Why do they bet 10 times the pot? Call or not?

[kylma]

I can't help wondering why do they bet $50 into pots of $5.. Or why do they raise $40 in the SB to steal the $1 blind fom BB? If they have a monster, are they not interested in winning more chips than just a couple small ones? If they have a good hand, why don't they just try to extract what the hand is worth? And if they have a poor hand, obviously, the risk they take is suicidal.

SB was just like that. I saw him go all in to small pots a few times.. He once had to show it: nut flush draw (only) on the turn, he pushes all in and a guy with a set calls and completes a full house. Second time he showed himself: he had a middle pair and a non nut flush draw on the turn on a board that had high straight and (obviously) 2 pair possibilities..

In addition, when he did hit a full boat he was betting it pretty right.. Extracting the max value.

That being said I was looking forward to a hand where I could call one of those awful bets..

He raises to $2 in small blind.. I call $1 in the big blind with 3d Td.

Flop is 9s 3s 3h.

He goes all in for about $60 and I have him covered.
This game is 3 handed, by the way, and I have only played full ring. An awful idea comes to my mind if some kind of a trap is being set for me.. After all my observations, could THIS be the moment where he indeed has 99 (or at least A3), the moment that he has been setting up? I simply cross my fingers hoping he does the same thing he has done before: overpair, maybe even middle pair, A9 K9 Q9 etc, nut flush draw.. there are tons of possibilities

Does someone fold?

Or should I just trust my earlier observations and call like I did (had him covered)?

As a more general topic, I'm interested in the "rationale" or the "psychology" or the flawed logic, or whatever it is, that makes people bet like this?

(Not talking about sensible play like pushing all in when it's a coinflip, but the few chips in the middle really make it +EV)

[lawpoker]

my favorites are the ones taht "defend" by rasing or reraising all in. only once have i had a hand to call with (AA). so i raised 3x BB on his BB, he reraised all in...just cause he annoyed me, i made him sweat it out a while before i called. he showed me a beautiful 74o. i took his stack, and he didn't pull that move for a while.

[Hillbilly Cat]

I think I may be able to help you with this one, cos I'm the kind of person that does this.

I should point out that I'm relatively inexperienced so there is a very good chance that what I'm doing is a bad play, but there is (probably) flawed thinking behind it that I'm happy to share. I should point out it often makes me a lot of money on one hand. How this stands up long term I have no idea.

My technical knowledge of poker is not great, if u asked me at any point in a hand about odds. +Ev play and so on, I could probably only give you an approximate answer.

The only plus point my game has so far ( i think ) is that I often read the table and players well.

I also, with on-line play, rely heavily on human nature. In particular things like greed, ego and machismo.

When I'm playing well I would describe myself as aggressive (overly so) and maybe even a bully. This is because I think less about the actual cards I hold and more about what you might hold, and how you might act. By far the largest portion of my winnings comes from betting marginal hands... yes that what I said, marginals. Frankly, looking at my spreadsheet some of my biggest leaks seem to be on the bigger hands, AA, JJ, AQs and so on.

I don't multi-table. I watch and observe and spend 99% of my time watching you. I can pick up your style, I can see what your after and I can play you for that.

Lets take a ridiculous example. If I *know* what you're holding then my cards make no difference. If I *know* you KJo in early (yikes), then I know you'll not have much confidence in that if the flop comes badly... gotcha! I could be holding 23o or AA, doesn't matter. I know you'll lay down (well at least often enough for me to profit).

If you're broke and steaming or weak or greedy, I might try it on and throw stupid money in the table. Do you want it or don't you? Of course you do. Will you go for it? It depends, but you might. And it doesn't have to happen that often to make a profit.

I also have a further edge in that I don't care about the money. Thats not to say I don't value it, its just that when I'm playing it ceases to be cash, it is simply a weapon to take out your entire stack.

I am rarely looking to win a few dollars off you, frankly I couldn't care less about the tiny sums, what I'm all about is taking aim at everything you have.

