Default read on new players?

[tor]

What is your default read on new players and why? I hear a lot of respecting a player until they give you a reason not to, but I just read in SSH that when unsure of a table's texture at these low limits, assume that it's loose. Does that rule of thumb translate to individuals as well?

[bottomset]

what limit are you playing?

I usually assume slightly too loose to way too loose, way to passive preflop and post .. till shown otherwise

[tor]

[ QUOTE ]
what limit are you playing?

[/ QUOTE ]

.50/1 party, .25/50 on UB
.05/.10 on UB when tweaking things

[cold_cash]

I've played quite a few hands online at levels between .50/1 and 3/6.

At the 1/2 games and below (especially shorthanded), I assume all of my opponents are retarded until I'm shown otherwise. Most of these players are way too loose before the flop, and way too bad after the flop.

As you go up I think you should extend a little more respect to unknown opponents, but I would never assume an opponent is tough based solely on the limit he or she is playing.

It's true that there are less dopes as you move up, but they're still out there. At the lower levels you can't swing a dead cat by the tail without hitting one.

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
At the 1/2 games and below (especially shorthanded), I assume all of my opponents are retarded until I'm shown otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

[GrunchCan]

I make no assumptions of any opponent until I see thier play. I'll just play straight percentages poker until I know what they are doing. Observation is crucial.

[tor]

Uh, so you play against based on any random hand? How can you possibly interpret what an action of a player means with no prior information or assumptions? I mean, that's what assumptions are for, to substitute in the absence of reads. Something as simple as whether or not a player called/raised/checked preflop is heavily influenced by reads/assumptions and contributes to decisions later in a hand.

Maybe I don't get this. Kindly explain further, and share the love.

[shadow29]

I've played from .05/.10 to 3/6. I assume that all my opponents are donkeys until shown othewise.

I've sweated some 5/10 and I think that I respect them a bit more there.

[johnc]

I treat new players as just that new, blank slate. I try not to assume anything, good, bad or otherwise. I know at the micros the quality of player is, in general, low or horrible but my initial reaction to a new player must not be biased. Every tiny piece of info gathered from that point forward is what I'll use to form an OBJECTIVE assessment of anyone new to the table. He'll prove his skill (or lack thereof) based upon his play. Subjective or biased assessment of a player just because he plays at certain level delays a more accurate picture of whom I'm up against and how to extract the most $ from him.

[tor]

It sounds like you're kind of saying the same thing as GrunchCan, but I'm missing something. A clean slate has to assume your average player starts *somewhere* on the spectrum from Loose-Tight/Passive-Aggresive, even if it's right in the middle.

Am I correct in interpreting what you're saying as seeing them as neutral-neutral?

I don't see the assumption as delaying any read on a player as long as you're paying attention and are equating certain actions with playstyles. As things grow on you decide on what you've seen and cast away your "crutch" of where the player started.