First Impressions

Do you ever think about your table image,and how you can use it to your own advantage?If your an older geezer[like me]people tend to think your a nut player.Then maby bluffs&semi-bluffs will win you alot of pots.Oriental's[and young people] are thought to have alot gamble in them I think its best that they realy cut down on thier bluffs.How you are dressed also can work to your advantage if used properly..Just a tought...

I have the two strikes working against me in terms of bluffing. I am both young and Asian(Oriental isn't PC, if you didn't know), and sometimes I wil try a bluff in the first few hands after I sit down. With this, I am able to etch in stone that I am a constant bluffer, and make more than my share of thin value bets(although I think I should do this even more). Most of the time the players don't even realize that I am mucking 80%+ of my starting hands.


DN


Of course, this doesn't really work when you do it and then can't make a hand to save your life(a value bet with an unpaired AK usually isn't a good play), which is what has been happening to me the past month.

Why not tighten the screws down [no bluffs] for say2-3hours,and establish a tight Image.Then open up bluff {until cought}, raise and re-raise then shift it back in 1st.gear?Just a thought...

I wouldn't do that DN. I think you can be perceived as a solid player by observant opponents even being young and Asian. Observant players won't etch a racial and age stereotype in stone. Bad players might. But you want to be able to steal on good players more than bad players. So I would try to project a tight, good image to help with the good players. The bad players you have to show a hand to. So show them one. I really think Mason is correct that you want a tight image. So if you have 2 strikes already, I wouldn't encourage it more. In general I do agree with Herb N. that younger people and Asians are not going to have as tight an image as a crusty old white dude. The players that matter most will see past all that crap though.

There certainly is a lot of stereotyping going on in poker. Seniors are rocks. Women are weak (easy to run over) and honest (don't bluff much). Asians are gamblers. Neatly dressed people are organized. Slobs are sloppy players. And so on.


We can exploit these stereotypes simply by playing tight-aggressive (if we're in a ring game), thus allowing our stereotyping opponents to trip over us and beat themselves. Let them play our image while we act and play according to the reality of being the optimal +EV seeking tight-aggressive players that we truly are.


Of course, it wouldn't hurt if we reinforced our stereotypes by acting (but not playing) according to it. In otherwords, a woman can talk and act sweet. The senior citizen can wear neat clothes, stack his chips very neatly, and look dead serious. While doing so, we must pay some attention to who's buying the image and who isn't.


It goes without saying that we must avoid making stereotypes ourselves. Watch how the other person really plays, regardless of his race, clothing, or age, and play him accordingly.

The HDPM&jedi Knight are saying what i'm saying.If your an old geezsr{like me}Maybe sit down play a couple of hands Then start firing until caught.I do disagree about one thing The good observant players are NOT the most important one's you will win most of your $$chips from the less observant[fish]ones.

But you will win a few chips from or lose however many chips to the better players in a different way. Playing straightforward against the bad players works OK. Because against the bad players you are playing the cards more. So image comes into play more, relatively speaking, against opponents who are more observant. There is of course a continuum here between the worst and best.

Your right I was wrong in saying,or implying the fish will pay attention to your image,or your play.But there is a large group in between the fish and good players that will be influnced.

the crusty old white dudes are the ones i see playing way too loose. passive, to be sure, but loose. the tight ones you can spot. they are the ones who don't play a hand for at least the first 15 minutes you are at the table.


as for me, i tend to wear some black tshirt with a metal band logo on the front, and blue jeans. im young, but not clean cut. i don't know what image this projects. but i usually try to get the pulse of the table and work with their weaknesses. tonight i played 9-handed and most flops saw 6 players. and the showdown almost always occurred, though there were a good number of uncontested pots at the river as well. so i decided to show these guys hands until they started laying down. and i did. i was able to buy a couple pots. then a slightly more aggressive player sat down, another guy decided he was gonna play cop, and then there's me, flopping the nut flush with a kill pot!! won that hefty pot and went home. (ok, so i stopped by the roulette table and won $45. bad habit, i know.)

Last night, a new face sat down in my game, and I instantly decided she was a good player. She was young and Asian, and something about her told me she was no fish. I had been trying to figure out how I knew that even before I read your post.


I think it is a combination of her looks, the way she dressed, and the way she addressed the dealer and floorpeople when sitting down. She was confident and didn't look nervous or scared like a lot of people taking their first shot at the game.


I was right. She made short work of those who perceived her differently.


I often categorize players when they first sit down. If the player is older, I usually assume he is no threat. And I'm usually right. Older players are tight,lacking in technical, psychological, and math skills, and for the most part, unprepared for the young players who have spent many hours developing their game.


The best way you can take advatage of this stereotype is to do your homework, and study and emulate the best players. But understand that some of those young players are very, very smart.

this is what i do. i'm young and asian. at first they think i'm wild with my bets. then they see me playing super tight for like 3 hours, and when i show down, i show close to the best hand at least.


then when they start noticing this i'll bluff a pot occasionally. sometimes it works and i'll have a whole table fold out on my bets. when it doesn't i won't even bother again, and just play tight.

a few weeks back this guy sat down next to me. he said it was his first time playing, he was wearing an obnoxious hawaiann shirt and he was annoying as hell. he didn't seem like he knew what he was doing. he'd talk about other people's hands... but put them on wrong hands. ask the dealer a lot of dumb questions, and wouldn't shut up. i'm sure everyone including me wanted to take all his chips.


but he was winning. i didn't get involved in any hands to him, but it was putting a couple people on tilt, losing a pot to him.


after about a half hour i changed tables, because i suspected this tourist thing was just an act. but everyone else seemed to just think he was an obnoxious guy.


i've still wondered to this day. if it was an act, i gotta say, kudos to him. and it made me think about how i can exploit any stereotypes of me. be young and cocky and hope they just think i'm a know it all punk? who knows.

didnt you see the hands he played? or how he played certain hands? that's one sure way to tell.


if a guy's playin trash, look at how he played post flop. find his leaks. is he just on a rush? ive seen these types, then once i figure them, their act is only entertaining then.


like watching a magician...if you listen and watch to where he points, you wont see what hes doing in his other hand.


when i run into these types, i concentrate on their play til i get the feel...


have fun...


b

Thanks for a great thread. Research demonstrates that first impressions have an enormous impact, even on people who should know how to make more intelligent judgments. Two studies stand out. Since I read them years ago, I may have a few details wrong, but the overall picture is clear.

