After reading my lengthy introduction to Z cents, someone asked "that's all well and good, but what does that have to do with poker?" So I'm going to try to apply it to your approach to poker at the global, local and micro decision making level. First let's re-identify what the key elements of Z cents are; self awareness of strengths and weaknesses, goals and priorities, and compromise (understanding the other party). We often read in poker how everyone is trying to make an +EV decision. Everyone is trying to reach the ultimate right decision. I don't think there is one right decision that is best for everyone. Certainly there are points when the math of the situation dictate making a certain move but there are plenty of times when it doesn't. The old maxim "it depends" holds sway. But what does it depend on?

Looking from a global perspective first, identify what your goals and priorities are?

1. What is your goal for poker? Do you play poker professionally, as a profitable hobby, or just for fun?
2. What does the money implications mean to you? Can you reload over and over or is this bankroll your ultimate roll?
3. What is your priority? How much time do you have to give poker? Do you have to balance work, home, family or hobbies?

Looking from a local level second, identify how you sit down and play

1. What is your natural style? Do you fall on the more aggro or tight spectrum of play?
2. How many tables can you play optimally?
3. How long do you maintain optimal focus in your sessions?
4. How do you handle losses and the inevitable variance associated with playing?
5. How do you go about selecting tables to play?

Once you have answered the global and local questions you can start to focus on the appropriate micro level potential decisions. For me there is no one right way to play a hand. Brian Townsend or other high stakes professional players would answer the above questions differently than I would and thus their perspective at the table would reflect that difference. An optimal decision in a marginal situation for them might not be the same for you or me when factoring in everything.

I'll use myself as an extreme example. As I've blogged about before, I am not your typical CR player. I am not a professional. My goal is to improve over time and become more profitable long term as a hobby player. I approach my bankroll as the ultimate roll, not to be replaced and reloaded. I don't prioritize playing and have to balance many competing interests from home to work demands.

My natural style is to play TAG, occasionally lapsing to weak tight play at very aggressive tables. I only play one table effectively at a time. I don't have long periods of focused time to play. I don't like tremendous variance and employ a strict stop loss. I take time to select tables that have decent mix of players, stacks and position to suit me.

Adding all these factors together will often lead me to make different decisions at the micro level than another player might. I'll give an example of a marginal hand situation and how different players might play it. Let's say I have 10's on the button, checked to me and I raise pot, with the big blind calling. The flop is Q,8,3 with two diamonds. Checked to me and I make a 3/4 cbet and called. The turn brings a 7. Check, I 1/2 pot bet and called. The river is a non diamond 5 and the OP shoves for a larger than pot bet. Now I haven't given you any prior history which would have a significant bearing on what is the correct +EV decision? In this scenario, you don't have that additional resource of understanding your opponent's perspective. Is it to call or fold? Certainly if you knew he was a floating maniac who likes to outplay people, you might lean toward a call. If he's a very tight player, it might warrant a fold.

In the absence of that information, I would try to use my Z cents. I would employ the collective reasoning described above. For me, I am trying to reduce variance. I play tight, safe poker that preserves my bankroll. I'm not going to play big pots with one pair hands when I can wait for a better spot because i'm only seeing a few big pots playing one table. I've selected this table because I thought there were weak players but not in these marginal situations. My ego doesn't mind being outplayed on one hand as long as I can profit overall. Thus my Z cents would probably opt for the fold.

Another player evaluating the same situation could easily arrive at the correct decision for themself to call. Let's describe that potential player. He is a professional player at the mid limits. His goal is to grow his bankroll quickly and move up limits. He regularly sees significant variance and it doesn't bother him. He regularly 6 tables for 5-6 hours a day. His focus is on poker daily. He plays an aggressive slightly LAG style. He doesn't worry about the table makeup because he plays a more automatic hand range style of play. He feels that against the range of hands of the big blind player, he is often still ahead. The flush draw didn't get there and no straights were possible. He feels that for meta game purposes it's okay to make the call here to inform the table he is not to be pushed off a good hand. He is not to be bluffed. He will use this image in future hands and on the other tables he's playing with the same opponents. Thus his Z cents arrives at his correct decision to call.

I could illustrate using other hands, possibly better marginal situations, but I think you get the idea. The point is that depending on your Z cents at the global and local levels you may arrive at different decisions at the micro level. One decision isn't more correct than the other. It is more important that you have effectively evaluated your perspective towards the game so you can live with your decisions. Your Z cents influences how you play a hand in different situations. The important aspect is to be constantly thinking about the factors that make up your Z cents so that it is optimally tailored to achieve your goals and priorities. If they are out of alignment, you won't probably see the results you are looking for and will need to adjust.