Interview with Mike Caro

I prepared for the interview with Mike Caro as I always do, by doing some research and making a long list of questions that I usually don’t get to, but like to have in case the interviewee needs a lot of prompting. With Mike, I think I asked two prepared questions, and he was off and running. I tossed the rest of the questions away and buckled in for the ride, as he seized on one topic after another, following the whimsical rhythms of his thought patterns without ever losing his enthusiasm or running out of steam. I had the feeling he could talk all night if he cared to. The interview eventually covered so much ground it had to be cut into two parts. A gentleman, a scholar, an encyclopedia of poker legend and lore, he has seen the world of poker inside and out, written numerous books and articles, and compiled countless statistics, maintaining throughout it all a vigorous curiosity and a humorous sense of the absurd. Sit back, relax, and come along on a journey into the mind of a truly unique individual, just don’t ask for a tour of the campus at the Mike Caro University of Poker.

MF: You’re known as the mad genius of poker. I have to ask what exactly are you mad at?

MC: (laughs) Hopefully, its not that kind of mad, it’s more of a marginal insanity.

MF: That’s a great answer

MC: I’m capable of feigning sanity anytime, which allows me to be in business meetings and to be taken seriously in consultation and such, like that, so I can force myself out of this . . . my atmosphere of total madness in order to feign sanity at moment’s notice. I pride myself on that ability.

MF: That’s an excellent quality to have. I happen to think life exists on that level, a kind of mass marginal insanity. And most geniuses are slightly off kilter, though it’s probably because they see things differently. Of course, I wouldn’t know . . .

MC: I agree life itself is an exercise in sorting out insanity and making . . . finding patterns that make it more sensible. I think life is, in fact, a quest for sanity. I think that’s a very apt observation.

MF: Let’s start with a little background. I know this is probably been asked a million times, but would you care to talk about where you were raised and how that impacted you or formed you in any way?

MC: Well, I was an only child, and I was probably spoiled. I was lucky to have a mother who always thought I could do anything, but I went through periods where I was considered retarded.

MF: Interesting. You’re serious?

MC: Actually, yes. I was held back in the 6th grade and put in a special retarded class because people thought that there was something wrong with me. I guess they didn’t have ways to measure things in those days like they can do now. It was like the 6th grade, personally I was very fascinated with astronomy, I read avidly, but at the time I just couldn’t come out of my shell, or be able to do anything but probably daydream in classes.

MF: I understand.

MC: I spent about a week in an actual retarded class, at which point the women teacher, whose name I’ve long forgotten, bothered to do some more investigating, and talked to me on a personal level, and I was taken out of that retarded class and put in to the accelerated class.

MF: (laughs) That’s quite a leap.

MC: In the same day, I went from a retarded class to an accelerated class.
I was only interested in cards back then, too. I was just fascinated with cards, mainly.
My grand parents and my parents played cards a lot, not so much poker, but other games. I would make my own games with cards.

MF: Wow.

MC: I kind of developed a personality that lingers to this day. That I am . . . I am kind of a hermit at heart. I go back to the days when I was making up card games and playing them with myself rather than with the other children. I recently kind of abandoned the Los Angeles area and the Las Vegas area and moved to Table Rock Lake in Missouri.

MF: The Ozarks?

MC: In the Ozarks. I have like 31 acres on the lake here, I’ve made pathways all through the forest, and I hang out there all the time. Between my computer work, which includes not just programming but writing columns, books, and doing other research, I spend a lot of time in the forest. When I come back, I’m surrounded by computers. Any room I walk into there’s a computer waiting for me, it’s just such a contrast. If people want to know what’s really going on with the Mike Caro University of Poker, which is headquartered here in Ozarks, that’s basically the core of it.

People ask me what the University is, and I answer–and I’ve done this many times to reporters who have not dissuaded me from promoting it– is that it’s a hoax.

MF: A hoax?

MC: Well, the University is a hoax. We’ve been on the front page of the Los Angeles Business Magazine, which I got a kick out of, but there is no Mike Caro University of Poker.

MF: You mean in the physical sense?

