I had a read on the player...

[zaxx19]

Ok Im fairly new to the poker scene (6 months almost) and have played primarily online(UB MY MONIKER IS ZAXX19)but also live in Vegas and in local( chicago & nwest Indiana)cardrooms. The one thing ive noticed is people both on 2+2 and in person sometimes assume they have a "read" on the type of player someone is well before the number of hands played would even remotely justify labeling anyone as anything. For example it seems as though people here believe 20-30 minutes is long enough to really put a solid read on someone as to how aggressive and/or loose they are ... they believe this to the extent that they will risk their entire tourney on these "reads". Im sorry imho 30 hands is not as valuable as most of the players on here believe... as for decisions such as who to check/raise when yu catch on a ragged flop for extra chips early in a tourney, YES if you see someone betting every pot on the button go ahead and check, but for huge decisions preflop that have reprecussions for your entire tourney throw these weak reads out and play your cards. It might sound elementary but i really believe this is the way to go. Based on all the quasi-bad beat stories in here about moving in with 9,9 bc you read him overly aggressive etc etc then he showed you 2 black cowboys etc etc...I believe it more and more...

[jakethebake]

I wish I had back every bet I threw out there because I thought I had a "read" on a player because I'm frankly lousy at reading people. With that said, I think sometimes when people talk about a read on a player, they're really talking about a read on the hand given the betting and the board. I read a good article by Negreaneau recently (I don't have the link) where he talks about the difference and that the latter is usually much more important.

[Stoneii]

Online players tend not to have the luxury of playing the same players time and time again in cardrooms, casinos or card clubs. Nor can they expect to play (at levels the majority play at I may add - different for higher levels I presume) the same player very often at all.

So, albeit a much weaker read than perhaps you would be comfortable making coming from a live poker background, it is all they have to go on. Sometimes a 30 minute read on a players style can be remarkably accurate.

G'Luck

stoneii

[Cleveland Guy]

Zaxx - I think this is extremely true of online play. 20-30 minutes, escpially in a tournament isn't enough to have a solid read on any player to make it worthwhile to commit chips based on that. There are a few maniacs you can be "fairly certain" against, but still would be cautios.

I think a live game can be a little different. When you can pick up things like how they look at the board, how quick they are to act, how they count their chips, what their conversation is i think you can pick up reads much quicker.

My live reads on the first night of playing with someone are much stronger than an online read I might have played in 4-5 different SnG's with.

[TakeMeToTheRiver]

I have just started to play more live tournaments and I think that you can get a basic read on many players during the first 1/2 hour. I cannot necessarily say that a tight player is aggressive or passive, but you can certainly identify the players that are inexperienced or primarily home game players. In a low stake MTT, these are the people that will limp pre-flop on nearly every unraised hand. Frequently, these players will go to showdown with an offsuit Kx and win a small pot or lose a big one with second pair or to an obvious flush. The inexperienced players also give off signs by not understanding the rules -- most commonly they try to raise with one chip without saying anything or they string bet -- I often here "I call and raise..." in these tournaments.

It is more difficult to do this online, but the beginners and frequent limpers still show themselves (hopefully while they still have chips and before you get an opportunity to take them).

[zaxx19]

I had a BIG problem with string betting in Vegas and honestly i see it all the time on WPT episodes. What is the agreed upon rule? Must all the chips be moved in one motion or is that only if yu dont announce the amount??

[TakeMeToTheRiver]

[ QUOTE ]
I had a BIG problem with string betting in Vegas and honestly i see it all the time on WPT episodes. What is the agreed upon rule? Must all the chips be moved in one motion or is that only if yu dont announce the amount??

[/ QUOTE ]

First -- here is what I do: Once I decide to raise, I say the word raise. I then take a second to decide how much to raise (or take a second even if I know how much I will raise) and state that amount. (During the brief pause I may look around and see what the reaction of the other players in the hand is -- thereby getting a little more information without it being a string bet.)

My understanding of the rule (and I could be off) is that if you don't say anything, you must make your bet/raise in a single motion. If you say raise, you don't need to put all the chips out in a single motion. You should also not count your chips in front of your cards where the motions can be misinterpreted. If you say an amount but put out a different amount of chips, your words bind you.

I got into a little fight with a dealer over the one-chip rule a couple of days ago. Blinds were 25/50, I was BB. A novice player in MP threw in a T100 chip and just before the next player mucked, he said raise. The dealer announced the raise. I told the dealer that it was only a call and he told me to relax the guy was new... as it turns out, the button reraised while I was talking, so I let it go and mucked my 83o.

[adanthar]

For most, but not all, online players 20-30 hands is more than enough to determine where they fall on the fishdar. For many, it's exactly one hand.

If a guy thinks long and hard before cold calling, calls every bet from there on on a KQJ board and eventually shows down K6s, he's a fish.
If a guy raised 6 of his first 10 hands, once in a great while, he got big pairs six times. 99% of the time, he's a fish.
If a guy limp/reraises all in on the first hand and shows down a pair of sevens, he's a fish. Sometimes, when combined with another type of fish, he actually has a suited connector.

There's six or seven more of these archetypes and they're all pretty much obvious before level 2 ends (usually much earlier.)

[2005]

well, I'm gonna disagree with you on one of these. Limp-re-raising w/ 77 can be a very good play. You are doing it to set up those times when you limp-reraise all in w/ AA, KK, QQ, or AK. You are hoping to be able to show 77, 99 etc. when you do this though.

Gavin Griffin

[adanthar]

If your name is Mistermo and/or you have 2000 posts here, yeah, that might be a viable setup. You can easily tell those guys apart from the fish because after 10 hands their VP$IP is 20% and the ones I'm talking about will be at 80%.

(I still hate that play and will never use it early in a tournament because on Party 88 calls anyway.)