|
|
 Originally Posted by MarinaD
So...that's your info?
Not really, no. That's the point of beginning. That's an illustration to let you know that there is definitely stuff to give you reads on Villains before you've even seen them play a hand. The starting points are very hazy and only offer the tiniest bit of help at first, but we have to start somewhere.
Let's start with a conversation about what there is to give us reads on Villains.
Poker is a game of outsmarting people. The cards can be a distraction from this deeper point. My intention is to help you identify the things you've noticed about poker players and link those characteristics to ranges and styles of play.
Please answer the question about what Villain's choice of poker game and site tells you. Even if it's broad, it will help. It will give you a sketchy outline of all the players you will be facing. The exercise is to think about all of your opponents as a single entity and see what statements can be made. If you play different games, or play on different sites, then you will immediately see that the tendencies of the players is nuanced to that particular site, stakes and game.
Noticing Villain's starting stack before the hand is a potentially huge piece of information that I've use to make plenty of dollars. A Villain with less than a full buy-in is far less likely to understand pot odds and drawing equities. Getting all-in against them is usually good because A) they make poor folds and poor calls when faced with tough decisions and B) You risk fewer mistakes by playing aggressively and forcing the decisions onto them. I'm not saying that you should play foolishly against them; I'm saying that if you're sensible, you can find some very high profit spots against them.
Originally Posted by MarinaD
No. To be honest, i can't congeal any read with these numbers. That's why i'm asking! 
Excellent! Let's help with that, then.
Originally Posted by MarinaD
I see he has a 3bet of 4 in 188 hands..... reliable? Don't think so.
Just because the numbers don't make sense doesn't mean you have no information. The 4 in 188 means only a little, but it does mean that we'd be shocked if the 'true' value of that stat was over 10% or less than 1%. It certainly tells us he's not the kind to 3-bet all that often. Less often = tighter range.
So what we can infer is:
Villain is not a loose cannon with his 3-bets. Furthermore, my experience tells me that a 3-bet of ~4% to 6% is a strong, sensible range for most FR games if a player is trying to play a TAG style.
Is that a loose descriptor? YES. The point is that we're noticing tendencies first. THEN we link the tendency to its effect on their range. When we take into account all of what we've noticed, we'll find that it's actually enough to be a better poker player.
Open up a program like Equilab and drag the range slider to 4%. What range is that?
Since we accept that we could be overstating our certainty about that 4%, drag the slider a bit past 4% and see what combos are added to the range.
Voila. We have made a loose read into a concrete range. Albeit, we are not absolutely certain about the range, but we have a VERY limited set of hands that we now expect Villain to have going to the flop.
Originally Posted by MarinaD
Does he have a 3bet bluffing range against EP with these data? I Don't know.
So far i have ZERO info about his fold to 4bet.
You don't know, but you can look at that 4% range in Equilab and notice that if he has bluffing hands in there, then he has to remove some of the hands from the top of his range to keep it (at least near) 4%. This means that when we assume that his 4% is the top 4%, we can only err on the side of being in a stronger position against him (preflop).
Originally Posted by MarinaD
I have no data of his 3bet pot playing tendencies.
This is OK.
You have reads now that he's started the pot with over 100BB, so that makes it less likely that he's an easy fish to catch.
You know that his VPIP/PFR of 13/10 is a TAG style. He's very selective of his hands PRE. He is probably following a starting hands chart, and is highly likely to be positionally aware with his starting ranges.
You know his 4% 3-bet stat is consistent with the above TAG style.
All this is pre-flop info, but we can surmise that he's probably going to be an aggressive player post-flop. His starting hand selection puts him in a good position to have strong hands that play easily post flop because he's avoiding stuff like suited-connectors unless he's in late position. His pre-flop tightness will end up costing him money if he's playing passively and not pushing hard post. He thinks he's "getting away" with a lot of steals post-flop with this style, but it's more likely true that he's actually bluffing with the best hand a large portion of the time.
Originally Posted by MarinaD
BUT that's what i can look for in my very limited experience in NL10! I thought that if i'm missing something in my colorful numbers, someone with more experience could give me some extra imput.
This is what a see at the table. What am i missing here?
I have covered a bit. My honest answer to what you're missing is just that it's overwhelming to look at all that data and make sense of it.
All you need is to be pointed in the right direction and you'll see how you have really been right on track all along. I'm sure you've gathered an intuitive sense of strong players and weak players. The struggle is to attach that intuitive sense to the data in your HUD, and also to ranges.
Originally Posted by MarinaD
Next time i should say that i have no CONTEXT instead of no info.
I doubt it'd work. I'm pretty nit-picky... if you hadn't noticed.
Originally Posted by MarinaD
Please, i'm a begginer in NL10, if you are not gonna be helpful, i would appreciate to show your lack of sex somewhere else.
I think if you re-read my above post you'll find that while I had a lot to say about your approach, I did my best to give you the answers you asked for. I did my best to point out where I was making assumptions so you could evaluate if my assumptions matched your own.
I don't know what "lack of sex" means... but it sounds kind of mean.
I apologize if anything I said hurt your feelings and made you feel the need to strike back at me. I assure you that I only want to offer you my perspective on learning to make mad mojo monies at playing poker.
I am honestly trying to help you, and I claim no expertise. It's just a friendly conversation.
Originally Posted by MarinaD
Please forgive any assertive tone on my part.
Done and done.
Please keep the conversation alive.
|
Reply With Quote