MC: You can look it up on the Internet, and you’ll probably find thousands of entries about it, but it does not exist. I founded it at Hollywood Park Casino, which is in Inglewood, and I had my first headquarters there, and we had plans when I launched it to do graduate programs and we would be a very formal kind of university-type environment. But what happened was I started out doing beginners courses and some intermediate courses, and they were very well structured, and then I kind of drifted out of my schedule, which I am want to do, and we ended up being an organization that does a lot of research, all mind research basically, and puts its imprint on books and videos and I go all over the world doing seminars on poker, which are presented by the Mike Caro University of Poker, but as far as getting the graduate degrees and the real disciplined structure, I haven’t gotten there yet. So when people ask me about it, the simplest way to explain it is that it’s a hoax.

MF: Well, for something that’s a hoax, you’ve certainly churned out a valuable inventory of articles and observations, and tips, and things of that nature.

MC: Well I think MCU has done some really good things, but it just hasn’t turned out to be the disciplined format with a campus and students coming to classes, and a staff, and, you know, professors and the graduate degrees that I envisioned. It’s kind of gone in a whole other direction. The most notable incarnation of MCU is probably at Poker1.com, which is the home of MCU, where I am in the process of adding tons of information and research, so I think that will evolve.

MF: Well, it’s great because it sort of reflects the way you go about things. You follow things that interest you.

MC: I do. I’m coming out with a book, and the interesting title is ‘Professional Hold’em Play by Play’ and it’s from a whole series of books I’m envisioning called, ‘Professional Poker Play by Play.’ My publisher, Cardoza Publishing, keeps asking where it is because they started asking for it about 2 years ago. I just have ultimate answer, because I can show him a large ad that ran for six straight months from over ten years ago, advertising this book coming out, and how it will profoundly change poker forever. Actually, this book will probably come out later this year, but it was advertised ten years ago for six months running. Some people have told me that I have taken irresponsibility to a whole new level. (laughs)

MF: Well that’s your right. That’s everyone’s right. We get too controlled by external forces, right? You have not allowed that to happen. I think it’s great.

MC: Yeah, but I mean well. I don’t do these things intentionally they just end up getting dropped. I work on so many projects simultaneously, which I know is not a good organizational strategy, and then they tend to come out in batches.

MF: I think what you’re saying is, the important ones get done, the ones that may not be as important fall by the wayside.

MC: The reason I’m saying this is because you made the comment earlier that I kind of get sidetracked, and all I can say about that is: boy howdy!

MF: I actually envy you, speaking as a person with a schedule dictated by things not directly under my control.

MC: Well, what drives me crazy is I have so many columns to get out, that I have to impose deadlines and I’m sure people in the publishing industry just drop dead. I remember for 12 years, I wrote the lead column for CardPlayer, which I am no longer affiliated with. I write the cover column for Poker Player Newspaper right now, I write a strategy column for Bluff magazine, another one for Casino Player, but those all have deadlines and I don’t take well to deadlines. Now I’ve never missed, in 800, maybe 900, I don’t know how many columns I’ve written, I have never missed an issue. I just cannot–my character, something in my persona, something deep within me–just won’t let me ever get anything in on time. I know everybody’s always worried, but I always come through. One time I was in the composition room at Cardplayer, and on the wall, there was a picture of me with a target around it and the caption, “the late Mike Caro.”

MF: What? Oh, I get it.

MC: I guess it had a double meaning.

MF: That’s pretty good. Well, isn’t there something in the universe that hates our little schedules and plans?

MC: There is something in the universe, and I think it’s Mike Caro.

MF: You are an acknowledged master of the psychology of poker, and with the popularity of online poker, how can someone apply some of your famous observations playing on the Internet where it is primarily faceless?

MC: Yeah, you really can’t. The closest you can come to that is determine who is trying to bull the game, you know, be very aggressive, and what the temperaments are, and of course there are many strategies you modify in accordance with how they’re playing. But 90% of my work has been in statistics and analysis, including computer simulations, going way back, and are probably more widely quoted than the work that I’ve done on poker psychology. But what I enjoy more is to get out of that kind of clinical mode of cold analysis, and actually see how poker relates to the masses.

