on-line tells

[tripdad]

just wondering if any of you have picked up any tells by online players and what are the more common ones, specifically for limit games.

cheers!

[AttackDog]

Strong means weak, weak means strong

A raise means weakness and a fold means strength

WOOF

[benfranklin]

I wouldn't put too much faith in tells, particularly a long pause before a raise. If it's a tell, it's supposed to mean the raiser is playing weak, like he can't decide to raise or not, and he is trying to suck in some bets. On the other hand, it can mean that he is playing multiple tables and is slow to respond, or that he had trouble fiddling with the bet slider to get it just where he wanted it.

[Sheriff Fatman]

There is one rock-solid tell, particularly at Party/Empire.

A delay of over 1 minute by any player means the ****in site has crashed again.

Works every time.

Sheriff

[rusty JEDI]

Assuming most of us play limit holdem, tells arent worth worrying about.

Players dont change to often so just play the player. If he's a maniac he's a maniac, if he's weak tight then he's weak tight. Players do not often change and getting tricky just doesnt pay off that well.

rJ

[Bubmack]

I do think the pause is a semi-legit tell. But it depends on the player. I will use that Pause when I am bluffing..since most people read it as a strong tell.

Also, a lot of times I try to bet rapidly (a noted sign of weakness) when I am on a big hand.

I would focus on trends in bettting patterns...

For instance: A turn checkraise is very rarely not going to be better than top pait. If you see someone use the turn checkraise with top pait or less...make a note of it.

Also, check/call on the flop and then a turn bet is usually not Stronger than top pair..if someone breaks that mold....make a note of it!! Once you document that...you can determine what someone's bets mean....much more useful than an online tell.

Bubs

[Homer]

A long pause before acting is likely to be a straightforward play (check means weak, bet means strong) whereas a quick action is more likely to be a trick (bet means bluff, check means check-raise).

Against certain opponents, I've used the delayed check to my advantage to squeeze in a few extra river value bets, where I would have checked it through had they acted in a normal amount of time.

-- Homer

[MS Sunshine]

"A long pause before acting is likely to be a straightforward play (check means weak, bet means strong) whereas a quick action is more likely to be a trick (bet means bluff, check means check-raise)."

Well put. I try to match pauses to each player, but it can be something else and players will change-up more than keep the same M.O. The quick actions I like acting on, because players seem to be more hard-wired with these and keep the same one for a while. Warning, in NLH I find that a sudden over-sized all-in bet from an up front caller on a nothing river card is usually the real deal. IMO

MS Sunshine

[gunboat]

Quick/slow actions can never be reliable. In addition to the reasons mentioned, internet delay can cause a series of very quick appearing actions or lengthy delays.

Tells which are very reliable are betting patterns. When you find someone that likes to slow play sets, TPTK, big pairs, etc, a flop bet by that player will be weak - 2nd pair or a draw. This is very reliable.

[Homer]

Quick/slow actions can never be reliable.

Not true. They aren't always reliable, but that doesn't mean they aren't ever reliable. If I'm heads-up on the river and have a borderline decision as to whether I should bet for value or check it through, I'm going to lean towards betting when my opponent waits ten seconds before checking, assuming he/she has been acting in a reasonable amount of time for every other decision.

Tells which are very reliable are betting patterns. When you find someone that likes to slow play sets, TPTK, big pairs, etc, a flop bet by that player will be weak - 2nd pair or a draw. This is very reliable.

Betting patterns are not tells. But yes, they are very reliable, much moreso than tells, such as time taken to act. Of course, that doesn't mean that time taken to act should not be considered at all.

-- Homer