re: Poker & One part of one poker existence.
Explaining how one existence feels, growing pains from learning, trials and errors. Now just like at the table who can adjust and how fast can they catch on to the subtle switch of table dynamics? A person can really recognize who are the good players and bad players based on information that is not obvious.
I have read many posts in this forum about various types of information; for example, people having others analyze their numbers of their frequency of voluntary putting money in the pot, three and four betting frequency. Other posts about hand ranges for shoving, calling depending upon specific information about an opponent, poker books
about equilibrium, aggression, math based information; I have read, played against, and been exposed to this since I have started playing.
However, this is a broad perspective about poker that I am trying to be specific in explaining. Most, all of this information has been setting in my brain with no proper way of using this information except on a straight line; for example, I was using this on a one way street both ways.
Now tactics, how does this change the wheel? It does not but I understand the wheel better than most of my opponents even though, my opponents are not bad players; it is the next part some are not quite confident enough to exploit consistently because of their own short comings. I am trying to master those short comings.
For example, changing table dynamics, in early game situations, in early position; I look for people whom are trying to three bet light in position against either me or others because of either trying to exploit situations to set image or they might just have a hand?
I am willing to four bet light because they are expecting a flat or a fold, if they blink, if they flat or fold, I now understand how confident they are pre-flop, if they four bet me then I will assess the situation, if I do not have a hand to continue I fold knowing they have hand. Most because they are either not as experienced, confident, or they are card dependent will only four and five bet with high ev hands. I am willing to find their threshold early without cards or when I have cards to them this appears the same. When I have made my opponent react or I caught them three betting light, I now have many options of play that have been setting in my brain with no previous way to use as a tactical advantage; that would not produce positive results so, before I would just observe, take in the information and not act on what was observed. The lack of courage, confidence, the fear of the unknown resided here before I was willing to change.
Whether I exploit a good or bad player, my table image, the change of dynamics and how, when, why is now seen by the table. The only thing that might not be seen is my cards, in this either or situation of having or not having cards, I can now play off of the change of this dynamic. Does the table understand? Which or how many people will either put themselves in a box or have I put them in the box? How reactive is each opponent? Did this tighten the table? Did this loosen up the table? I have to adjust, assess, what is happening as it happens from this point forward. Then do my best to allow my opponents to choose freely to make the wrong adjustment against me to further enhance my hold on table dynamics.
Now I can adjust and look for empirical information based on the little amount of information. What I am looking for is a threshold and a ceiling for which to understand in my mind how much of an opening there are between their two identifying thinking routines. For example, if a person is willing to open with no thought about hand selection in early position and defend their hands to a reraise, but will routinely bet their top range hands differently now I have an opening to drive a truck through.
I can exploit them pre-flop or drag them post flop and abuse them with my passive aggressive post flop skills; whether I am in or out of positon; ultimately position is not the most important factor, it comes down can I make my position absolute and make their positon relative? If their position is only relative then they are worried about my tactics. If the opening is narrow I have either not done my job or I have not identified their mistakes quickly enough. I must make this type define their abilities because this is where the tight bad players or the tight good players reside.
To sum this part up, this allows me to be a step ahead or a mile ahead of my opponents, I can assess successfully how confident, reactive, estimation of knowledge, how they view me, how I view myself, do they know the tactics beyond their highest level of tactics that I have observed so far? When I am wrong about my reads, off on my game, only displaying by “B” game, I can always adjust, tighten up and play my “A” passive, ethical, card dependent poker, then change gears, change table dynamics and start the wheel spinning all over again. I am willing within reason, logic, commonsense, poker knowledge, as some examples, to exploit, bring out of my opponents, their individual strengths and weakness to allow them to train themselves to my play because being reactive allows me to be active in a positive ev manner with and without cards. Leaning on my opponents pre-flop, especially as the game winds down, this is done methodically, this enhances my opponents to either fight back at the wrong times, become card dependent looking for good cards, or they mentally give up.