Hand reading question

[SeanC]

I've been decent at hand reading but not great. My mediocrity is due, mainly, to laziness at the table. I play either online or at home games with friends, and when I'm online I multitable and when I'm at a home game I'm not focused on hands (I'm joking around with friends, whatever). I have a good understanding of the game and am a winning player (yes, I keep a session log), but I want to go to the next level, and I think that the quickest fix to a higher EV in my game is going to be better hand reading.

So, last night at my home game, I really started paying attention to all hands. Every time there was a showdown, I'd run back through the hand and see how each player played it. I'd take note how the person bet when he had top pair, a draw, a bluff, etc., and I'd pay attention to body language. I found it a bit hard, however, to cleanly organize the data in my head. I did make good reads that lead to good laydowns, but these were standard plays for me; with the exception of two or three hands, I didn't feel I was getting a considerably better read than before by really "paying attention."

Now, this was partly to me feeling a little "spread thin." I was trying to store PF tendencies (does what with what range in what position), flop play (what does he bet, check-call or check-raise, how big will he call draws, how often will he call with mid-pairs or junk, etc.), turn and river play (same considerations as flop play).

Processing the data wasn't too overwhelming, but it was tough to then remember what I had noted 2 hours earlier. I wasn't completely incapable, though: there were a few hands where I'd go, "Hmm, I've seen this sequence before," and correctly fold or bluff-raise/bet (I know they were correct plays because my buddies always show when asked [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].

Any tips as to the most important "mental note" criteria or how to somehow simplify this process? Mnemonics even? Haha.

Thanks.

[Albert Moulton]

Most people can be stereotyped into loose/tight and passive/aggressive. That makes for LP, LA, TP, TA. With pokertracker, you can get a feel for how preflop aggression might be different than post flop aggression, but that is often more difficult to do live because the hand sample is usually pretty small. Instead, you might add "tricky post flop" and "straight forward" post flop.

So, put somebody in one of those four general categories, and play accordingly until you get information that makes you change your read.

If it helps, think of them as if they are PT icons (i.e. eagle (TA), fish (LP), tazmanian devil or dice (LA), and mouse (TP). Phil Helmuth's book uses similar "animals" to categorize player tendencies, but I didn't really like his book very much so I use different ones.

[SeanC]

[ QUOTE ]
Most people can be stereotyped into loose/tight and passive/aggressive. That makes for LP, LA, TP, TA. With pokertracker, you can get a feel for how preflop aggression might be different than post flop aggression, but that is often more difficult to do live because the hand sample is usually pretty small. Instead, you might add "tricky post flop" and "straight forward" post flop.

So, put somebody in one of those four general categories, and play accordingly until you get information that makes you change your read.

If it helps, think of them as if they are PT icons (i.e. eagle (TA), fish (LP), tazmanian devil or dice (LA), and mouse (TP). Phil Helmuth's book uses similar "animals" to categorize player tendencies, but I didn't really like his book very much so I use different ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the reply. I don't have any trouble stereotyping my opponents and adjusting accordingly, but ideally wouldn't I be going deeper than that? Wouldn't it be beneficial to note how one tends to play his pairs, draws, monsters, etc.?

[radradrad]

That assumes that your opponents are consistant. If they are tight, how they play a pocket pair is likely more predictable than if a loose player has pocket's. You may see the same play from a loose player if he has pocket K's or 34 suited.

[SeanC]

[ QUOTE ]
That assumes that your opponents are consistant. If they are tight, how they play a pocket pair is likely more predictable than if a loose player has pocket's. You may see the same play from a loose player if he has pocket K's or 34 suited.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, but there are usually some consistencies in most players' games. Players who aren't actively mixing up their play tend to follow the patterns they've established. You are right, though; some people's play is just completely obscure.

In those cases do you have any chance in reading or does it become more of an issue of just modifying your game to exploit their recklessness?

[radradrad]

IMO, most people are 'predictable'. Tight players are maybe MORE predictable than loose, but even if you correctly think someone is loose, you have indeed predicted how they will play to some extent -- loose. Predicting that they will be unpredictable is something in itself. Maybe it is too dangerous to predict when they will FOLD because they are apt to stay in with anything. However, if you turn that around, you might instead predict that they will make a flippant call -- if you play it right. For example, you may have the nuts but choose to make a raise in a flippant manner. Maybe shrug your shoulders and push all in. If the guy takes that as you comming off the tracks, he is more likely to follow you in than a tight player. If you know that, you can play it. That said, I think it's more dangerous to try to use your 'powers of prediction' against loose players. Hope that comes across right.
One more thing. I used to play a game professionally -- not a card game. What I found was that when I played novices I had a greater chance of losing a ramdom game. Not in the longrun -- overa series of games -- but a ramdon one here or there. Their luck born of ignorance, and unpredictability of play is why. I look at the loose player the same way.

[lilman2636]

hand reading is the toughest part of poker
first you have to understand a few things
well first off your home game with friends isnt gonna improve your game period-there will be to much socalizing and your friends wont care how they act in order for u to read them cause they arent even payin attention to their own image at the table.
however if you want to hand read alot better i suggest
steppin away from your comfort zone and jump into a live tourny were you know nobody.
once you take your seat observer immeditaly. the way they talk before the tourny the way they talk after a hand before a hand etc...
once u find yourself heads up with this person and you have a few suspecions on him look him up
once the cards come out. dont look at the board look right at him see what he does with his hands his lips watch his chest how hard he is breathing, are his feet wrap around the chair. then once he makes a move at the pot, then and only then look at the board. You can go off preflop betting and your read and be able to figure out what he has.
and once you discorved your read was right you'll notice
the difference with every player your up against.
even when you are not in the hand. you must act and think like your in a hand
i hope my advice helps you out somewhat but its up to you to apply it.

[Xanthro]

Observe more when you aren't in the hand, try a place a hand for someone then.

Note changes in behavior or betting patterns. A hyper loose player who has never simply completed a small blind, but has raised it everytime, not simply completing, means something.

[TheCount212]

Use logic to determine (1) what opponent has (2) what opponent thinks you have and (3) what opponent thinks you think he has. This assumes that the opponent acts rationally and plays well, because you have to trace back through his decisions to determine what he would do if he held xx PF, flop, turn, and river. If the opponent plays poorly or acts irrationally it becomes nearly impossible to put him on a hand unless you have played with him many times and pick up on betting patterns or tells.

[sean457j]

I would suggest that you start with only a small amount of information and then build on that. For example, the next five times you play in a home game concentrate entirely on what their starting hand ranges are in the blinds or on the button. This information will only be partly useful, however, after a while it will become allot easier to pin other players down to a starting range and you will be able to pick up on other tendencies without jepordising your primary observations.

You could then move on to other factors, such as: the frequency a player bluffs, does he/she fold to a bet when a scare card hits the board etc. There will come a point where this becomes second nature and you are able to sit down with a group of players you have never played with before and quickly work out the general pattern of their play.