When I play on Doyles Room, I don’t know if you know this, but I endorse Doyles Room exclusively, but when I play there, I do miss the opportunities to interface with players. I love manipulating opponents. I love chatting them up, I love getting tells, eliciting tells, I just think that is the most intriguing part of poker. And on the other hand, I don’t do it the way some others do, I never try to irritate an opponent, I never minimize their playing ability.

MF: Or compromise their dignity.

MC: Yeah, I want my opponents to giggle. I feel that when players are giggling and having fun, they’ll give some discretionary money to you, making, you know, marginal calls. I think the road to profit is to be popular at the poker table.

MF: Yeah, it’s almost like they are giving you a form of payment for entertaining them.

MC: Yeah, and what you’ve really done is you’ve given them permission to play poorly because what you are accomplishing is you’re making it less painful to lose to you specifically than if someone is going to jump down their throat if they make a bad play.

MF: Outstanding advice. You’ve also called it . . . let me get this right, “Poker is a game of quiet conquest.”

MC: I don’t recall having said that, but I’m sure I did. It feels comfortable to me, I like that. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

MF: Yeah, I interpret it as you’re not showy, not a source of irritation, or annoyance.

MC: Well, I’m not quiet at the table, though. This doesn’t apply to my demeanor. I’m not someone who just sits there and is invisible; I want to engage my opponent. I’m very animated at the poker table, but I never try to do this in a way that annoys people. I try to do it in a way that enhances the poker. I teach my students that the first thing they need to look for in a game is laughter. If you want to shop around for a good game, look for one that has laughter, because laughter is where the profit is. That means the people are not playing that seriously, they’re playing more for the enjoyment, and that’s where the profit is.

MF: Do you think that’s one of the deficiencies of online poker, it can seem to some as if it’s almost an antisocial endeavor of sorts?

MC: Well, yes, but on the other hand you can have fun and chat up your opponents. When I’m playing at Doyles Room under my own name, they have these Bounty tournaments every week, I’m constantly chatting. Doyle is bewildered at how I can do this, but being at a keyboard so frequently, I can type almost as fast as I can talk. So I can carry on coherent chat conversations, and hopefully, still play effectively. But I suppose that would be the closest equivalent there is right now to socializing at a real world poker table. I perceive that this will change, I mean it’s only around the corner, neither you nor I can envision a time 20 years from now when it’s evolved to the state where you will be able to see your opponent and play online at the same time. I mean it’s just an extension of teleconferencing.

MF: That’s a good point. I am personally interested, and I’m sure you’ve told this many times, but how did you meet Doyle? How did that come about? How did you form a bond with him?

MC: Doyle won the World Series of Poker in 1976, and then again in 1977. Someone decided they wanted to approach him about writing a book. At the time, there really wasn’t a lot of profound poker literature. There were some books out there, but they were mostly guesswork, more homespun wisdom. There wasn’t a lot of analysis. I was playing poker in California where all the games were 5 Card Draw Poker, by law. I had done a lot of research, but I kept it to myself. Doyle decided to go ahead and do the book, which resulted in the original ‘Super System.’ He would do the No Limit Texas Hold’em on his own, but would get expert collaborators. He would also write the other sections, but he would do it in conjunction with who he thought were the best players in the world in the other games. And he decided I was the best player in the world in Draw Poker, which, I can say modestly, is correct. Unfortunately, you never see anyone play Draw Poker anymore in a public arena, so I would like to say that they retired the game in my honor. (laughs)

So I was the expert, and he actually flattered me, although he wrote many chapters under his own name, I got to write the Draw section under my own name. Plus I did all the statistics. There were no accurate poker statistics at the time that Doyles Super System came out, and if you look in the back of the first Super System, you’ll see like 50 tables that I did, of all perfectly accurate statistics, and I think they’re probably the most widely quoted. You could look at books that predated it, and there are just so many mistakes. Interestingly, they were lifted for another book by a famous person, John Scarney, the preeminent gambling authority in his day, back in the 70’s and 80’s, and he was a very accomplished magician, by the way. But he had seen my statistics in Doyle’s book, and came into the office and asked we minded if he used some of my statistics. And I said no, that I’d be flattered. Unfortunately, he didn’t credit me for them; he just put them in a different format.

MF: That’s pretty rude.

