KotiRyhmätKeskusteluLisääAjan henki
Etsi sivustolta
Tämä sivusto käyttää evästeitä palvelujen toimittamiseen, toiminnan parantamiseen, analytiikkaan ja (jos et ole kirjautunut sisään) mainostamiseen. Käyttämällä LibraryThingiä ilmaiset, että olet lukenut ja ymmärtänyt käyttöehdot ja yksityisyydensuojakäytännöt. Sivujen ja palveluiden käytön tulee olla näiden ehtojen ja käytäntöjen mukaista.

Tulokset Google Booksista

Pikkukuvaa napsauttamalla pääset Google Booksiin.

Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions…
Ladataan...

Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don't Have All the Facts (vuoden 2018 painos)

Tekijä: Annie Duke (Tekijä)

JäseniäKirja-arvostelujaSuosituimmuussijaKeskimääräinen arvioMaininnat
5931739,388 (3.63)3
Business. Psychology. Nonfiction. HTML:Wall Street Journal bestseller!

Poker champion turned business consultant Annie Duke teaches you how to get comfortable with uncertainty and make better decisions as a result.


In Super Bowl XLIX, Seahawks coach Pete Carroll made one of the most controversial calls in football history: With 26 seconds remaining, and trailing by four at the Patriots' one-yard line, he called for a pass instead of a hand off to his star running back. The pass was intercepted and the Seahawks lost. Critics called it the dumbest play in history. But was the call really that bad? Or did Carroll actually make a great move that was ruined by bad luck?

Even the best decision doesn't yield the best outcome every time. There's always an element of luck that you can't control, and there is always information that is hidden from view. So the key to long-term success (and avoiding worrying yourself to death) is to think in bets: How sure am I? What are the possible ways things could turn out? What decision has the highest odds of success? Did I land in the unlucky 10% on the strategy that works 90% of the time? Or is my success attributable to dumb luck rather than great decision making?

Annie Duke, a former World Series of Poker champion turned business consultant, draws on examples from business, sports, politics, and (of course) poker to share tools anyone can use to embrace uncertainty and make better decisions. For most people, it's difficult to say "I'm not sure" in a world that values and, even, rewards the appearance of certainty. But professional poker players are comfortable with the fact that great decisions don't always lead to great outcomes and bad decisions don't always lead to bad outcomes.

By shifting your thinking from a need for certainty to a goal of accurately assessing what you know and what you don't, you'll be less vulnerable to reactive emotions, knee-jerk biases, and destructive habits in your decision making. You'll become more confident, calm, compassionate and successful in the long run.
… (lisätietoja)
Jäsen:dlawisch
Teoksen nimi:Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don't Have All the Facts
Kirjailijat:Annie Duke (Tekijä)
Info:Portfolio (2018), Edition: Illustrated, 288 pages
Kokoelmat:Oma kirjasto
Arvio (tähdet):
Avainsanoja:to-read

Teostiedot

Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don't Have All the Facts (tekijä: Annie Duke)

Ladataan...

Kirjaudu LibraryThingiin nähdäksesi, pidätkö tästä kirjasta vai et.

Ei tämänhetkisiä Keskustelu-viestiketjuja tästä kirjasta.

» Katso myös 3 mainintaa

Näyttää 1-5 (yhteensä 17) (seuraava | näytä kaikki)
As with most advice books, your mileage will likely vary depending on how many of the behaviours prescribed you already engage in, and/or whether you find the strategies herein useful for yourself.

Respectively, I tend to do many of the things Duke advocates for automatically (adjust for risk, discount skill effects on the past, keep an eye on the future), and so while I unreservedly recommend that section to anybody who feels like this sounds helpful for them, it wasn't necessarily my jam. Her strategies for assisting other people in doing this and for making them complicit in improving my own decision-making are pretty great, though, and offered new ideas for me to try. So I am very appreciative of that.

I can't help but feel like this is one of those books that should have been somewhat shorter and was forced up to a certain length by a publisher, but I don't think that is necessarily Duke's fault.

Also, perhaps she is a bit too generous with her estimate of (this) readers' brain-power. She mentions that it is important to learn from every player at the poker table and to not discount anybody because of perceived skill-level - I would have an extremely difficult time learning from more than one player at the poker table simply because I don't have enough mental bandwidth to process more than that.

