Play the math or the player, which one?

[winky51]

I have been reading some articles and speaking to some people that are real math whizzes. They play a certain that is mathematically correct. Doesn't matter the other players just play mathematically correct. Sounds like you?

Personally I can't do that. I play 4 tables of 3/6 and keep notes on all my players. Got my own system of abbreviations and values. I change my play for a particular player. I would have to say that in situations where a math whiz would fold I have done something different that allows me to win the pot.

For me players that make me play different.

SUPER Calling Stations: Those you can't bluff and ALWAYS call when they have a pair or obvious draw. So on a board of Q72 rainbow you can't continue betting your AK vs this player. You know they have a pair and wont fold.

BLUFFERS: I have a number of notorious bluffers noted and I have to call them down on many hands that seem good but you would normally fold against the turn raise. I'm talking about people that limp reraise with J5 off suit and then bet all the way down and all you got is a pair of 9s. These kind of bluffers. Reraise on a gut shot on the flop or the turn even.

RAISE ANY PAIR: There are those that raise on any pair they have fore the flop or on the flop into any # of players. I have even seen them raise on the turn in the same hand.

These are the 3 major types I have in my notes that turn me from the math player to the tell player. I just can't play the math and have these types bluff at me hand after hand. Don't know how the pure analysts handle it.

Opinions? Comments? Is my style wrong? What type are you?

I would say I am 60% math 40% psychology when I play.

[prox]

I'm 65% psychology/reading , 35% math ... there's a book by Matt Matros (he was on one of those WPT final tables on tv) coming out next year who supposedly plays solely on math.

[stinkypete]

anyone that plays "purely on math" and is good will incorporate such obvious behaviour into their math. the image of a "math player" that you have built up in your mind is very wrong.

[winky51]

Well the odd thing is that I know an all math player. Never uses tells and never has played live. He makes good money online 10/20 15/30 playing multiple tables. But I don't know how he can always win without someone realizing how he plays.

If I see some player constantly folding to a turn raise when the board looks scary then I start thinking "bluff" and I have to assume that other players do the same.

He plays VERY VERY tight seeing probably 14% of the flop, maybe less. I tried his strategy playing my 4x 3/6 and it just didnt work. When I got a hand people never gave me action and I lost money. I would win tiny pots because the other players knew I was playing that tight.

So this is why I posted this question. I wanted to know how many people play just by math and how many by psychology.

When I say I am 60/40 it means that I play proper pot odds and make calls. I count all the possible hands against me and the chances to win. But there are times that a check becomes a bet, a call becomes a raise, a bet on the river becomes a check to induce a bluff, because of who is in the pot. Some I can bluff, some I can't. but these decisions are involved in 40% of hands.

[JoshuaD]

Sklansky is the epitome of a "Math Player" to me, and he often talks about reads in his discussion of poker.

I agree with the above poster, I think you're view of a "Math Player" is skewed.

[pokerkai]

why do you think their mutually exclusive???
making the correct mathematical play relies heavily on playing the player

[jclin]

[ QUOTE ]
why do you think their mutually exclusive???
making the correct mathematical play relies heavily on playing the player

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent point. I think the mathematics are always a good basis, but the "mathematics" is what matters most. It just takes a lot of playing and tells, even if it is online tells.

[Richard Berg]

"Mathematical play" that doesn't incorporate opponent tendencies is an oxymoron. Ok not quite, just really dumb/lazy.

[winky51]

I agree but I know players that consider themselves "math" players and do NOT take into account the other player and are successful. Thats what I can't understand. But perhaps I just misheard them.

[John Deere]

Funny, I have a friend who is a complete "read" player and nothing else. He refuses to read any poker books or listen to theory or mathematics... he insists that you need to develop your own strategy instead of listening to everyone else. He doesn't know the first thing about odds or value, and plays about twice as many hands as I do. He tells me that whenever he is checked to, he is always going to bet, because he likes to "see who has a hand and who doesn't" -- even if _he_ doesn't. And the thing I can't understand is how, night after night, he makes a ton of money playing this way. I have been waiting for months for the odds to catch up to him, but they haven't yet.