Waiting to look at your hole cards until the action is to you

[Moyer]

I noticed on the WPT the other day that almost all of the players would wait to look at their cards until it was their turn to make a decision. They would watch the other players pick up their cards first, apparently looking for tells.

Is this a common thing to do? It certainly slows the game down. I guess this probably helps no limit players a lot more than limit.

[astroglide]

it's pretty standatrd in higher limit games

[andyfox]

You can't emit a tell if you don't know what you have yourself.

[bicyclekick]

I do this too when I'm playing live mostly now. I don't really slow the game down because I'm always ready to look when the action gets to me and I'm quick to act. I may look one person in advance if I'm getting impatient or the guy in front of me is a moron and isn't paying attention to me anyhow.

[Warik]

When you think about it, waiting to look until the action on you is a great way to maximize the number of people who will spot your tell if you do happen to give one off.

[andyfox]

At the higher stakes, many more players are watching you. The admonition "always look left" before acting is a good one.

Even more than pre-flop, it's important to, as surreptitiously as possible, keep your eye on an opponent as the flop hits. In general, when an unsophisticated opponent stares at it, it's good for you.

[Mike Gallo]

My sop. I never look at my cards until I have to act.

I know I have frustrated more than a few posters who have played with me because I play my blinds blind. Meaning I do not look at my big blind unless someone has raised before me. I have attempted to work on this.

[Steve Giufre]

I thnik you can gain a lot more information by watching a player check his hole cards than people think. A lot of players make an event out of squeezing thier second card when the first is an ace or a king. Some will even shuffle the two together after getting excited by the first one. The other one I have seen from time to time is the guy who only checks his first card and doesnt bother to look at the second a good majority of the time. It's useful to know when player will never limp in with a suited ace or small to medium pocket pair, you can often steal from them when the flop come ragged.

[gigahurts]

I think this could be debated without end..... Looking immediately, already knowing what you're going to do 80% of the time, your actions and movements until your turn.... or waiting until it's your turn, under more scrutiny, acting...

I haven't done much live poker, and after reading this thread, I'm going to wait most of the time based on position... I also like the idea of playing the blinds blind unless raised....

[daryn]

how could anyone like the idea of playing your blind truly blind unless someone has raised? does that mean you check your option all the time without looking? if so you're giving up EV.

[CrackerZack]

I went through a phase of this at my home game, but that's just fooling around more than anything. Its really dumb either way though.

[jedi]

Part of this depends on the players you're up against. If they're clueless, then who cares?

That having been said, my friend and I debated this as he's going to the WSOP main event. My comment is the same as most people here, don't look until the action gets to you. However, he would rather look when he gets his cards first, when everyone else is concentrating on the player UTG or looking at their own cards. Then, he lifts his head up and observes the other players when they do look at their own cards. Just food for thought.

[John Deere]

[ QUOTE ]
how could anyone like the idea of playing your blind truly blind unless someone has raised? does that mean you check your option all the time without looking? if so you're giving up EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Last week, I sat to the left of a guy who checked his big blind without looking. He also informed me that he _always_ chops -- even with pocket aces (because he once lost with them heads up in the SB against the BB). Nice guy, though.

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
He also informed me that he _always_ chops -- even with pocket aces

[/ QUOTE ]
the point of chopping is to speed the game up and not fight over a nothing pot that is going to get raked down to sh*t. if you only chop with bad hands and want to play when you get aces then you don't get it....

[GuyOnTilt]

Hey Moyer,

I think the value of not emitting tells by looking at your cards early (and noticing them from players on your left that do look early) comes more from seeing whether they're going to muck, limp, or raise than getting a read on what kind of specific hand you think they have. I have been able to play my hand much better preflop because of looking to my left, as well as postflop occassionally. Raising from 2 off the Button becomes a more profitable play when the two players to your left have their cards between their finger an inch above the felt. In essence, you already know you have the Button, while the playes in the blinds perceive your raise to be from late MP. There's many other applicable scenarios, but this is the one that I myself most often in.