In any case, especially well worth reading if one wants a self-help book to validate the side of you that thinks more math will improve your life, certainly. ( )
  danieljensen | Oct 14, 2022 |
Very thinly stretched content, this is largely about reiterating a few admittedly good points over and over again. Most of the advice boils down to: instead of saying you think something is true or false, ask yourself how sure you are and consider other possibilities, then try to avoid hindsight bias.

That advice then gets re-framed by annecdote and example repeatedly. At one point the idea of a Ulysses contract is explained in about half a page and it's a good, clear explanation. But then it gets re-explained several times for the next two pages. Overall this feels like a corporate seminar presentation excessively padded out to justify the printing of a book. ( )
  ElegantMechanic | May 28, 2022 |
Annie Duke makes me want to play poker again. I don't think that's the point of the book.

I'm going to take one big lesson from this book. The right strategy may still result in a bad result. She put a little blurb about how in her poker strategy classes, she teaches the strategy but purposely avoids telling the result. A sound strategy is a sound strategy. ( )
  wellington299 | Feb 19, 2022 |
I preferred The Biggest Bluff by Maria Konnikova to this book. Both were books about poker but I got more insights and ideas about psychology and decision making from the Konnikova book. I read 50-60% of the Duke book and it just felt repetitious to me. I had a hard time motivating myself to read more. ( )
  writemoves | Oct 26, 2021 |
I recently saw a stack of seven books on a city manager's desk; one was a dictionary of finance terms and another was The Daily Stoic and I decided to read the other five, of which this was one. Cognitive biases and decision making with incomplete information from a different perspective - poker. I think that the premise is sound, but the deliverables fall short. Ms. Duke says, "So this is not a book about poker strategy or gambling. It is, however, about things poker taught me about learning and decision-making." And it is a book full of poker and pop culture anecdotes (some repeated a few times...) with more focus on the stories than any actual lessons learned. Duke also cited a lot of books I was less than impressed with...The Power of Habit, The Righteous Mind, Kahneman's... but she also gave me two jumping off points with a couple of books I need to find. Overall, I was not all that impressed with this book, but as always, there is merit to be found. Some selected takeaways:

"We link results with decisions even though it is easy to point out indisputable examples where the relationship between decisions and results isn’t so perfectly correlated." All too common a misconception.

"When I consult with executives, I sometimes start with this exercise. I ask group members to come to our first meeting with a brief description of their best and worst decisions of the previous year. I have yet to come across someone who doesn’t identify their best and worst results rather than their best and worst decisions." Key difference.

"Over time, those world-class poker players taught me to understand what a bet really is: a decision about an uncertain future. The implications of treating decisions as bets made it possible for me to find learning opportunities in uncertain environments." Or, simply treating decisions as not needing complete information...

This is how we think we form abstract beliefs: We hear something; We think about it and vet it, determining whether it is true or false; only after that We form our belief. It turns out, though, that we actually form abstract beliefs this way: We hear something; We believe it to be true; Only sometimes, later, if we have the time or the inclination, we think about it and vet it, determining whether it is, in fact, true or false.
She further says, "It doesn’t take much for any of us to believe something. And once we believe it, protecting that belief guides how we treat further information relevant to the belief. This is perhaps no more evident than in the rise in prominence of “fake news” and disinformation." This is sound.

SCOTUS Justice Clarence
Thomas once said, “I won’t hire clerks who have profound disagreements with me. It’s like trying to train a pig. It wastes your time, and it aggravates the pig.”* That makes sense only if you believe the goal of a decision group is to train people to agree with you. But if your goal is to develop the best decision process, that is an odd sentiment indeed.
It did not surprise me that Thomas was so blind. His decisions reflect that.

Duke nailed this
We treat outcomes as good signals for decision quality, as if we were playing chess. If the outcome is known, it will bias the assessment of the decision quality to align with the outcome quality.
[...]
Pete Carroll and the world of Monday Morning Quarterbacks could have used the judge’s reminder that we tend to assume that, once something happens, it was bound to happen. If we don’t try to hold all the potential futures in mind before one of them happens, it becomes almost impossible to realistically evaluate decisions or probabilities after.

A good mental checklist:
When we think in bets, we run through a series of questions to examine the accuracy of our beliefs. For example: Why might my belief not be true? What other evidence might be out there bearing on my belief? Are there similar areas I can look toward to gauge whether similar beliefs to mine are true? What sources of information could I have missed or minimized on the way to reaching my belief? What are the reasons someone else could have a different belief, what’s their support, and why might they be right instead of me? What other perspectives are there as to why things turned out the way they did?


