Texas Holdem Poker Online – Risk stratification theory
Because in the world of traders, risk means loss, loss means failure, and failure means …… In short, many unpleasant things are caused by these two words, so countless traders I have talked to have put risk control at the forefront of their trading systems.
Some of them do their best to optimize their systems in the hope of achieving risk aversion, but the reality is cruel.
They believe that losses are an inevitable cost of the trading system and that if you deliberately avoid risk, you lose the opportunity to make a profit from the market.
I have had a lot of opportunities to repeatedly confront the most fundamental aspects of risk because of my own different experiences, and these different experiences have led me to my own unique understanding and view of risk in trading, which I call risk stratification theory.
In my view of trading, I believe that risk is not a single constant, but a hierarchy.
Texas Holdem Poker Online – Why did I come to this conclusion?
It starts with my experience as a professional poker player. In the reply from Uncle Fox, I read this paragraph, “Originally I felt that 80% of the market condition might be a big opportunity, but the result did not come out, and after being brushed several times and missing a big opportunity, my mind became unbalanced, resulting in a chaotic market, and finally lost 20% before I stopped.” In the course of my own poker game, I often experience much more extreme situations than this.
I remember one time at the end of the game, I was alone with a player and had one last card to deal, and there were already three diamonds on the table, and I had two diamonds in my hand, the biggest of which was the jack of diamonds, and I had already made a flower. My opponent had to deal one more diamond to beat me, and he had two cards in his hand, one of which was a useless miscellaneous card, and the other was the king of diamonds.
There are only 13 diamonds in the whole deck, and now we have taken 3 of them, and 3 of them have been dealt on the table (5 cards are dealt on the table, and now 4 have been dealt, and the last one is left), that is 13-6=7 and there are 7 diamonds, and there are 52 cards in the deck excluding the big and small kings. The last card is dealt from the remaining 35 cards, so the probability of him beating me is only 7*35=20%, my chance of winning is 80% and my opponent’s chance of winning is 20%, so you should be happy, right?
Then before the last card was dealt, he could call one more bet and he asked me, “How much money do you have left? I answered 50,000 in total, and he said well, I’ll bet all your money, 50,000! I didn’t need any deep thinking just 1 second to confirm that he was stealing the chicken, his hand was now almost impossible to be bigger than mine, but by placing a huge bet, he actually gave me a huge pressure because he directly pressed all my money on the table. Although I was sure he was stealing the chicken, hoping to force me to fold and steal the bottom pot with a huge amount of money, the absolute amount of money in a total pot of over 120,000 still put a lot of pressure on me. (We both bet over 60,000 on the last hand, so the total was over 120,000.) Of course, I didn’t have any other choice but to call.
I was naturally quite happy to find out that he only had a king after the opening hand, because I’m already quite professional at playing this game, and I knew by doing some silent calculations that my chances of winning were 80%, four times that of my opponent. A square!
I made no mistakes in probability, judgment, calculation, or guts, and I lost a six-figure pot. In a matter of 3 minutes!
How would you feel if it were you?
And I can also tell you that although the previous incident can be considered a small probability event from the perspective of probability, the fact is that we all encounter it every day in poker, and many poker players will lose control of their minds once they encounter such a situation, just like Uncle Fox. So although I am determined to play a hand (that is, only if the probability of winning is greater than the opponent’s premise to play with the opponent in the end, do so because there is an obvious probability advantage in the long run), but can not help but always be a small probability hand, and the absolute amount is also quite large.
So in your free time, you will also talk with your friends who play poker together about how to avoid this situation from happening. The result of the discussion is very frustrating, that is, we found that this kind of risk no matter how we do it is inevitable, we call it “systemic risk”.