GoT

[daryn]

i always chop too, yes even with aces. since i don't look at my cards until the action gets to me, whenever i'm in a position to chop, i just chop and then flip the cards up to see what i had (for no reason really).

like another poster said, the point of chopping really is to not let the house take a drop off the hand when you're heads up.

anyways, always checking your option out of the big blind without looking is still dumb.

[JGalt]

Two points

1st - If you look at your cards right away, you may give off a tell at that point and gives more time to give off a tell. It can also give you time to re-evaluate your hand. Well I'll fold this, but if those three call then I'll give it a shot, damn only two called, I'll try anyways. Can work much to your disadvantage IMHO.

2nd - I think in the higher limits, especially NL and tourneys in order to be more unpredictable they will hesitate and mull over a hand even though they know they're gonna fold. It can be very easy to get inot habits which become second nature and I think they try to minimize that as much as possible.

[gunboat]

I would like to take the contrary position and advocate that it is better not to wait until the action is on you before looking at your cards - at least in low and some intermediate limit games.

1) You don't want to draw attention to yourself. The observant players will immediately see that you know what you are doing (or at least think you do). Even the unobservant will soon notice that you are not playing many hands as the action pauses, even if only briefly, when it gets to you.

2) You do not want to be perceived as taking the game too seriously, as that will cause others to tighten up.

3) You may feel pressured to make a quick decision on marginal hands so as not to give the idea that you have something to think about.

For higher stakes, NL and especially tournaments the waiting is fine, even expected. Especially in tournaments, you do want the others to notice and respect you.

I have tried to learn to give my cards a quick glance after the second is dealt while keeping an eye to my left and peripheral attention to the others while they look at their cards. You don't have to actually see them looking at their cards. Their mannerisms afterwards are where the tells are.

Some which I notice.

Covering cards with both hands or pulling them closer - these are good cards and the player is not letting go of them.

Apparent disinterest in the action without getting the cards ready to muck - this is also a strong hand.

Asking where the action is, especially if it isn't to him yet. He can't wait to get his chips in, or to see the flop if they are already in. This is a very strong hand or a big drawing hand. Watch on the flop to see which.

The manner in which the chips go into the pot.

I have never gotten much from watching a player actually look at the hole cards. And I don't want the others to think I am watching them - which is all to obvious if you wait for the action to look.

[Ed Miller]

Is this a common thing to do?

I switched to this about a year ago, and I certainly don't regret it. I think that it is strictly better than looking immediately... I see no downside.

Interestingly, I look at my cards immediately when I play stud. I use the extra time to compare my hand to the upcards and stuff.

I also look immediately when I play Omaha. It takes me like ten seconds to figure out what the hell I have. People would want to beat me if I waited.

[luckycharms]

nice post and good reasoning, gunboat

Personally, I try to watch the action and peek my cards when the action gets to a rock. Best of both worlds, huh? Plus I raaaaarely pick up tells when people peek the hole cards.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
I see no downside.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess nobody read my post.

-----------
When you think about it, waiting to look until the action on you is a great way to maximize the number of people who will spot your tell if you do happen to give one off.
-----------

Or am I wrong??? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Saborion]

Well by looking at your cards immediately you're may give people information about whether you'll play the hand or not.

[Mike Gallo]

Interestingly, I look at my cards immediately when I play stud. I use the extra time to compare my hand to the upcards and stuff.

I do not look at my hole cards until I see all the upcards. That way if I have a small pair and I see a dead card I can make a good decision.

[surfdoc]

I read it and completely agree with you. I like to take a peek, memorize my cards, and never look back. I don't really like having the entire table focus on me.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
Well by looking at your cards immediately you're may give people information about whether you'll play the hand or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

By looking immediately you may give whoever happens to be looking at you at the time information on whether or not you'll play the hand. By waiting until everybody and his mother is looking at you, you may give everybody information on what hand you have. I think the latter is far more dangerous.