Duke talks about how some focus on their successes and relates a story about Phil Ivey (poker dude) who had just won a huge tournament. She notes where most would have talked about their victory,
Not Ivey. For him, the opportunity to learn from his mistakes was much more important than treating that dinner as a self-satisfying celebration. He earned a half-million dollars and won a lengthy poker tournament over world-class competition, but all he wanted to do was discuss with a fellow pro where he might have made better decisions.
Elites in any field can work those details. A tennis player will work on a seemingly insignificant wrist twist; a runner can adjust arm motions: and I knew a bridge grandmaster 40 years ago who could recall hands from months or even years earlier and analyze where the bidding or play went wrong. It's a good practice to ask "how can I have done better", even if the outcome was better than expected. ( )
  Razinha | Sep 4, 2021 |
Näyttää 1-5 (yhteensä 17) (seuraava | näytä kaikki)
ei arvosteluja | lisää arvostelu
Sinun täytyy kirjautua sisään voidaksesi muokata Yhteistä tietoa
Katso lisäohjeita Common Knowledge -sivuilta (englanniksi).
Teoksen kanoninen nimi
Alkuteoksen nimi
Teoksen muut nimet
Alkuperäinen julkaisuvuosi
Henkilöt/hahmot
Tärkeät paikat
Tärkeät tapahtumat
Kirjaan liittyvät elokuvat
Epigrafi (motto tai mietelause kirjan alussa)
Omistuskirjoitus
Ensimmäiset sanat
Sitaatit
Viimeiset sanat
Erotteluhuomautus
Julkaisutoimittajat
Kirjan kehujat
Alkuteoksen kieli
Kanoninen DDC/MDS
Kanoninen LCC

Viittaukset tähän teokseen muissa lähteissä.

Englanninkielinen Wikipedia

-

Business. Psychology. Nonfiction. HTML:Wall Street Journal bestseller!

Poker champion turned business consultant Annie Duke teaches you how to get comfortable with uncertainty and make better decisions as a result.


In Super Bowl XLIX, Seahawks coach Pete Carroll made one of the most controversial calls in football history: With 26 seconds remaining, and trailing by four at the Patriots' one-yard line, he called for a pass instead of a hand off to his star running back. The pass was intercepted and the Seahawks lost. Critics called it the dumbest play in history. But was the call really that bad? Or did Carroll actually make a great move that was ruined by bad luck?

Even the best decision doesn't yield the best outcome every time. There's always an element of luck that you can't control, and there is always information that is hidden from view. So the key to long-term success (and avoiding worrying yourself to death) is to think in bets: How sure am I? What are the possible ways things could turn out? What decision has the highest odds of success? Did I land in the unlucky 10% on the strategy that works 90% of the time? Or is my success attributable to dumb luck rather than great decision making?

Annie Duke, a former World Series of Poker champion turned business consultant, draws on examples from business, sports, politics, and (of course) poker to share tools anyone can use to embrace uncertainty and make better decisions. For most people, it's difficult to say "I'm not sure" in a world that values and, even, rewards the appearance of certainty. But professional poker players are comfortable with the fact that great decisions don't always lead to great outcomes and bad decisions don't always lead to bad outcomes.

By shifting your thinking from a need for certainty to a goal of accurately assessing what you know and what you don't, you'll be less vulnerable to reactive emotions, knee-jerk biases, and destructive habits in your decision making. You'll become more confident, calm, compassionate and successful in the long run.

Kirjastojen kuvailuja ei löytynyt.

Kirjan kuvailu
Yhteenveto haiku-muodossa

Current Discussions

-

Suosituimmat kansikuvat

Pikalinkit

Arvio (tähdet)

Keskiarvo: (3.63)
0.5
1 3
1.5
2 9
2.5 1
3 30
3.5 6
4 36
4.5 1
5 21

Oletko sinä tämä henkilö?

Tule LibraryThing-kirjailijaksi.

 

Lisätietoja | Ota yhteyttä | LibraryThing.com | Yksityisyyden suoja / Käyttöehdot | Apua/FAQ | Blogi | Kauppa | APIs | TinyCat | Perintökirjastot | Varhaiset kirja-arvostelijat | Yleistieto | 202,131,890 kirjaa! | Yläpalkki: Aina näkyvissä