Question about post flop experts.

[beekeeper]

I hear commentators on poker shows talk about professional players "outplaying" nonprofessionals on the flop. I thought I knew what that meant, but the more I learn about the game, the less I think I know.

What are ways in which a better player can outplay me after the flop?

I'd like to mix up my play more, play a wider range of hands, and not bet so predictably, but my competitors seem to know when I have a modest hand.

thanks

[donkeyradish]

The skill to be able to make you throw your cards away without a showdown, even though your cards are the best.

And conversely

The skill to be able to induce you to bet your weaker hand

[beekeeper]

I knew after my question posted that it was a weak question. I just didn't want to get long-winded.


Is superior post-flop play more a matter of reading your opponents, or a continuation of taking control of the hand? Judging by the players who are labeled excellent post-flop players--Helmuth, Negranu, Lindgren--it would appear that these are players who are excellent readers of the opposition, not necessarily just ultra aggressive players.

So, what are they better at than their competitors? Since a lot of contributors to this forum discount the value of "tells," I would assume their edge is not picking up on tells. Are they better at putting their opponents on a range of hands preflop and narrowing it down by their betting on the flop? Are they better at selective aggression? Are they more comfortable putting their stacks at risk?

What's the difference between these players, and players like Hoyt Corkins or Antonio the Magician, players whose game seems predicated more on aggressiveness?

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
I knew after my question posted that it was a weak question.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't find it weak, but your follow-ups are good too.

[ QUOTE ]
Is superior post-flop play more a matter of reading your opponents, or a continuation of taking control of the hand? Judging by the players who are labeled excellent post-flop players--Helmuth, Negranu, Lindgren--it would appear that these are players who are excellent readers of the opposition, not necessarily just ultra aggressive players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm no NLHE expert by a longshot, but imagine it's two sides of the same coin. Players who read the opposition well know when to be aggressive. If raw, unselective aggression were winning play, poker would be easy. They know when to be aggressive because they correctly judge more than how their opponents will react (folding better hands, calling value bets).

[ QUOTE ]
So, what are they better at than their competitors? Since a lot of contributors to this forum discount the value of "tells," I would assume their edge is not picking up on tells.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa whoa whoa!!!

It's all about context. I would say don't bother looking for tells in the Foxwoods $2/4 until you're playing the cards and the situation optimally, because there's much more to be made from that sort of technical knowledge. At high levels (limit or NL), tells are tremendously important because supposedly everyone has the basic technical knowledge. Low-buyin NLHE is probably a middle ground where technical knowledge can make some money but reads/tells are helpful too.

I look for reads and tells in low-limit games because correct play can get boring and I want to learn this for when I move up. But you don't need to focus on tells until you're well on your way up the food chain. And often a good read is just an intuition about psychology that doesn't involve a specific physical manifestation, i.e. isn't a tell.

[illunious]

I think of "outplaying" when use like this to mean: Over time, the better player (pro) is going to make better decisions post-flop, so he will be able to play more hands profitably.

I don't really think it means a pro is playing his 54s with a plan to pull some super tricky move that wins him all kinds of pots.

[SheridanCat]

There are lots of things that let players "outplay" their opponents. Among them are:

<ul type="square"> Hand reading
Player reading using tells and betting pattern analysis
Ability to manipulate pot odds effectively
Table image
[/list]

etc.

Regards,

T

[Webster]

I thuink it comes with time. I ONLY play online and when I had Poker Edge I was AMAZED at how many tight players were long term losers. When I looked more deeply it was poor post flop play.

The more hands you play the better you get post flop - no charts to tell you what to do. You start to look at betting patterns, hand reading and past experience in the millions of things that can happen in a game.

[url=http://www.grinderswarehouse.com]Grinderswarehouse - NOT just another BLOG[/url

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
What are ways in which a better player can outplay me after the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]
Here are a few:
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Value betting more successfully while ahead.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Getting people to fold profitable draws.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Protecting more effectively against weak draws.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Avoiding unprofitable calls.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Making more profitable calls.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Bluffing more effectively.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Getting people to bet less while the expert is behind but would still call.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Inducing people to bluff or make incorrect value bets more while the expert is ahead.

These don't require getting inside someone'e head or finding extra information. That part of poker is grossly overrated. Judging the strength of your hand relative to the betting pattern is underrated, but very important. So is making use of the betting options.

[beekeeper]

Wow, I got some really great feedback. Thanks to all.



[ QUOTE ]
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Value betting more successfully while ahead

[/ QUOTE ]
Ways to defend against this would be to (1) have good starting hands relative to position and (2) let go of hands if the flop isn't promising?