#1. Two groups of students received nearly identical introductions to a guest lecturer. They both received identical information about his education, etc. The only difference was that one group was told: "People who know him well say he is quite cold." The other group was told: "People who know him well say he is quite cold." Both groups then went to an auditorium and listened to the same lecture.

Although virtually all their information was identical, the two groups reacted quite differently. Members of the "warm" group asked more questions, and their questions were less critical. They also gave higher ratings to the lecture and the lecturer.

#2. Psychiatrists, who should certainly know better, very quickly put people into diagnostic categories, then ignore or distort information that is inconsistent with their diagnosis.

My book, "The Psychology of Poker," gives some hints about things to look for to make quick judgments about people, but warns that such judgments should be very tentative.

You should also be aware of how people tend to see you and do your best to create the image that is most favorable to your particular style.

Jedi Knight said it better than I can: "It goes without saying that we must avoid making stereotypes ourselves. Watch how the other person really plays, regardless of his race, clothing, or age, and play him accordingly."


Al

These players don't exist. There is no player that can hide his natural tendencies and put on an act I can't catch in five minutes. there are too many giveaways.


1. folding your blind for one bet

2. playing tight up front, more hands in the back

3. sound raising


there are tons more, if you think there are these magic acts out there you are either fooling yourself, not very perceptive, or not very good.

a psychologist gets his digs in on psychiatrists...lol..gl..first impressions are much more important than most people perceive imo...probably less so at poker table than "real life"..lol...gr8 post dr. al...gl

which is why i say watch his play and not his act. the more experienced you are the easier it is to spot.


i watch the play 1st off on an unknown new player. which is pretty much what you said...


no act possible?....it could be. study BJ for awhile, and youll see how to pull it off. it's a somewhat prime part of winning BJ. but of course more observant people will catch it. but they will have had to study the game to catch it right away if the person is good at it. the normal, typical player/floorperson wont necesarily catch on. same in cards.


ive also found that these types try to 'act' when they just buy in, or if theyre up. when theyre losing, they tend to tighten up and play much less extroverted.


b

Thankfully, the tables are not populated by "players that matter," or we would all be broke. While any stereotype against Asian players may be unfair, any decent player must take into account how the other players at the table view him and react to him, based on factors that both within and outside of his control. A failure to do this because the stereotypes of others are unfair would be to cost oneself money at the tables.


Mike

Hi- You wrote: "I often categorize players when they first sit down. If the player is older, I usually assume he is no threat. And I'm usually right. Older players are tight,lacking in technical, psychological, and math skills, and for the most part, unprepared for the young players who have spent many hours developing their game. "


Brett--this statement of yours re: older players is bizarre to me. There are numerous 30-60 players I know who are over 50 that terrorize the game and can demolish the younger crowd. I am not sure what you mean by "older" so perhaps I am missing something here. Just think of the guys like Morgan, Barry Tannenbaum, and yourself, for example who can make mincemeat of any "younger" (or older) player! Even the "tighest" over 50 guys I know have great track records in the 20-40 and higher games and have the staying power that some younger "more educated" players do not. I know 9 players at the Mirage alone who are winning players in the 50+ y.o. category. Not all of these guys are "pros".! Also, think of the well known "younger hot shots" who have blown up? Just bad luck? I think not. In poker as in life, there is just no substitute for "experience" IMO. Babe

Well bret i can assure you i am not the older stereotype player..I`m well into my half century very youthful and sensical and enjoy the thrill of being challenged by those young bucks who are 25 going on comatose..Skill wins and i am very cautious classifying anyone till I`ve seen a few hands played by them..I alter my game to maximize thier tendencies..


jg


jg

There's nothing bizarre about being realistic. Two of the best holdem players at the commerce both have nicknames. One is Kid and the other is Junior. Get the idea?


To put this in terms of LV players, I think about Patrick, Grant, Shun,and Sam as some of the best under 40 players anywhere. These guy would make mincemeat of any of the over 50 players you could round up. If you picked four of the alledged killer 30-60 players and put them at the table with those four, there is no question of the outcome.


I can think of only two over 50 players who could hold their own in that game. One is a Vegas player who is summering in LA, who was on Danny N's list of the top twenty limit holdem players (hereafter known as #6), and the other is a longtime LA pro. But neither would be a favorite in that game.


I'll take my guys over your guys any time.

Hi 3 bet: I don't know Patrick, Grant, or Shun so I cannot comment on their play. If we are talking about the same Sam, I disagree with your assessment of his skills. He appears deliberate and methodical, but can make horrible plays without considering pot odds. Sound familiar? At any rate, if we are using the under/over 50 criterion for evaluating players, I guess I am glad I'm in the "under" category! /images/biggrin.gif /images/wink.gif. Or does this age variable just apply to male players? Hmmmmm.... maybe the over 40 babes beat the under 40 babes? YES...Of that I am SURE! /images/wink.gif. Babe