If you give off your "I'm going to play this hand" tell, you still give no indication of how good your hand is. The danger is giving away information on how strong your hand is, which people are more likely to notice when they are all looking at you.

When I play live, I look at the person whose turn it is to act - so do most people.

I would think that one would rather look at his cards when the fewest # of people are looking at him, not the most.

I'm dealt my cards, I peek, memorize them and off I go.

Plus, it slows down the game substantially. If you're playing 30 hands/hr and everybody decides to take 3 seconds every hand to look at his cards when the action is on him, you add 30 seconds to every hand. 60 minutes for 30 hands = 2 minutes per hand. Increase that to 2.5 minutes per hand and you're looking at 24 hands per hour now. As if live play weren't slow enough.

[TimTimSalabim]

[ QUOTE ]
If you give off your "I'm going to play this hand" tell, you still give no indication of how good your hand is. The danger is giving away information on how strong your hand is, which people are more likely to notice when they are all looking at you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Consider though, that a tell that indicates your hand is junk is extremely valuable to someone on your right who's deciding whether he can steal the pot.

[aaronjacobg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you give off your "I'm going to play this hand" tell, you still give no indication of how good your hand is. The danger is giving away information on how strong your hand is, which people are more likely to notice when they are all looking at you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Consider though, that a tell that indicates your hand is junk is extremely valuable to someone on your right who's deciding whether he can steal the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, depending on your read on the player, an "i'm going to play" tell may be very telling. If the player is a rock, you may want to fold that low pp or AQ/AJ. Any more info is important in a game like hold'em which is a low info game as opposed to, for example, stud.

Also, i hink the extra time is well worth it as long as you take a reasonably short amount of it.

Jake

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
a tell that indicates your hand is junk is extremely valuable to someone on your right who's deciding whether he can steal the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you care if you were going to fold anyway?

And, if you hand is junk, but not quite junky enough to fold, would you rather find that out before everybody had their eyes on you, or after everyone was looking so that the players remaining to act could know your hand sucks and possibly raise you?

[TimTimSalabim]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would you care if you were going to fold anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, for one thing, if he sees you don't like your hand and decides to steal, now *you* lose the opportunity to steal with your junk hand (say for example he's the CO and you're the Button). Also, if he sees you really like your hand, now he won't try to steal, and you lose the opportunity to reraise him and make more money with your good hand.

[Mikey]

"That way if I have a small pair and I see a dead card I can make a good decision."

don't you mean the only decision.

[jdl22]

I've never played live, but I would think that if they knew your hand was junk that wouldn't matter when your hand is junk but it would when you get a good hand. If a player knew you had your arm bent back ready to flip into the muck every time your hand is trash then he would know your hand was good when you didn't do this.

Suppose it's folded to the cutoff and you have a big pocket pair. You would be much better off if the cutoff went for a steal rais instead of folding which he would do if he noticed you weren't ready to muck.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
If a player knew you had your arm bent back ready to flip into the muck every time your hand is trash then he would know your hand was good when you didn't do this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm talking about subtle tells... not 40 foot neon signs telling your opponents what to do. If I'm going to accidentally give information, I'd rather do it when the fewest # of people are looking.

[ QUOTE ]
Suppose it's folded to the cutoff and you have a big pocket pair. You would be much better off if the cutoff went for a steal rais instead of folding which he would do if he noticed you weren't ready to muck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again... subtle tells, not advertising.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, for one thing, if he sees you don't like your hand and decides to steal, now *you* lose the opportunity to steal with your junk hand (say for example he's the CO and you're the Button).

[/ QUOTE ]

But if the CO is such a great player who can read you while you're looking at your cards to determine if he should steal or not, shouldn't he be intelligently focusing on the person whose turn it is to act instead of you while you peek?

[ QUOTE ]
Also, if he sees you really like your hand, now he won't try to steal, and you lose the opportunity to reraise him and make more money with your good hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if the SB and BB see that you really don't like your hand when you peek while they are looking, then they'll know you're on a steal and might play differently.

