Personality traits affect game (long)

[AlienBoy]

Great thread, though I don't have much to add - though I wonder if it can be broken down into a way that makes for +EV plays?

AB

[JJNJustin]

I am surprised this thread has been bumped. Yeah I was going thru one of my hypo-manic periods and had this need to write profusely about personality types. I dont necessarily use this all that much in my game, but it does help to understand why they play the way they do. And it is a good general guideline when trying to get a fix on unknown players. But mostly, you will gain the most information by watching how they play on each hand. However, these are just some observations I've had about poker players over the years, and the various traits almost always fall in clusters.

I am a very rigid player, but try to dress in a very flamboyant manner in an attempt to give off the impression of a "loose gambler", so you are right that some regular players intentionally dress differently in order to create an illusion. A wolf in sheep's clothing is the correct metaphor. One funny thing I have noticed is that eventhough I am wearing flamboyant clothes, I am wearing them regularly in very routine combinations, which is typical of the rigid personality trait.

It's not like I am trying to promote this is the do-all end-all of personality types, but usually, in a player, if I start to see one or more of the various traits, eventually I start to see the rest of them appear sooner or later. I find it helpful to know in advance how I am going to play against a very timid player vs. a misanthropic player.

Here is a little summary of strengths and weaknesses:

Strengths | Weaknesses

Rigid: math, logic, discipline | predictable, instinct
Imp: instinct, psychology | addictions, gambling
Comp: aggression, good cards | tilt, making laydowns, ego
Timid: usually plays very tight | failing to maximize value
Misantr: tilts others into losing, hard to read | too lose, chases, emotions control him
Benev: instinct, patience | have subconscious difficulty taking others money

-J

p.s. for those interesed, here is a link to some photos I found that seem indicative of these personality traits, yet I should preface that by saying that to truly identify these types, you have to actually sit and play with them and watch what they do, not just what they look like.
photos

-J

[JJNJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
a liking for more daring exotic food such as sushi

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. Oh yes, very daring and exotic..

Like most psychological theories going right back to Freud, I've got a strong suspicion that this stuff tells you much more about the person that came up with it than about anyone else. No offense. I just think people are much, much more complex than you're them giving credit for.

The only other comment I'd make is that I'm not convinced I see what use all this personality stuff is, even if it were complete and correct (which I don't think this is).

What matters is how your opponents play, not what they look like, what they eat, etc. Image can easily be manipulated for a start - Chris Ferguson, Amarillo Slim, Doyle Brunson, Sam Farha etc all have talked on this point before. Your own snap judgements about someone's personality are more likely IMHO to cause you to make incorrect assumptions about your opponent's play than they are to give you any special insight. Test them and see how they play and react to that, not all the extraneous static.

Interesting and thought-provoking post though, thanks for all the work.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really wasnt trying to emphasize the external physical attributes of these people, but rather use these features in conjuction with their overall personality profile to help identify a pattern. I agree with you that surface features such as dress and food preference are not reliable enough to make complete judgements.

This is where I find surface details to be helpful. Say you sit down at a table, and you see a guy with rather flamboyant dress, either a flashy shirt, or a well groomed modern looking haircut/beard and or jewelry. Now normally you might just ignore this. But from my experience and my thoughts about this topic, the first thing I think is, may be an impulsive/thrill seeking gambler type. I dont make a conclusion about him, but I watch his betting patterns more closely. Then maybe later on he asks for a set-up, or he says something like "I knew you thought I thought that," or he makes a risky call with something like Ace high but it turns out to be right. I start piling up points in that impulsive gambling category. This doesnt mean someone who plays like that always has to be wearing flamboyant clothes. Just like in poker there are no across the board definites.

Obviously, you should never make stereotypical judgements based on what food someone eats or what they wear. But I have just noticed that often these various traits tend to appear together, so any that I notice I have listed in this thread, no matter how superficial or seemingly irrelevant.

I dont even know if my descriptions would help your game very much. I'm not even sure it helps my own game. But it does help me to understand my opponents and what motivates them. I am not a good enough player to develope sophisticated strategies in dealing with the various players, although I am getting better at it. My hope by posting this thread was that other players on this site who are much more experienced than myself could help discuss appropriate strategies or more importantly adjustments for playing against these particular styles.

You probably noticed that my "rigid" profile basically describes a "tight" player, however with other detail. My "impulsive" profile describes a "loose" player similarly. My "competetive" profile describes an aggressive player, "timid" describes a passive player. Misanthrop/benevolent scale seems to represent a different undiscussed axis.

