|
|
Mix it or leave it alone?
We all know one of the most important aspects of poker is figuring out early on who the fish at the table is. I'm not going to pull out the ever so corny saying, which states that if you can't figure the other players out soon enough you are probably the weakest player there, because it's been worn out already, but the matter of the fact is, the statement it makes, remains true.
Figuring out the other players, though, is only half of the prerequisites required to make an outstanding player who is constantly up to the challenge to win hands.
Confusing the opposition should be just as well part of the plan as figuring them out is. Being read in online poker is certain to translate in losses. Been there, done that, learnt it the hard way... And don't you for a second believe, that playing online poker or playing at an online casino will make it harder for the opponents to read you and relax because of this false sense of safety.
The way you play tells more about you than a thousand words and images. Confusing the opposition though is easier said than done. This is probably one of the most important and in the same time most challenging things to achieve in poker. As such it seems to be plagued by a series of contradictions I'll try to elaborate on in this article.
Many experts will tell you that if you really want to confuse the other players you need to vary your play. This makes perfect sense, however, we already run into the first set of contradictions regarding this matter. Basic sound poker play dictates that – since the nature of the game requires it – one should fold on all hands that don;t show potential, then try to milk the hands that do to the best possible extent.
This makes sense and all, but the fact is, this is an easily readable approach and it'll backfire every time one decides to move in on a good hand. Limping in on it would be a theoretical solution, however that will already give too much away as well. I did a study on this matter and discovered that, if one plays every hand by the above mentioned rule, even limping in will cause as much stir as if one went all in.
Poker rakeback - you'll be read and consequently penalized on the pot.
So this is the first contradiction: playing sound doesn't add up well with a varied play. This is exactly why good poker players aren't found every step of the way. Finding a solution to marry the two oppposing things off doesn't only take skill but a good amount of a 6th sense type "feel" that can only be acquired through countless hours of practice.
Now for the other contradiction: Let's assume you play a monotonous game, and many people around the table feel they have you figured out. You bet three times the big blind just to try to confuse everybody on the flop, even when there's little you can act on. They get used to it. Suddenly you get hit by a good hand, and you decide you need to get more action on the pot since you're almost sure you'll be able to take it.
You limp in on the flop, and you're suprized to see everyone fold left and right to you, leaving you with little but your own money in the pot.
What happened?
You approached the prey from where the wind blew. That is the limp gave you away. Them guys being used to seeing you post tripple the big blind, needed litle more than your 'uncharacteristic' limp to sense that you had something brewing for them. You varied your play and lost. They still read you. In this situation it is obvious you should've stuck to your old ways and not vary anything. It might sound crazy, but in this case the lack of variation would've brought you the pot you had been after.
This leads us to the same conclusion as the beforehand pradox did. Knowing when and how to confuse the opposition is nothing short of an artform, and this is exactly why some players keep on winning whilst others lose most of the time.
|
|