In a game of limited information, why put yourself in a situation to give it away when the greatest # of people are watching you?

[nykenny]

I "look immediately" as i get dealt. Then i watch others act while thinking about what my action should be and planning for the rest of the hand.

as long as you don't act dramatically differently when u get AA or 72, and don't act out of turn, ther is no need to worry. giving yourself extra time to think up counter strategy is very helpful.

i would refuse to play in a game where many players can adjust on a per hand basis base on my slight mannerisms upon looking at my hole cards.

giving reverse tell is the bomb, i will pretend to muck my AA out of turn, and when ppl call or raise to me, i pop it /images/graemlins/laugh.gif...

anyway, look first, then watch, then act in turn. happy pokering.

Kenny

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never played live, but I would think that if they knew your hand was junk that wouldn't matter when your hand is junk but it would when you get a good hand. If a player knew you had your arm bent back ready to flip into the muck every time your hand is trash then he would know your hand was good when you didn't do this.

Suppose it's folded to the cutoff and you have a big pocket pair. You would be much better off if the cutoff went for a steal rais instead of folding which he would do if he noticed you weren't ready to muck.

[/ QUOTE ]

looking <> giving tells

[andyfox]

"I also look immediately when I play Omaha. It takes me like ten seconds to figure out what the hell I have."

As you discovered the one time we played, I solved this problem by just playing everything. Certainly, with all those cards, one must have something.

Regards,
Andy

[nykenny]

Warik is right. looking immediately rules!

Kenny

[Ed Miller]

When you think about it, waiting to look until the action on you is a great way to maximize the number of people who will spot your tell if you do happen to give one off.

I take it back. My response to this thread was silly. This is my new response:

"As long as you don't show your cards to grandpa nextdoor, it don't matter how you look at your hand."

[TimTimSalabim]

[ QUOTE ]
In a game of limited information, why put yourself in a situation to give it away when the greatest # of people are watching you?

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is, you're giving away *more* information (potentially) when you peek ahead. If you wait until it's your turn to act, there's no chance of giving away any information to anybody about whether you're going to play the hand or not.

Having said all that, to be honest, most of the time I peek-ahead anyway, because the players in most of my games aren't paying attention. Game selection above all, right? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[J_V]

I think it's hogwash. I pick mine up right away. I rather not have 10 eyes on me when I look at my cards.

[joker122]

I haven't sifted through this entire thread so this might have been said already. But how is it possible for every player to wait for the other players to look before they look themselves. If this were the case then you would have a table of players looking at eachother forever.

[wrongpond]

I think waiting is the way to go. The man who wrote the book on tells instructs you to wait, plus, here are some other reasons: 1)You want to catch everything, most people who say they don't see many tells are not watching well enough (IMHO of course). Stopping to 'peek' will prevent you from seeing everything. 2)If you want to steal with 'rags' then you'd better be watching the table because you'll get the info you need to make the final choice. 3)If you're taking advantage of the info you're getting from watching other people, it's gonna be hard to get tells from watching you check your hole cards even if all 10 of them are watching you.

[Peter]

I have almost never played live, but the times I did, I noticed that most of the time I new immediately what to do. But some of the time I had to think about it. For this reason I rather look immediately, so I can think about what to do as the action gets to me. If I would wait, everyone can see I have to think about what to do, and that's not good.

Peter

[Moyer]

[ QUOTE ]
But how is it possible for every player to wait for the other players to look before they look themselves. If this were the case then you would have a table of players looking at eachother forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

"players would wait to look at their cards until it was their turn to make a decision"

[ZManODS]

When i play online i turn the monitor off until i hear the computer beep confirming that it is my turn to play.

[Norm]

[ QUOTE ]
When i play online i turn the monitor off until i hear the computer beep confirming that it is my turn to play.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is unnecessary. Go to the graphics file and change the card appearance to tiny characters.

Then when it is time to look at hole cards, bring your eyes about 3 inches from the monitor and read.

[JKratzer]

10 eyes....you only play in 6-handed games?