MC: Yeah, well, you might think that this could be libelous, and I can tell you that it isn’t. He obviously had some underling copying these tables and change them. Now here’s one thing that people are not aware of. You have a very famous book that came out called, ‘Scarney on Modern Poker.’ In my introduction to my tables, at the very last line leading into the tables I say, ‘These tables were done by me personally, and are accurate beyond question.’ Scarney comes out with his book, and whoever he had copy the tables, it ends with the line, ‘These tables were done by me personally, and are accurate beyond question.’ Then after ellipsis, added, ‘ . . . I hope.’ Kind of proof beyond any reasonable doubt (laughs). I never even confronted him about it.

MF: That’s because you’re a gentleman, in the truest sense of the word.

MC: (laughs) Anyway, that’s how I met Doyle Brunson while writing this book, and we spent a lot of time together. Okay, so now we’re there in Las Vegas, and Doyle gets talked into, you know, Doyle being a poker player and not so much a businessman, he gets talked into putting out a book and the guy convinces him to lease out a big office building and he had a big staff, and, at the time this was unheard of–computer typesetting equipment– all this to put out one book. So I sit there for the whole project and we put the book out, and I went back to playing in California. A few weeks, a month later, he calls me on the phone, (MC imitates Doyles voice) ‘Mike, I’ve been thinking.’ (laughs) ‘We have this big building and all these people working for us’ . . . and I’ll never forget this, he says, ‘You think we should put out another book?’ (laughs)

So we decide to put out Bobby Baldwin’s book. Now Bobby Baldwin, after 1976 and 1977 when Doyle won the WSOP, Bobby won the main event. At the time, I didn’t even play tournaments; what you have to understand about me is that I’m not a tournament player. So, they decide I’m going to write Bobby’s book, which by the way is still in print. About his life story and how he got good and some poker advice, this is the idea. So every day we go down to Doyle’s office where he has all this stuff and everything, and we all sit down and say we’re going to talk about the book, but after a few minutes go by, we decide, screw it, we’re gonna go play poker. And this goes on for weeks and weeks and weeks. Then Doyle puts down an edict. ‘You know, we’re gonna get this done. Here’s what we’re gonna do. We’re gonna go up to Lake Tahoe, we’re gonna rent a boat, we’re gonna go out to the middle of the lake, the three of us, and we’re gonna interview Bobby.’ (laughs) He said, apparently, there’s no way gamblers have the discipline to get anything done unless they’re in the middle of a lake. (laughs) So he has the ultimate solution.

MF: Did you actually do this?

MC: We actually did it. We go up to Lake Tahoe, and we go to rent a boat, we can’t find a suitable boat, all we can find is a little fishing boat. The 3 of us get in that. In the meantime, they had some fishing tackle for sale, Bobby and I buy fishing tackle and immediately make a bet on who’s gonna catch the first of how many fish and whatnot, so we go to the middle of the lake, where, by the way, nobody ever catches a fish. Now we’re sitting there and we start to interview Bobby about his book. It’s springtime in Lake Tahoe. Now, this is a mountain lake, very cold, but Doyle gets distracted and says he’s going to go swimming. He takes off his clothes down to his underwear, and at the time, he was much heavier than he is now, and this was not a beautiful sight.

He reaches over the side over the side of the boat, puts the tips of his fingers in, and says the water is warm. So he jumps overboard and there’s this howl like you have never heard in your life, this most hideous horrendous howl as he falls into this ice-cold water, because the sun only warms the top inch of water. (laughs) So he’s in this freezing water, trying to get back in the boat, and he’s rocking the boat, and Bobby is screaming, ‘Doyle, no. You’re going to drown us all.’ (laughs) So Bobby’s reaction to his good friend Doyle Brunson is–sacrifice yourself. Finally, somehow, I don’t even remember, it kind of blurs together, we got Doyle back into the boat.

We went back, long story short, and we never got around to interviewing Bobby, and as we were leaving Tahoe–I keep telling people now– if at that moment, somebody had told me that among the three of us somebody would go on to be President of the Bellagio, it would’ve had to have been me. (laughs)

Finally, the book got written because I sat down and talked to Bobby a bit and wrote it entirely on the typesetting machine, probably the first book ever written on that type of machine with no intervention. (laughs)

And that’s how the second book got written.