How much do you trust your reads? (LC)

[kurto]

There are times when the "2+2" side of me is at conflict with the 'gut' side of me. Its very hard sometimes to reconcile instinct with the rational way we approach poker at this site.

I'm just curious how often the grinders here ignore the 'logical' thing to do and trust your reads?

here's the hand that I completely blew... and yet I felt very happy about my read that I completely ignored. (note in advance- I played everything wrong about this hand because my internal alarm bells were screaming and were battling with my brain.)

I'm in the bb and I have pocket kings.

Now I've been sitting at this same table for a couple of hours and it has a rhythm. UTG+1 opens to 6bb. Immediately my alarm bells go off. No one opens for 6bb at this table. The guy has been at the table with me for a few hours. His stats make him TAP. Its hard to describe how glaring this 6bb raise was. Other tables and with other people I wouldn't have blinked. But at this table with this guy.... I said to myself "this guy has aces."

There's another caller… and 99% of the time I reraise here. After all, I have the 2nd best starting hand in poker. But I call.

The flop is something like Q93. I check, the pf raiser bets pot, other guy folds, and it comes back to me. Now the 2+2 is battling with my gut,... "this is not how you play kings. You have played this so passively. You only have to worry about pocket aces or pocket queens here... besides, you're tight, you could rep 2 pair or a set with a checkraise." So I reraise him.

The guy thinks and thinks and thinks… decides he's not folding so he pushes. I gotta call because, heck, I've got pocket Kings and I've bloated the pot so much.

So my hand doesn't improve and, sure enough, he has aces.

I'll be the first to say that we're not, in most cases, supposed to be results oriented. And I've been a part of many a thread about how you shouldn't fold Kings preflop... get it all in if you can. I know that you should normally put your opponent on a range of hands... and I believe all that.

At the same time, sometimes instinct can be better then math. Sometimes you know.

And I'll be the first to say that the difference between a 4bb raise and a 6bb raise 99% of the time isn't the same as someone turning their hand over preflop and showing you their cards. But perhaps 1% of the time that minor pattern difference tells you everything? Learning how to trust that voice in us is difficult. But I know listening to it is important. We need math, logic AND instinct.

To be honest, I don't expect much support here. I've been posting here for years and I don't think I've seen anyone on this forum, particularly at low stakes, who would ever agree to trust a read to this degree, especially with such slim information. But, I actually think this is wrong. There is conscious and subconscious analysis going on all the time at the poker table. I argue that sometimes we KNOW where we stand even if our rational analysis (hand ranges and such) contradict it.

I played everything about this hand wrong... and yet, I would have been thrilled if I trusted my instincts and folded on the flop (or bet/folded... as that's how it should have been played).

I hope this doesn't get me banned for Microstakes [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]


I'm just curious how often the grinders here ignore the 'logical' thing to do and trust your reads?

[/ QUOTE ]

Without reading any further, this is one of those things that I see crop up at 2+2 across all the forums pretty constantly that makes no sense. Reads are an input to the logic; they don't exist independent of the "math" side of the game. Your logic should be incorporating the reads if it's going to be good.

Very, very specific reads like the one you present are a different case, simply because you need a high degree of certainty in order to proceed. Often times we don't have that degree of certainty and so you go with default actions. But, in general, your thought processes shouldn't be as static as "I have kings, this is what I'm supposed to do."

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
Reads are an input to the logic; they don't exist independent of the "math" side of the game. Your logic should be incorporating the reads if it's going to be good.


[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps I should change 'reads' to 'instinct.'

And I think there are different schools of thought here (2+2) regarding how much weight people give to their reads.

Though in this case, I'm saying with minimal information you get smacked in the face with a read. Certainly there is information but not necessarily something you could describe in a 2+2 post. Information that you can't articulate but your brain sounds an alarm.

Mind you- this isn't happening every time I play. More like an occasional hand every couple of weeks.

There are a lot of players who play by feel. Perhaps there's more to it?

[delta k]

try this, it worked for me:

normall i play a certain way, using math, logic, everything I can. but from time to time i'll open up a table lower than my normal stakes and try to play 'read based poker' which involves knowing when i can push TP on the flop, putting my opponent on hands that i beat/beat me, etc. that sounds like normal poker but at my normal stakes i am too focused on the money to make certain calls/folds, especially when the math is in my favor. all the best poker players make their reads and trust them. and i guess my moving down i'm able to trust my reads better (somehow) that I am at my normal stakes. then when i move up i have a better feeling for how i'm playing, what others have, what certain moves mean, etc.

i know it sounds silly (drop down and trust your reads) and maybe i suck at explaining but for me this works. i turn off huds and try to get into the heads of these players and off of autopilot, which would say c/r flop all-in here (or re-raise pf). you had a read and you didn't follow it for one reason or another.

a read you don't trust is nothing.

[ColdSteel]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just curious how often the grinders here ignore the 'logical' thing to do and trust your instincts?

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot.

[ColdSteel]

Instincts are simply the accumulation of experience. There's nothing fuzzy or magical about them, and they aren't invalid.

[Antinome]

Whenever I get that sick feeling, and ignore it because the odds the pot is laying me are so good, I end up regretting wasting the money.

I only one or two table, so I get some sick, detailed reads.

I feel crippled without them.

[FastPlaySlow]

I don't think AQs comes over the top like that. I put a TAP on AA/KK/QQ/AKs/AKo/AQs, and I'd eliminate the AKs/AKo if he'd lead with two to act behind him. I dunno, I felt like you were beat too, but I'd get stacked.

[limit refugee]

I haven't read the book yet, but there was some interesting comments in this thread in HSNL about the book Blink that got my attention andreally hit home with me.

Basically, our brain sums up visual clues and patterns faster than we can even interpret them. That is your instinct and some people are very good with it. I've become alot more aware of this since I switched to NL, as the exceptions to normal patterns stand out alot more than in limit. While I sure as heck don't look into my low limit opponents souls through my computer screen, I'll go with my gut often when something doesn't feel right. The situation doesn't come up often, but the times I've gotten to see the opponents cards, I've usually been happy with the choice.

Who know anything about how these brain things work, but it's pretty neat. Looking forward to reading the book.

[Heine]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm just curious how often the grinders here ignore the 'logical' thing to do and trust your reads?

[/ QUOTE ]

I play only 2-3 tables, only 3 after i have a couple of reads at the first two tables. So reads are huge part of my play.