Let's Talk Player Reads

[Festus22]

Having a read on your opponents continues to be emphasized as an important, and in some cases a vital component of one's arsenal. I'm not going to debate that statement per se but I do question just how much weight reads have in determining correct play.

For example, I have notes on a few hundred players with whom I've played 70 or more hands (that's my personal cutoff for considering the data reasonably valid). I'd guess maybe 80% of them have VP$IP/PF Raise numbers within a few points of 15/7. I see these players as pretty much using "normal/good" strategy and the play against them is pretty straight-forward.

The LAG's are pretty easy to spot with or without notes and honestly, I don't have notes on too many since they usually bust out quickly. But again, they're easy to spot and require a different approach.

I have a few tight/passives who I really what out for when they're betting and especially raising.

OK - now with all that said, how many times have my notes and reads REALLY come into play when making a decision? Tough to estimate but in reality, not that much. LAG's get good cards sometimes, tight players can have a surprise hand, even a passive can do the unexpected.

I'd say betting within a hand, pot and implied odds and board/hand reading are all more important in most cases than reads. Reads are tendencies only. Their applicability in any one hand cannot be taken as absolute and can actually lead to erroneous assumptions and mistakes.

Is it a valuable tool? Yes. But only as one, small piece of the overall equation.

I'm probably in the minority but I think reads are overrated in the vast majority of cases.