So, a TAG, as you would call it, in my terms, describes someone who is Rigid and Competitive/Dominant. A LAG, would be Impulsive/Gambling and Competitive/Dominant. It is totally possible for someone to be neutral along an axis as well, and have no malevolence/benevolence rating. There are so many combinations you can come up with.

In the game I've been playing in lately, for example, the typical profile is Rigid/Timid/Benevolent. The majority of the players play only good cards, and afraid to bet or raise without the nuts, and in general never bluff and hardly ever check raise. This is not a typical game, and I've had to make small adjustments for playing against these kinds of characters.

Here are some general rules of thumb or tips:

Rigid- dont get involved in their pots unless your hand figures to be superior. Try to give off the impression that you are mentally incompetent. If they think you play well, you wont get any action from them unless you are beat.
Impulsive-dont let them trap you, dont let them bluff you, dont ever give free cards. Dont automatically lay-down. Try to avoid heads up pots with them if they play well and force them to show down the winner in a multiway pot as it takes away all their psychological and instinctual weapons.
Competitive- watch them for tilt. Tighten up slightly due to their frequent raising. Use them as your hand protector by betting into them. With big hands, challenge them in an aggressive way rather than slowplay as the aggressive challenge sets off some primitive desire for dominance and they may put in many bets without backing off. A timely c/r bluff may work more often.
Timid player- lay down decent and good hands more frequently against their bets and raises. Dont worry about being re-raised. Never check/raise bluff ever and bluff with caution. They exhibit all kinds of uncertainty which may automatically induce you into bluffing or value betting, yet they call anyways because they are too scared to bet.
Malevolent- most importantly, resist their attempts to tilt you. Play solid poker and value bet often as they are distrustful and pay off. Since they often have nothing, induce bluffs by showing weakness when strong. Rarely bluff as they never trust anyone anyways, unless you have nothing and are certain they have nothing, however, beware they will be quick to re-steal. As they say, you can not bluff a a bluffer.
Benevolent- donk bets indicate more strength than normal. dont look for bluffs. Try to play heads up pots with them. They give away their hands often due to their inherent honesty. Be especially nice to them and they will be less inclined to play well against you. Make them angry and they may play better against you.

Good luck

-J

[zelwood]

Hope that helps you out at the 4-8 game.

[JJNJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
Hope that helps you out at the 4-8 game.

[/ QUOTE ]
Stay out of my thread troll.

-J

[Bill King]

hey justin,

a lot of the stuff you've touched on here is of particular interest to me. thankfully, at school i get to educate myself with professors and material which is readily available and at my exposure.. but i'd love to chat some time about common situations you experience a lot of this with in B&M environment.. since i basically play only live.

let me know, PM me..
-Bill

[Poker_Ace]

Thanks for the thoughtful posts. I found them to be extremely interesting. I fit your "competitive" profile almost exactly, even the follow up about doing well financially and in school. Now, if I could just translate a bit of introspection into tilt avoidance . . .

[JJNJustin]

I figured out how to move my sample pictures into this thread. If anyone has any more to add, feel free.

Here are some good sample photos of players whom I describe in each of the six categories:

Rigid/Grinder types:


Impulsive/Gambling Types:


Competitive/Aggressive Types:


Timid/Shy Types:
no photos

Misanthropes/Malevolent Types:


Socially Sensitive/Benevolent Types:


If anyone has any more photos, especially of stereotypical "timid tentative types" I would appreciate them, as I can not find any I find to be indicative of these types of players.

-J

[Reber]

I usually just lurk but this extended series of posts on the personality traits that affect poker got the ol' professor stoked.

I appreciate what Justin is trying to do. Others have tried as well. Alas, there is a HUGE literature in psychology on personality, personality types, personality traits and the degree to which they (if they actually exist) predict behavior.

The bottom line is not inspiring. There appear to be a few fairly stable characteristics that can be used to classify people. They are "neuroticism", "extraversion" "openess", "agreeableness"and "conscientiousness". None of these has the slightest relationship to the ones identified and discussed in this thread.
The problem is that the types cited are based on simple observations and attempts to generalize. Alas, the data are utterly compelling. These so-called personality types are not real; they do not really capture who people are, what they do or how they will react to particular situations.
I know, I know.... They FEEL real to you but, trust me, whenever careful studies are carried out they turn out to be illusions.
For the purpose of playing poker, we are all better off if we try to asses each individual at the table in terms of how they play and how best to play against them. This will go a lot further than trying to pigeon-hole them into a largely illusory personality type.

[JJNJustin]

Maybe you should go back to lurking.

-J