Is there really any value to "mixing up your play" in these games?

[jdl22]

It seems like there are tons of posts here every day where somebody says "I did X in order to mix up my play" or something very similar. Usually X involves either looser than normal play (calling raises with hands usually not worth it, limping with something normally mucked) or doing something tricky/slowplaying big pocket pairs or possibly big slick (trying to limp reraise where you wouldn't normally, calling raises in place of reraise etc).

I have done similar moves in my games with similar thinking and gotten burned by it pretty much every single time. When I say burned it's not necesarily catastrophic, I mean that at best I left an obvious big bet or two on the table and at worst I lost a pot when maybe someone would have folded to my raise.

After giving it some thought I think it is best simply to play your hand optimally every time in these games. The benefit of deception both in the hand and for future hands is far outweighed by the costs. As has been pointed out in virtually every poker book, there is no reason to try anything fancy against fish so there is little gained there. As for the better players many of them multitable anyway so they tend to just play abc poker which by definition means not really playing the opponent much. So there is no real benefit to be gained from these people either. It would seem that the only place it could work would be against the dedicated single tablers but the lost bets the fish don't put in more than make up for that.

Any thoughts?

[Trix]

The only thing I can think of that I mix up is how I play overcards. Sometimes I fold flop, raise flop, call flop. Same on turn and so on.

[bdk3clash]

I remember someone here pointing out that if you are going to do something out of the ordinary, you're generally much better off raising when you normally would have called than vice versa.

I don't really see too much value in "mixing things up" in terms of table image, but aggression alone has inherent value, and it usually isn't that much worse than calling, if calling is the "correct" play.

Trix made an excellent point. Overcards that miss are something I struggle to play optimally, and I've been ratcheting up the aggression factor with pretty good results, on, say, an AKo that misses the flop and is bet into.

As usual, your mileage may vary, and "it depends."

[Tosh]

Some opponents need to be deceived, some don't. You need to try to spot the ones that do.

Its true there will be less at lower limits and deception is not often crucial but there are still some good players around these games.

[LetsRock]

In low level games, there's rarely much benefit in mixing things up much.

Most low level players don't pay that much attention to what you are doing to begin with - they're too busy staring at their cards and praying for deliverance.

If you're getting an unusally good run of cards, then it can be benfitial to play them differently, but most of the time, it's best to just play ABC poker.

My most common "mix-up" would be to slow play a little if for some reason I'm getting a little too much respect.

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
After giving it some thought I think it is best simply to play your hand optimally every time in these games.

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on what you are referring to by "these games". If you mean your typical online low limit table with mostly non-thinking (and ever changing) opponents, then I would say no, you do not need to mix it up that much. If you are at a casino table for a long period of time with observant opponents, or in a home game with the same players week after week, then there is a benefit to mixing it up so long as you don't get too out of line making suboptimal plays for deception purposes. Naturally, HPFAP discusses this.

All the best.

Colgin

[Sarge85]

I actually think there is, but I don't know that it involves "looser" play, I think it involves more aggressive play. (And actually what probably seems like "mixing up play" is probably standard at the higher limits)

I thinking of hands in late position, with suited connectors or the such and raising them. Now to the majority of us, that may seem standard....to the masses, that may look slightly manical.

My .02

Sarge[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[PokerNoob]

If you play at a small site and start recognizing the same people over and over again, I think its a good idea. Within one sit, I don't think it matters too much. At one particular small loose passive site I play, I adopt a certain persona so people remember me. I've even had players comment about keeping a notebook and knowing who bluffs, who's a rock, etc. I vary my play wildly there and it seems to work out.

[StellarWind]

If you pay attention to nuances you naturally vary your play without making any special effort. Take Trix's overcards example. No two hands where you raise PF and flop overcards are exactly alike. There are differences in pot size, board rank and coordination, position, number of opponents, type of opponents, back-door draws, etc. If you consider all of these factors you naturally play it all sorts of different ways without ever deliberately making anything but the best play.

You also should realize that as a tight player you don't provide information about your post-flop play very rapidly. Your loose opponents cannot learn as much about you as you know about them because there is so much less data.

I also have a theory that most online players notice only the 1-3 most conspicuous players at the table. If you have a too-clever or rude screen name and constantly chat you are doing more harm to yourself than any amount of deceptive image play could possibly fix.

[jdl22]

When I say "these games" I mean 2/4 or 3/6 online. I guess my thinking is that nobody pays much attention including good players due to multitabling.