite skill level does not allow that extra gear to be successful at a final table, or maybe their short-handed game needs work. At the end of the day, for some people, winning is everything and anything less is considered failure. For others, a place or show isn’t all that bad. Your own mindset will often make the difference between a payday, and absolute success.
