|
|
|
|
|
|
SPONSORED BY
|
|
|
Poker's rich and colorful history has has lent itself to a similarly rich glossary of terms and phrases used to describe elements of the game. Clicking the links below will take you to Wikipedia's complete alphabetized index of terms and information regarding the playing of poker. Both fun and informative, the information will familiarize new players with the jargon and basic information of poker and help experienced players develop a deeper understanding of the game. Enjoy! Know Thy Enemy: Profiling your Opponents by Jennifer "The Poker Shrink" Cummings, M.D. "So it is said that if you know others and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know others but know yourself, you win one and lose one; if you do not know others and do not know yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle" Sun Tzu, The Art of War The situation: middle of a $100 buy-in multi-table tournament in Las Vegas. You’re in the big blind. All the players fold to the player on the cutoff (one before the button). This player peeks at her cards, chews on her lip, and raises four times the big blind, counting her chips carefully but placing them on the table with what seems like a confident motion. You notice that she is blinking quickly. She puts her chin in her hands, covering her mouth. So, is she bluffing, or not? Well, that depends. For sake of argument, let’s imagine that before this hand you had made the following observations of this player (let’s call this player “Nervous Nancy”). Nancy is wearing a turtleneck sweater and has a demure look about her. Early in the tournament you’d asked her if she played a lot of tournaments, and she told you this was only her second tournament, and that she played online “a little – nickel and dime games, though.” She has frequently been counting and recounting her chips. She has played about one hand in ten and has folded in the small blind several times, even when there had not been any raises to her. In her only showdown she won with a solid hand (trip nines). She’d seemed anxious during that hand, even though there had been no straight or flush possibilities on board. In fact, she has seemed anxious in general, which you noticed because she has been smiling shyly, pursing her lips, and demonstrating self-soothing behaviors like hand rubbing. Is Nancy likely to be bluffing? Now let’s say that your previous observations had been different. Let’s call this other hypothetical player “Gabby Gambler”). Gabby is attractively made up and is wearing a shimmery low-cut blouse. She’d earlier revealed that she played in tournaments several times a year during vacations to Vegas. She also said that she’d recently placed fourth in an online tournament, netting $500. She had been chatting about her great run at the craps table the night before. She has been playing about four hands per go-round, and occasionally raising (especially on or near the button). She has seemed happy, relaxed, talkative, and fairly confident through the tournament. So, bluffing or not? The example above is a bit exaggerated, but highlights the importance of “knowing your enemy” when you are making decisions at the poker table. Most non-poker players are familiar with the concept of “tells” – behaviors that offer clues as to the actual strength of a player’s hand. “Tells” include generalizable behaviors (the tremor that occurs when you’ve hit a monster hand) as well as individual, idiosyncratic behaviors (perhaps the most famous being John Malkovich’s “Oreo tell” in the movie Rounders). But just as important to the game as understanding “tells” – probably even more important – is the ability to infer what kind of player your opponent is. Is your opponent at the table to gab and gamble, or is he there to calculate his pot odds, make solid decisions, and take home a profit? Does your opponent hope to “get lucky,” or is your opponent terrified of losing? Knowing your enemy is hard. It requires that you make initial guesses about your opponent’s style. These initial guesses will be based on limited information (eg, assuming that the kid with the tattoos and the nose ring will probably be an aggressive player) and may be completely off-target (although it is usually good to make initial guesses). As the game proceeds, you should continually gather data and refine your concept of who your opponents are. Observe their appearance, manner, table talk, betting patterns -- everything. The goal is to develop a mental picture of your opponents that you can use as a backdrop for your decision making. “Profiling” will give you an idea of the ranges of hands your opponents are willing to play, the amount of risk they are willing to tolerate, and the degree to which they rely on luck rather than solid play. It also will provide a context for any “tells” that might become important later in the game. Basic Profiles: Betting Patterns Probably the most important (and easiest) place to start “profiling” your opponents is by looking at their betting patterns. How often do they fold, check, call, raise, reraise, checkraise? While other clues as to profiling carry many caveats (eg, that guy in the bow tie with the neatly stacked chips is probably very conservative – a reasonable guess, but a guess all the same), when you study your opponent’s frequency of bets and raises you are basically gathering statistics – imperfect information, but probably better than guesses and stereotypes. If, over the course of one hundred initial betting rounds, a player limps in fifty times, you can safely assume that that player is often limping in with poor hands, just because the vast majority of starting hands that are dealt are poor hands. Observing betting patterns is the main – sometimes only – characteristic you will be able to pick up on in online play. It’s therefore worthwhile to learn to keep track. And, as Dan Harrington has aptly noted, players are free to conceal tells, to fake tells, or to sit there like a statue… but everyone has to bet! In terms of developing a profile, probably