What poker can teach us about post-mortems
summary
Argument: post-mortems often mistake unlucky outcomes for bad decisions; variance means you can do everything right and still lose. Poker specifics show how to judge bets: a $3 call into a $7 pot with 8 outs is 8/46 ≈ 17.9% so EV = $2.33 < $3, fold; the coin game yields $2.50 EV per play. Tools for review include Equilab and PokerStove. Real build example: a consumer-phone monitoring wall that produced false alarms gets decommissioned then later might have mitigated an outage — it informed whether the original choice actually worked.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (16)
- 0:00Intro
- 0:16WHAT POKER CAN TEACH US ABOUT POST-MORTEMS CORY CHAMBLIN
- 6:27HOW TO BE GOOD AT POKER
- 6:58MAKING GOOD BETS
- 11:41EXPECTED VALUE (EV)
- 16:48POST MORTEM OF A POKER HAND
- 20:57RESULTS ORIENTED THINKING
- 24:43Data, you're being results- oriented. — Picard (not really)
- 27:13QUESTIONS FOR MORE EFFECTIVE POST-MORTEMS
- 27:36SHOULD WE HAVE PREVENTED THIS?
- 28:16SHOULD WE PREVENT THIS IN THE FUTURE?
- 29:53DID WE UNDERSTAND THIS RISK UP-FRONT?
- 30:45HOW SHOULD OUR DECISION MAKING CHANGE IN THE FUTURE?
- 32:02POST- MORTEMS
- 33:00FAILURE
- 33:20IN THE LONG RUN, ONLY THE LONG RUN MATTERS
