"When weak act strong"?

[Orpheus]

I can't deny the wisdom of this at all, but in low stake limit games, not applying this rule gave my BB/100 a very solid boost. In fact, learning not to apply this rule (at low stakes) was probably what let me turn the corner from "equivocal breakeven or low winner" to "solid winner" who expects to clear a profit each time he sits down (I don't always, of course, but I'm surprised and disappointed when I don't -- and I'm sure most of you remember the glorious secondary boost that confidence gave to your game, when you solidly turned that corner, even if you started out lucky.

Don't get me wrong. I know I'm no shark. I could put T. Lobsang Rampa (a once-prominent Tibetan monk) on tilt just by showing the hand he folded to. A blind three year old could outdraw me with a dried-out pen (There seemed to be a bunch of angry toddlers at the tables where I cleared my last bonus -- "U R' and similar phrases always suggest a bare familiarity with the alphabet, and none with spelling).

Still, though I doubt I bluff even once an hour (if that much. It's probably more likely that I misread my hand--an occupational hazard of playing blind three year olds), I find that there is usually at 2-3 players at a low stakes table who have clearly read -and completely misunderstood- Mike Caro's Book of Tells In fact, some of these young guns seem to be waiting for someone to raise, so they can take *our* "transparent bluff raises" as a personal affront to their player-reading skills (Well, what are we supposed to do when we flop a flush? Slowplay to give the board a chance to pair? Sheesh!)

Let me be clear. I'm not picking on Caro. I haven't even gotten around to reading his book yet. It's not his fault that it has a special appeal for peoples with a two digit BB and three digits total hands--who haven't mastered the cashout, but are already checking hotel rates for next years WSOP. I only mention him because an irate disciple took his name in vain at Interpoker this afternoon.

As I said, I absolutely agree that "when weak, act strong" has great merit. I wouldn't be surprised if the next step in my evolution is relearning this lesson which I unlearned the hard way. Poker is like that. A lot.

Naturally, any rule works poorly when practiced poorly, but I'd enjoy hearing some discussion of the rule, and your experiences with it -good and bad- at various levels. I feel like I may be overripe for picking up some subtleties, that I'm playing too straightforwardly. I am getting so fat dumb and happy where I am that I actually caught myself saying "I think I'll keep playing this level for another thirty or fifty thousand hands, so my stats are valid."

Or maybe I'm just overripe because I need a shower.

[MtDon]

I can't tell from your post whether you understand what the "weak means strong, strong means weak" rule is. It is not "when weak act strong!" You do need to read Caro's advice on reading tells. It's one of the basic, must have, poker books; but it primarily applies to B&M poker and not internet poker. He has plenty of articles on the internet, so you don't even need to buy his books to get the basics.

[troy5168]

Ya know it is kinda funny though, so many people have heard "when they act weak they're strong and when acting strong they're weak" that it really is benficial to just play str8 forward, betting with both guns a blazing and the absolute nuts and 9 outta 10 times there's at least 1 or 2 callers all the way. Gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.

[redbeer]

I've been lurking a couple of weeks. I think I just saw an instance of the weak-strong dichotomy. Playing a 1 table satellite at Binion's. First hand--5 or 6 limpers. I hit the nut flush on the flop and lead out for $250 (we got 1k in t chips to start). guy pushes-I call (he has trips and does not improve and says"...geez...if you had it, I didn't think you'd bet it." So many folks play weak when they are strong the reverse effect has almost occurred.

[jedi]

I was at a table that had 3 or 4 total fish, calling everything. I flopped a full house. Normally, I'd slowplay this a little, but figured why bother? I got some nutjob calling me down with KQ high, and 3 other people calling me drawing dead after the turn.

[Esteeban]

I just discovered 2 + 2 and I am excited about closing up the many holes in my game. This represents some weak play on my part but I think this also reemphasizes the point made here. I was in a NL game (blinds $5 and $10) recently and a raiser made it $30 from early position. There were 2 callers and the raiser had been raising with a number of hands so I decided to play 89s from the button. The flop came 983 rainbow. The raiser bet $40 there were 2 callers so I made it $100 to go. The raiser called and the 2 other players folded. At this point I put him on an overpair or a straight draw (unlikely). The turn was a 2 and the raiser checked. I bet $100 and he came over the top making it $200. The only thing that could have had me beat was a set and since he bet into me the $40 on the flop with that crappy flop I thought why would anyone come out betting with a set with that flop. I ended up pushing another $500 and losing to a set of 3's. If he had checked on his first play I certainly would have never pushed and would have never called the over the top bet. It is interesting how I expect players to slow play strong hands and when they don't it really throws me off.

[Louie Landale]

A great rule for low limits is this: try desperately to give your hand away. They play so loose, don't really know what you are representing, and don't do anything about it anyway that its definately detrimental to try to disguise your hand. Yup, they know they're beat but call anyway. And this is great against the "tricksy" folks who presume that everyone who knows what they are doing play "tricksy".

Even in tough games, the correct way to play is, well, the correct way to play. The main reason to disguise your hand ..err.. play 'incorrectly', is not to disguise this one but to disquise the ones you DO play correctly.

When weak play weak. When strong play strong. I have no idea where you heard the reverse advise, but it wasn't here.

- Louie

Now "Triksy" is for folks who will bet Ks with a Q but lay it down for a raise against you, since they know you won't raise with KJ. Now you probably DO want to just call with AK and raise with the pair of 7s.

[LoosenUp]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been lurking a couple of weeks. I think I just saw an instance of the weak-strong dichotomy. Playing a 1 table satellite at Binion's. First hand--5 or 6 limpers. I hit the nut flush on the flop and lead out for $250 (we got 1k in t chips to start). guy pushes-I call (he has trips and does not improve and says"...geez...if you had it, I didn't think you'd bet it." So many folks play weak when they are strong the reverse effect has almost occurred.

[/ QUOTE ]

You all have misunderstood this principle. It is not when weak act strong or the other way around and it hasn't anything to do with betting amounts or slow playing. (weak means strong, strong means weak is the principle )
P.S. your bet into 5 limpers w/ the nut flush makes absolutely no sense, you did not include blind size or pot size so I can't say how deranged it was. Most tournys start at what 25,25 more likely 25, 50 , so if they were in that ballpark, you bet 250 (a pot size bet into 5 other limpers) great way to shut everyone out of the pot and get no action on the hand.

[MtDon]

[ QUOTE ]
A great rule for low limits is this: try desperately to give your hand away. They play so loose, don't really know what you are representing, and don't do anything about it anyway that its definately detrimental to try to disguise your hand. Yup, they know they're beat but call anyway. And this is great against the "tricksy" folks who presume that everyone who knows what they are doing play "tricksy".

Even in tough games, the correct way to play is, well, the correct way to play. The main reason to disguise your hand ..err.. play 'incorrectly', is not to disguise this one but to disquise the ones you DO play correctly.

When weak play weak. When strong play strong. I have no idea where you heard the reverse advise, but it wasn't here.

- Louie

Now "Triksy" is for folks who will bet Ks with a Q but lay it down for a raise against you, since they know you won't raise with KJ. Now you probably DO want to just call with AK and raise with the pair of 7s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some of the posters seem to be using the terms weak play vs strong play as synonyms for slow play vs fast play or tricky play (Caro's "Fancy Play Syndrome" [FPS]) vs straight forward play.

The OP wrote that he hadn't read Caro's book on tells. Which is where the "weak means strong, strong means weak" phrase comes from. Which refers to how to interprete a tell when you think the other player is acting.

-- Don