Important concept least covered in this forum?

[IHateCats]

I'd like to start a somewhat theoretical post regarding concepts that many 10/20 & up players use but perhaps don't see discussed in pots or not in enough detail. I think we focus on stack size, position, hand range & table image pretty well but personally, quite a few other considerations go into how I play a hand and I don't see several of them discussed very much. So how about it, are there considerations that you rarely see mentioned that affect your decisions on how you play? So I'll throw a few out to potentially get the ball rolling:

relative position

table makeup preflop (who is still behind you to act & does this affect your play)

concealment value

bet size (value of effecting pot odds vs concealment)

Randomness (Surprisingly few discuss their use of this)

Timing (bet timing within the context of the hand)

Metagame (All the buzz on here 18 months ago, now much more implied than explicit)

Invisible Ante (<ed> Just to stir up trouble...)

In an hour or two, when I get a minute, I'll throw out an example or two. In the meantime, feel free to tell me what I missed and start a discussion on it.

[captZEEbo]

randomness: everytime someone posts a hand with total [censored] cards, they say "I was mixing up my play, or I was making a random play". Yeah right, we know you always limp call with [censored] you fish.

[samoleus]

I think that by far the most important concept that is not covered is your opponent's CURRENT mood. We do discuss opponent's tendencies (via poker tracker stats and stuff like that) as well as the hero's image. But we rarely talk about the flow/rhythm of the game and your opponent's current mood when discussing a hand. This is hugely important - albeit difficult to quantify sometimes.

[Dan BRIGHT]

What exactly do you mean by mood? IE tilty? angry? running-bad'y?

[aejones]

This is kind of in relation to mood- I find this because I play ultra lag as well. Basically, I like to know (and usually do) when an opponent is just pissed at my play. Something will happen where my second pair caught two pair and ran down his TPTK or something- and you will see the expletives roar from him. I pay very close attention to if they are steaming- specifically at me for playing so many hands and showing down bad hands and making thin calls, etc. Sometimes if I know I am affecting their play I can make proper call downs when they try to bluff me (because when someone is steamed, they will often use some variation of a bluff to "get back" at their adversary).

I don't know why anyone would try to bluff me though, I'm a freakin calling station.

I guess that has to do with their mood. Also, as far as "randomness" goes, I use this rule of thumb: When bluffing, I ask myself, exactly how much would I bet with the nuts here? And when betting with the nuts, I ask myself, exactly how much would I try to bluff vs this player? I suppose that is sort of randomness.

[IHateCats]

I think a lot of this depends on your table image and how many hands you've played with the opponents, it's primarily of use when picking on the fish or newer players who haven't yet learned who the good ultra lags are vs the fish/maniacs.

[IHateCats]

Well it's certainly true that randomizing your play can leave players in very ugly spots, I think it's pretty much a necessity against opponents one frequently plays against, especially in larger ring games where hand ranges can be quite small depending on how LAG one plays. Other than a few of samoleous's recent posts I haven't seen many 'I lead out here 70% of the time' nearly as often as one would think.

[kagame]

IHateCats,

In my view there is no inherent advantage to being "random" Doing something 70% of the time is deterministic, as far as I am aware noone is sitting here randomizing actions with second hands or dice/coins or something for every little decision.

Correct frequencies for -EV actions are impossible to attain, its all about the long run and all about shania, some people can make certain plays and its profitable because it fits into the overall strategy, and other people need to play differently in that particular spot in order to win long term.

This is one of the reasons these forums at some point become a dead end in terms of improving ones game, unless you're willing to let it all hang out. I don't see many people who are even slightly comfortable conversing frankly about the more complicated aspects of the game. Even universally well regarded and popular top posters are given to saying that poker is a "boringly simple game".

Everything is about instincts and playing your opponent, I almost think we would be better off completely fabricating hands with fictional well developed characters and discussing poker in that fashion. Hmm.

Kagame

[IronUnkind]

I think all of these things are taken for granted in most strategy posts (which are why they become boring and often pointless due to decontextualization).

I wish that people would take a bit more time to include the theoretical underpinnings of their advice, even when it's somewhat obvious. Samoleus does a nice job of this, and the risk of prolixity is more than overcome by his analytical precision.

[samoleus]

exactly. also, scared into passivity, frightened of the possibility of losing a big stack, comfort with table position against certain players, etc ...