(I sound like a madman don't I [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] )

I'm also considering things like, where did you learn poker, who's advice are you following? I read up a lot on poker which means I can see logic in your play (even if its lacking in mine). Maybe your a multi tabler (many are) and therefore you're probably playing pretty tight, taking a smaller edge of many tables whilst risking less. Excellent, you're dead meat... You won't be facing up to my marginals unless you've got something, and therefore I take away those pots I don't deserve.

Even I understand that taking a pot that I had no business winning has higher +EV that and good hand.

As soon as I get a handle on you (and sometimes I'm wrong) you're dead-meat. Once I'm comfortable with knowing your holding and your motivation I've got you.

Anyway, back to the point...

In the $50 or $100 buy-in NL games I tend to haunt, players are horribly predictable. Not their play (a lot play solid, technically strong poker) but their stereotype.

A good deal of players for example sit down to spend an evening playing poker. This means for the first half hour at least they don't want to lose their entire stack, else they won't be able to carry on playing. Bang... I bet them out of everything. Who cares what I have? So you occasionally have cards and beat me... you'll lay down all the rest.

Most people like to win. Most people want more money, you can play on their greed and their ego.

Bets like the ones you described are often so tempting for greedy opposition that they'll take you on... yes, thats right, they'll call a $100 raise on a $5 pot.... especially if you've done this a few times already.. as per your thinking, you suddenly felt a trap.. you may have been right.

I often make a few ludicrous bets early on (see below*), which, unless I'm just unlucky, will have most people folding, even reasonable hands.... but then they get fed up, they think you're a jerk, they hate to be pushed around... or they simply want that money I've got. And I keep offering it to them on a plate.

Sooner or later they get tempted.. but... Oh No.. to their horror the discover I'm playing better cards now. I have my values...

Or maybe I just figure your a jerk who needs the cash.. some people are desperate to make a comeback. I put out lots of cahs and I can almost hear them saying 'this will make up for all my losses'.. the gamble, and most often they lose.

So, in answer to your question, I throw in bets like these because I think I read you, and I'm playing on human nature. Maybe you aren't the kidn who'll go for it, maybe I got it wrong. But does it really matter, I'll usually be picking up something. Given that I'm doing this on marginals anyway, there's a good chance you'd chase me off the hand if it went to the turn, so I couldn't gain any more anyway..

Now, you must be thinking, well, this is easy, I just pick him off. But you'd be surprised how many people treat that cash in front of them like rent money. They are just plain reluctant to bet it. If I throw fives of these decisions at you during the session (assuming you've seen me take on or two out) are you going to wade in and challenge me every time?

I am well aware of the shortcomings of my play. A good player will spot me I'm sure and I'll be nailed.... or will I? Nope... I just get up and leave. There's always another greedy, weak, desperate group who may fall victim.

Of course any kind of fight back will probably see me off. After all, like any bully I'm really just a big coward. But all I do then is just leave you alone.

I'm hyper aggressive when I think I read you, when I don't (or you suss me out) I'm as gentle as a kitten and frankly will just avoid making mistakes.

I'm often told about all the +EV plays and percentages and so on... I use it as a guide, but frankly I have another (probably worse) approach.

When I think I have you I try to finish you, break you and get all I can out of you. When I don't I just stay away.

I find its usually quite hard to get a good overlay on someone with cards alone. I'm sure you find the same. Most decisions are difficult, and its hard to know who's ahead. Money is the way to increase the edge.

So what if I miss some 'value bets'. All I need to do is catch one guy in an evening, get a read on him, and bang... I can get it in one hand..

In summary, don't worry. I'll eventually go bust and realise my poker game stinks, but for now at least you know what I'm thinking.

Hope that helps. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

* In my books a ludicrous bet is one you don't win figure to win. from a stats pov. I usually have about 75-85% of showdowns won, but 80% of my winning hands are won before the river... does that indicate something?

[DoomSlice]

Well... whenever I make a bet like that I do it because I think people will think "why would he do that with the best hand", and sure enough everyone wants to find out, and I flip the nuts.