[ QUOTE ]
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Getting people to fold profitable draws.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ways to defend against this would be to know my pot odds and EV and play accordingly?


[ QUOTE ]
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Bluffing more effectively.

[/ QUOTE ]
Way to defend against this--protecting the button, protecting the blinds? Would this be with a semi-bluff or better quality hand? What's the best way to do this--reraise preflop or lead out on the flop with a sizeable bet?

[ QUOTE ]
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Getting people to bet less while the expert is behind but would still call.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Inducing people to bluff or make incorrect value bets more while the expert is ahead.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know that I fall victim to the first of these. This is great analysis--it lets me know what I need to work on to take my play to another level. Thanks a lot.

[Rosencrantz1]

Just a thought, but remember that in televised poker you are seeing a small percentage of total hands played. Because of this, it's easy to get a skewed perception of how people *really* play. For instance, from watching on-line it looks like Gus Hansen plays 80-90% of his cards. Truth is he probably plays a much lower percentage (30%?) but many of those hands never make it to air. Harrington discusses this briefly in HoH-1.

To answer your question about post-flop play, I do think what several of the other respondants have said is dead-on. Reading other players is part of it, sure, but also having an excellent grasp of the odds and how the texture of the board is influencing the hand are big factors as well.

Harrington talks about this a bit too: namely, that you are better off being faced with EASY decisions on the flop rather than hard decisions. This principal (which Ed Miller uses, really, as the cornerstone of his NL Cash strategy in GSIH) is what informs Harrington's starting hand recs (which are fairly conservative/tight). With really great players, they are better at navigating those TOUGH decisions post-flop than a beginner.

I see it in my own game when I am able to check from the BB with a marginal hand (that I would have folded otherwise) and then hit the flop, but not that hard. For instance:

4 limpers and I check from the BB with J9 off. The flop comes QJ2 with two cards suited to my 9. I now have middle pair with a medium kicker at best and a backdoor flush draw and I'm first to act after the flop.

Me: can't play that situation very well.
Professional: can.

[beekeeper]

Thanks, Rosencrantz. Yours, and everyone's responses are sure to be helpful. I think they'll help me analyze my play and also help me decide which hands, from which position, I might try to add to my starting hand selection. Thanks again, all, for the excellent feedback.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

You're reading too much into this post. Don't design you strategys for playing based on other people playing correctly. You base it on playing donks and make adjustments as you move up.

[bholdr]

just thought i'd pop in and add my 2c:

a lot of times when watching poker and hearing about the pros that rely on their ability to outplay opponents post-flop, they're referring to stars like Hellmuth, Farha, Hansen, etc: players that see a LOT of flops, even with appearently weak hands, but still manage to beat the tighter players. if this is what you're referring to, read on:

the loose preflop/outplay opponents post-flop idea/strategy applies to all games, not just high limits and big tournaments, as some have suggested in the past. since a skilled player makes better decisions more often, some hands that would be long-term losers for a weak player become profitable for an expert (again, long-term). Say, playing Kx suited in LHE, for example- over time, weak players lose a lot on hands like that, but a very good player knows how to squeze enough value out of the times that it hits to cover the cost of playing them in the first place). So, especially in NL, experts can play weaker, marginal, sometimes even trash hands, and show a profit on them.

pzon's post in this thread is a good list of the ways that experts turn weak hands into winners with superior post-flop play. nice use of the /images/graemlins/diamond.gifs as bullet points, too. i'm totally stealing that.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to mix up my play more, play a wider range of hands, and not bet so predictably, but my competitors seem to know when I have a modest hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

the benifits of playing more hands are:

/images/graemlins/heart.gif- it makes it harder for your opponents to read your hand
/images/graemlins/heart.gif- when they know you'll play weak hands, they'll give more action on your monsters- this is another source of profit from playing weak hole cards; even if playing, say, J7 offsuit, in NL may be a long term-loser, the action it'll get the expert when he gets bullets may factor into his descision to play more garbage hands like that.
/images/graemlins/heart.gif-you'll sometimes hit big on harmless-looking flops and get paid off.

disadvantages:
/images/graemlins/club.gif-higher varaince (i think- anyone know why?)
/images/graemlins/club.gif- gotta know what you're doing
/images/graemlins/club.gif- get dominated a lot more often

for a limit player, i'd have to say that a loose preflop strategy is almost always a recipie for disaster, but in NL it can be very very profitable in the right kind of games. like, limp with a lot of garbage in a game where there's rarely a raise preflop, try to hit a big hand on the flop, get paid off, repeat.

but, like rosencrantz said:
[ QUOTE ]

Me: can't play that situation very well.
Professional: can.

[/ QUOTE ]

B