Playing the Long Game


Later tonight, I'm headed to the neighborhood dads' poker game. 

Each of these guys has a different playing style. 

  • Some are conservative betters; others are aggressive. 
  • Some play the intellectual game; others get overly emotional.
  • Some get drunk; others capitalize on their competitors' drunkenness. 
  • Some play the short game; others play the long game.
The long game is the collection of small decisions and their resultant successes and failures over a duration. Months. Years. Decades.

When it comes down to success, I wholly believe in the consistency of good decisions is what matters.

I'm probably a below-average poker player. Yet, it's possible for me to sit at a table of world champion players... and win. 

How? By getting lucky enough times when I make bad decisions.

If I sat down against those same players for another 100 games, I'd get crushed in 95+ of them. These guys are stacking good decisions on top of each other. For them, getting lucky means maximizing on an already good decision, as opposed to bailing them out of a bad one. 

*

I work with detective teams that always seem to build the great cases and make the big arrests. I also work with teams who have much less consistency and much less success - but still seem to pull out huge criminal indictments every now and then.

Over time, those detective teams are all being dealt similar hands. We all see the same types of cases, crimes, variables, and clues. The best teams are methodical, precise, adaptive, and intellectual with their process. They don't get hung up on losses, but are still reflective on them. 

I'm attracted to these detectives who continue to stack up good decisions. I love learning from them about their attitudes, behaviors, decision-making processes, philosophies, and influences. 

*

In poker, it's easy to see the winners. Poker is a repetitive, consistent domain with clear objectives for success, that over time, allows the professionals to rise to the top... and send the amateurs to the bottom. 

The working environment for police investigative units operate in a domain that is not nearly as measured or consistent. It's considerably more ambiguous and complex than any structured game, and success can be a matter of subjective perspective.

Regardless, I believe there are lessons that can be transferred - especially an appreciation for and a commitment to the long game.

*

While I fully acknowledge the limitations of comparing "closed-loop" games to "open-loop" life, there are still lessons to be learned. 

I've previously written on learning by playing cards with my grandma and passing along similar to my own kids. Most of those posts focus on developing a strategy within the confines of the game's rules, holding multiple theories in your head, calculating rough odds, making predictions, and adjusting decisions based on feedback loops. (You know -- typical stuff that school never really teaches you.)

 ***

Lou Hayes, Jr. is a detective supervisor in a suburban Chicago police department. He's focused on multi-jurisdictional crime patterns & intelligence, through organic working groups compromised of investigators & analysts from a variety of agencies. With a passion for training, he studies human performance, decision-making, creativity, emotional intelligence, & adaptability. In 2021, he went back to college (remotely!), in hopes to finally finish his undergrad degree from the University of Illinois - Gies College of Business. Follow Lou on LinkedIn, & also the LinkedIn page for The Illinois Model. ***



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Presentation Hack: Your Last Slide(s)

Image
I've written before about introductory presentation slides . When the audience is filtering into the room, I prefer to play a few minimalist slides on a looping show over the typical static slide jammed with titles, organizations, names, events, and logos. (Many of you have circled back to me after having used this trick to share your successes with it! Thanks for trying it!) But what about ending the presentation? What tricks do I use to bring closure to a projected slide deck? How do I handle a summary or a Question-and-Answer session? First let me contrast two (2) different chronologies of the tail ends of presentations: Weaker Ending Final detail point. Grand closing (climax?) "Are there any questions?" Answer them if they're asked. Thank the audience. Awkwardly leave the platform Stronger Ending Final detail point. Brief Summary "Before I get into the final closing, what questions can I answer?" Answer them if they...
Read the entire post here »

Presentation Hack: "For those of you who don't know me..."

Image
I've been to quite a few weddings. Not that I've been invited to more than any of you, but I have moonlighted in a few banquet halls over the years. As such, I've heard my fair share of toasts by Best Men and Maids of Honor. (And eaten my fair share of dinners in the back half.) For many Best Men or Maids of Honor, the dinner toast is one (1) of the most stressful aspects of a wedding weekend for them. Public speaking causes all sorts of anxiety - magnified by the pressure of knowing your failure might ruin your best friend's most special day of his/her life! Yikes! It doesn't take long to determine who is comfortable holding the microphone. And whether I can see the body language or not, it's sometimes the first few words that come out of their mouths that give it away. Few public speaking phrases get me to cringe as reliably and as intensely as an introduction of  "For those of you who don't know me..." This introduc...
Read the entire post here »

The Generalist versus The Specialist

Image
There exists a conspiracy against the Generalist. Today's culture rewards those who Specialize: doctors, athletes, teachers, cops. Being labeled a Generalist comes with ridicule of being luke-warm, a moderate, uncommitted, or without passion. Those images are false. They are hallucinations. Time and time again, life penalizes the Specialist. We never learn from our mistakes. Striking a balance between being a Generalist or a Specialist hinges on one factor: one's confidence in the future . The equation is quite simple -- the greater the predictability of approaching problems, the more one should become the Specialist; the less foresight one has, the more benefit in being the Generalist. This axiom holds for any aspect of life: financial investment, medicine, emergency preparedness, physical fitness, backcountry camping, education, gambling, and of course....law enforcement operations. As with most of our theories, this is a spectrum bookended by two extremes. With a ...
Read the entire post here »