[kurto]

May I say that your play would generally be described as 'maniac.' And you're kind of player I think most here on the forum want at their table. Though its good that you use psychology... once any thinking player sees what you're doing, they'll set a trap. Your betting tendencies will be your own worst enemy.

Granted... at a table of passive people.. you can do well. But it only takes one or two people at a table who are sharp enough to slowplay you.

[kylma]

He had A9. No nine came.

Kurto, I really had no chance to *slowplay* here ;-)

[Hillbilly Cat]

[ QUOTE ]
May I say that your play would generally be described as 'maniac.' And you're kind of player I think most here on the forum want at their table. Though its good that you use psychology... once any thinking player sees what you're doing, they'll set a trap. Your betting tendencies will be your own worst enemy.

Granted... at a table of passive people.. you can do well. But it only takes one or two people at a table who are sharp enough to slowplay you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh absolutely! I agree I can get picked off by someone sharp. I'm not sure I'm a maniac though.

I don't just go out guns blazing on a whim, its done when I think I have the measure of someone. I would hope to have picked up on who the thinking players are and am unlikely to get into a situation with them. I figure I don't have to beat/take on everyone at the table. I pick my fights. (and I mix it up a little [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ) In theory, I guess I only need to beat one of them..

btw, I play mainly shorthanded. I struggle a lot at a full table.

If I don't feel I have any edge over someone you'll find I'm pretty quiet at the table.

But, as you say I'm aware of the weakness of my game, but I'm only starting, I have a lot to learn.

However, its a question of using what you have. I'm starting from the psychological side and will be trying to improve on the technical. I guess most people must do it the other way round. Maybe I'm wrong, but ultimately I think if you sat down a top flight technical player with a top flight psych player (and I'm over simplifying) I'd favour the latter. After all, if you can learn to read hands/people very well, there's little a technical strategy can do to combat it (perhaps resorting to game theory).

Either way, as a beginner I could get it equally as wrong trying to focus on technical play.. at least this way feels more natural, and... there's no denying it, it is more fun [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I'm constantly trying to improve my technical game, but its an uphill struggle for me. When I try to over concentrate on the theoretical aspects of a game, it seems to affect my performance drastically.

btw, at the moment, for my first 4 months of playing, I'm only about $300 down overall, and to be honest I lost most of that trying to learn limit play (boy I don't get that at all). I'm sure if I don't improve this will get worse, but ever time I play, I feel like I'm making progress or learing something new, which to my mind is the key thing.

I don't know though. What do you think? Is the psych aspect less important, or is it simply that its more difficult to teach/learn. All the books seem to focus on the theorectical and the mathematical, which is of course important, but surely in a game of incomplete information, any equation, such as it is, is highly prone to error.

I really don't know and I'd love to hear your thoughts. I'm simply following my gut feeling about my style of game, and then trying (with difficulty) to pick up the technical aspects.

It also surprises me that there seems a lot less material and discussion (here included) on the psychological aspects of poker. Do you have any as to where I can find more?

[Los Feliz Slim]

This doesn't necessarily apply because of your read on this player, but I'll do this with AA before the flop or the nuts after the flop specifically because it looks like I'm stealing (aka The Move of Honor). I'm getting addicted to it, at weak tables it's incredibly effective. I also think that when you're in early position and you get a caller, those in later position are more likely to call because they see all the money in the pot and can't resist.

[Bob Moss]

Hi kylma, given your read, you'd be crazy to fold this.

Bob

[Utah]

It is irrational play to make such crazy bets (although there are right times to overbet the pot like that).

However, it is difficult for timid or overly tight players to play against and the play could be EV for the maniac.

Lets say the blinds are .50/1.00 and it is folded to the maniac who pushes allin to $60 with any 2 cards. If the BB will only defend with 10-AA then the play is EV positive for the maniac.

Here is the math:
You will get one of those hands about every 40 deals.

39 hands = 1.5 x 39 = $58 (free blind money)
1 hand = -59*.8= -$47 (he will still win 20% of the time)

Total EV = 11/40 = roughly 25cents EV per hand for the maniac