the best way to start off is to get a general impression of each player as “loose” or “tight.” The most reliable way to do this is to count or estimate the number of hands your opponent is going in with. If they’re going in with a lot of hands, they’re probably loose (or -- much less likely, but possible -- on a very good run of cards). It is probably safe to suppose that they are willing to play weaker starting hands than other players. Conversely, players who are consistently mucking their cards are probably tighter. They should be given credit for good hands when they represent them. Additionally, you’ll want to have an idea of whether your opponents are passive (tend to call a lot, but rarely raise) or aggressive (with a tendency to bet and raise a lot). Don’t confuse someone who is loose but passive (limps in a lot) with someone who is aggressive. A solid raise by a loose but passive player likely indicates a solid hand. Many writers (eg, Schoonmaker 2000, Hellmuth 2003) basically categorize players into four quadrants based on loose-tight, aggressive-passive axes. The four player types are “loose passive” (“the calling station”), loose aggressive (“the maniac”), tight passive (“the rock”), and tight aggressive (“the solid player”). Hellmuth categorizes players as different types of animals that roughly represent these four quadrants: the elephant (loose passive), the jackal (loose aggressive), the mouse (tight passive), and the lion (tight aggressive). (Hellmuth of course is in a special category all his own: “the eagle,” who has a bird’s-eye view of the table landscape and swoops down from the air to pick off other players’ chips when hungry.) I refer you to both of these excellent books for more information about these types of players (see resources, below). Profiling: Beyond Betting Patterns Other than betting patterns, there’s a lot of other information out there that can clue you in as to the type of player your opponent is. Some of the information is sitting on the table, there for all to see and make educated guesses about. Some of the information will appear only if you elicit it. Caro’s Laws: The purchase, care and maintenance of chips. Mike Caro’s (Caro 2003) first law of tells states that players often stack chips in a manner indicative of their playing style – conservative means conservative, and sloppy means sloppy. That is, a player sitting there with tidy stacks of chips is more likely to have a conservative playing style, with a tendency to be tight and perhaps easier to bluff. By contrast, a pile of chips that resembles a load of laundry may indicate a looser player, one less conscious of his of his exact wins and losses – a player who is at the table to gamble and have fun rather than to sit around calculating his pot odds and making good decisions. No one has ever done a scientific study to see if tidy chip stackers are more conservative players than messy ones. Some authors (for example, Burgess and Baldassarre 2006) take issue with this “law” of tells, noting that with the surging popularity of no-limit hold-em, most players currently stack their chips in at least a somewhat orderly fashion just because one’s entire stack may have to be counted at any time, and having one’s chips in a big sloppy mountain is rude. This fits with my own observations. However, even these authors acknowledge that the occasional chip-sloppy player should be presumed loose until proven otherwise. Additionally, there are different degrees of “neatness” even among tidily stacked chips, which are probably indicative of tightness and looseness to some degree. For example, I have freely advertised my own tight, conservative nature in tournament play by arranging my chips by the amount of the big blind (don’t ask). I have even gone so far as to line up the color bars on the sides of the chips! And I wonder why I never get action on my good hands…. Caro’s second law of tells states that players often buy chips in a manner directly indicative of their style of play. Buying chips flamboyantly (grabbing a few hundreds from one’s pocket and waving them about until the floor person comes) indicates the possibility of a loose and/or aggressive player. Discreetly removing some bills from one’s wallet and asking the dealer for a new buy-in may indicate a tighter player. Something I (and I presume most players) do is to scope out everyone’s chip stack. If there is a maximum buy-in at your table, it is significant when someone has a stack significantly greater than that amount. That person may have simply gotten lucky recently, but can probably be safely assumed to be a good player until you have a reason to think otherwise. Not So Idle Chat: learning more about your opponent In her excellent DVD “Advanced Texas Hold 'Em Secrets - How to Beat the Big Boys,” Annie Duke recommends chatting with opponents in order to gather “profiling” information. She notes that seemingly innocent, polite conversation can actually yield some very helpful information. For example, just asking someone about their work and hobbies can guide you in guessing how risk-averse they are. You might infer that an accountant whose hobbies are reading and needlepoint is likely to be more risk-averse than a day trader whose hobbies are mountain biking and skydiving. If you are in a casino, it might also be helpful to inquire about what other games your opponents have been playing. An aficionado of roulette or craps might also be an aficionado of getting lucky and thus more prone to playing suboptimal hands or “chasing.” Those who stick to poker (and maybe blackjack) may be a little more likely to play in a way that makes good mathematical sense. For the most part, people enjoy talking about themselves and will be happy to chat (though of course you’ll run into the occasional appropriately suspicious person who will give you the cold shoulder). Even more to the point, it is probably worthwhile to talk to your opponents about poker. Again, the most inane polite conversation (“do you play in a lot of tournaments?”) can