Results-based thinking and what poker taught me

Having invested a lot of time into poker theory, I have often stumbled across situations where results-based thinking is a common and attractive fallacy. It is easy to say: “I won the pot, so I made the right call”. But often, this is wrong. Life, like poker, is not deterministic. This means that often, we cannot tell good decisions from bad just based on the results they produced.

Results-based thinking in poker

In poker, the best player does not win every pot or hand. The best players know how to win the most with good hands and lose the least with bad hands. The goal is to play every hand to it’s utmost potential while accepting situations that only increase losses.

A good poker player will attempt to play their cards as best as possible but knows that sometimes simply gets unlucky and loses a hand or session. This makes improving at the game quite tricky because often, good decisions yield bad results and vice versa. Just because one got lucky and got a full house when playing seven-two off-suit (considered the worst hand in Texas Hold’em), does not mean it is a good idea to keep playing these cards in the same way over and over again.

To ameliorate the problem of judging one’s decision only by regarding the outcome, there are multiple options:

• Using mathematical models to analyze the likelihoods of all outcomes and calculating the expected value (where possible)
• Letting some time go by and look at the situation without the biases experienced at the poker-table
• If possible, analyzing the situation when the results have been forgotten and looking at the decisions only

All of these options aim at improving decision-making and learning from failures. Sometimes, a hand that won a huge pot was actually played terribly and if no reflection is made afterward, the wrong lessons will be learned.

Obviously, one should not entirely ignore the results of one’s actions. If one’s own actions repeatedly produce results that leave much to be desired, one should not delude oneself into thinking it is just bad luck. If a poker player keeps losing at the table, they should seriously reconsider their choices. Are the opposing players too good? Are there general mistakes in their play?

This is where sample size comes into play. One lost hand does not prove a mistake, but if one keeps losing money when getting dealt pocket aces (the best hand in Hold’em) over many hands, there is obviously something wrong that cannot be blamed on bad luck. If results stay bad/good consistently, then the underlying actions are likely to also be bad/good.

Similarities to every-day life and stoicism

In life, one often has to make decisions with unclear outcomes. The full repercussions can often only be seen after the fact. This means that similar issues and biases can cloud one’s mind as in poker.

Stoicism talks about the principle of making the right decisions without minding the results. This concept can help make better choices and deal with setbacks. To me, this concept has always reminded me of poker and I still often think about life being one large session of poker with many hands being dealt. In my opinion, a person’s life should not be measured by the cards they are dealt, but by how they play them.

Viktor Frankl’s book “Man’s Search for Meaning” is a great example. He has been arguably dealt one of the worst hands possible but has found meaning in his toil in Nazi concentration camps, helping other inmates as well as keeping his will to live. I highly recommend the read, the book put my own struggles into perspective (they are obviously not in the same league) and demonstrated that I can always take responsibility for my life, even when the circumstances are bad and it is difficult to stay motivated to keep going.

The benefits of focusing on actions instead of results

The attempt to only judge one’s own actions and not the results is a great way to take charge of one’s own life. Even if results turn out worse than expected, the focus remains on what is within one’s own control. This type of thinking has given me more opportunities to accept what I cannot control while being mindful of what I can control.

By knowing that after my own decisions, the results are out of my hands, I feel more at ease when making larger decisions because I know, there is not a perfect decision, since unlike poker, I do not know too many variables; there is only a reasonable decision. This puts my mind at ease and helps me be more decisive, while also giving me more chances to improve my own behavior.