|
Every now and then being contrarian is a good idea just to make sure that you have a solid reason for knowing what you know. Many people assimilate information in poker and never question that information because it happens to come from a source that they place higher than their own position in terms of poker authority. Using poker authorities for gleaning information is a good idea, but at the same time it is important to question everything. There is no room for robotic thinking in poker, because it is ultimately a game of critical thinking.
Consider, as a way to start this exercise in being contrarian, what most poker authorities will say about poker players and their end of day book. When you read most of the authors, what you will read is them saying that most players tend to think they do better than they actually do. In other words, losing players think they break even and break even players think they win. This is ostensibly put forward as a reason for why you should keep a book on your poker sessions, so that you know exactly what is going on.
However, consider playing poker in a game that is raked. With a small amount being taken from each pot, you are essentially getting charged money in order to sit at the table. This is why it is quite possible that if you think you are a break even player, you might be a losing player because of the rake. Similarly, if you think you are a winning player, you might be a break even player because of the rake. If you win in home games and break even in the casino, it might be because of the stiffer competition or it might be because of the added cost of the rake. So it could actually be that a lot of players are right about their own self-estimation, but need to factor the rake in to make it more accurate.
This is not to disagree with poker authorities, as they are correct about most players overestimating their poker skills, but it is to point out that sometimes there are other elements in play worth considering.
| 