pave the way to a lot of useful information. Quietly asking people’s opinions about how your other opponents are playing their hands is likely to yield at least a little insight into the way your opponent herself thinks about the game. Even better, ask for advice about your own play. Besides offering you insight into the way your opponent thinks about the game, asking your opponents for “advice” has the potential to be helpful in other ways. First of all, it’s disarming to the other player. If you’re not obnoxious about asking for “help” and “advice,” there’s a chance that the player will be a little less aggressive towards you than he/she otherwise would. [People tend to behave consistently with how they have acted before. Therefore, if they have been “helpful” to you in the past, they are less likely to be “unhelpful” to you in the future – even if you initiated your opponent’s help-giving behavior yourself.] Additionally, if the other player happens to be good, you could learn a thing or two! Most people enjoy talking about themselves, but they enjoy giving advice and feeling like an expert even more. Thus, asking for your opponent’s advice might get him talking more easily than questions about himself. (Non-PC hint: if you are a woman, try asking a man for advice as you play.) (A caveat about having conversations with your opponents – there is always the possibility that your opponent may try to throw you by feeding you false information about him or herself. As with all information you garner during a poker game, put it into context before relying on it to make a huge decision.) “Baselining” – an important complement to “profiling” In addition to “profiling” your opponents’ personalities, it is also important to be aware of what their baseline physical habits are. What are your opponents doing when they’re not in the hand at all? Important characteristics to note are characteristics that you might later interpret as a tell. Do any of your opponents have a baseline tremor? Know this before you lay down trips because someone’s shaky hands cause you to decide that he must have the nut straight. Does your opponent blink faster than average, even when just waiting for the deal? This knowledge might come in handy later when he’s pushed all-in, and you remember that his fast blinking may not actually be a tell that he’s bluffing. Another important “baseline” characteristic to notice is whether the person is anxious. One reason to notice baseline anxiety is that anxiety predicts risk aversion. So, you can guess that the anxious person is less likely to take risks, and to play only solid hands. The second reason to be aware of baseline anxiety is that many common “tells” that are sometimes thought of as indicating bluffing (eg, fast blinking and self-soothing behaviors such as rubbing one’s hands) can be caused by baseline anxiety as well as by bluffing-related anxiety (Ekman, 2001). A highly anxious, risk-averse person may show many signs of “bluffing” when he pushes all in with the second nuts rather than the nuts! Recall “Nervous Nancy” from the vignette. She had been anxious throughout the tournament. She had made a bet in late position in what may have been a blind-steal attempt, and was in fact showing some classic “bluffing” tells. However, the fact that she had played very few hands to that point and been nervous in general (even when playing a strong hand) makes it likely that her rapid blinking and mouth covering are signs of general anxiety about playing rather than anxiety about bluffing. There’s always the possibility that she’s decided to take advantage of her tight image by attempting a bluff, but it’s probably safest to let this one go. “Gabby Gambler” may be a different story, however. Putting it all together: Although it is possible to “profile” and classify players, probably the most important thing to remember is that you should never be stuck on a particular profile. Should evidence to the contrary arise, adjust your ideas. That player you figured was loose may have been on a tremendous card run. That guy in the bow tie with the neatly stacked chips might be a loose aggressive player after all. Keep gathering information, and keep adjusting your thinking. Moreover, “profiling” is of course a vast and extremely complicated topic – understanding and predicting human behavior is a science which has filled hundreds of thousands of books and journals and fueled countless professional careers. (I myself studied neuroscience for four years and have been a psychiatrist for three and a half years and I’m here to tell you – the human animal is a tricky, tricky subject.) Below I’ve listed a few resources to help you build your own profiling (and tell-reading) skills. Resources: Burgess, Randy and Baldassarre, Carl. (2006) Ultimate Guide to Poker Tells. Triumph Books. Caro, Mike (2003) Caro’s Book of Poker Tells. Cardoza Publishing. (The classic. Read it.) Duke, Annie (2005) “Advanced Texas Hold 'Em Secrets - How to Beat the Big Boys” (DVD). (I’m not a big fan of DVD’s, but I think this one is as good as any book. Contains sensible advice about profiling and tells, as well as many other topics.) Hellmuth, Phil (2003) Play Poker Like the Pros. Harper-Collins. McKenna, James (2005) Beyond Tells: Power Poker Psychology. Lyle Stuart Books. Navarro, Joe and Hellmuth, Phil (2006) Read ‘Em and Reap: A career agent’s guide to decoding poker tells. Harper-Collins. Schoonmaker, Alan (2000) The Psychology of Poker. Two Plus Two Publishing, LLC Other works cited: Eisenberg, Amy; Baron, Jonathan; and Seligman, Martin (1998) Individual differences in risk aversion and anxiety. Ekman, Paul (2001) Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage. W.W. Norton and Co, Ltd. Harrington, Dan and Robertie, Bill (2004) Harrington on Hold ‘Em: Expert Strategy for No Limit Tournaments, Vol 1. Two Plus Two Publishing, LLC.
All content is ©Poker Room Radio. All Rights Reserved Sports 1140 KHTK logo is copyright & trademark protected by KHTK sports Radio. All Rights Reserved |
|
