Do you sometimes overthink your game? I often overestimatee my opponents and play like they are on a much higher level than they really are and i dont adapt to their level. Its a huge flaw that i need to work on.

I am an aggressive player, obviously I do not need to think about the plays so much, greetings

Yes, especially when I start to see my HUD and start to think about what my opponent is thinking about my move and in the manjority of time they were not even thinking. They just look at their cards and to the cards on the board

I also often seem that the rival has better cards than me, because of it I often drop cards

Ovethinking tell me about it! Not just in poker pretty much everything. Its nice sometimes to do something easy and repetitive so the "thinking" turns off.

Saying that I think thinking a lot and effectively is great as opposed to when all your thinking is taking you down unnecessary paths. So somebody who isn't thinking that much could never make the same ginormous errors that someone who is overthinking does.

You could prob put a lot of the great philosophers in there. Marx is most certainly been wrong and over thought in ways that have been utterly disastrous

Does over thinking nearly always lead to over caution? I'm overthinking this thread aren't I!

In principle, it is better to overestimate your opponent than underestimate. But in poker, in my opinion, this does not work! There is a rule of instincts - the less you think, the better!

Yeah, such an important thread.
I find it very hard to deal with very large bets that make little to no sense.
You know that kind of stuff when flop comes like KK5 and you hold 1010 and your opponent overbets the pot or reraises you. And yep he has it. Jeez who is thinking that way.
Classic overthinking situation where your opponent either has no clue and plays straight forward the strength of his hand or... I don't know lol.
Of course many times those kind of situations turn to be bluffs (bad bluffs I dare to say cause they scream ''I'm bluffing now'') but many times they aren't, especially in the micros where I play.
Damn self leveling and overthinking xD.

It always happens at the tables to underestimate another and fall into the mistake that has strong hands while not having it.

You always have to think about the game and the strategy to follow after the flop, if you don't do it you will not be a consistent winner.

This is where becoming a reg in a game type is particularly advantageous—because of you play a ton in a specific format then it’s extremely likely that if someone you have never seen before sits down at the table (wether live or online) then they are pretty likely to be a novice player.

In general I tend to assume that much but of course always seek to improve upon a starting assumption—looking for easy to get “clues” such as their preflop raise size as well as aggression. Those that tend to raise to standard sizes and are playing aggressively instead of passively (profitable moves especially in the games I play) get upgraded from me thinking of them as a total novice rather quickly

got to play passive aggressive, figure out your opponents

remember, if you don't figure out who the fish at the table is, you are the fish

I know we can get in a game and have a situation where you put the guy on something.
its important to not just assume that is what he has, as you continue the hand, and even saying i think you have this or that can work to his advantage, so be able to keep that to yourself and be ready to consider the various options.

Originally Posted by Mikeloti13

Do you sometimes overthink your game? I often overestimatee my opponents and play like they are on a much higher level than they really are and i dont adapt to their level. Its a huge flaw that i need to work on.

Ya I sometimes have to take myself back to a basic mindset like when poker was new to me and The thrill of new wins would happen. If the stakes aren’t too high I try to go with my first instinct. Without overthinking. I was ‘on tilt’ for a long time and took a break from the game for a nice while it helped me improve when I came back.

Usually I am very cautious about new players at the table. Sometimes my caution also prevents me from making the right decisions. But I am also convinced that underestimating your opponents is a big mistake. So I prefer a careful and thoughtful game.

I always analyze my game and my decisions. Analyzing decisions and making the necessary changes is an effective mechanism for improving your skills.

I make these mistakes myself. I come up with a hand, and it's full of garbage.

Guys by overthinking the op means that sometimes we put our opponents play on a higher level than what it is. Some times our opponents play like we can see their cards and we make fancy thoughts and take wrong decisions because we think that they play smart.
The problem is not that we underestimate them but that we overestimate them.

Originally Posted by FoxMS

Usually I am very cautious about new players at the table. Sometimes my caution also prevents me from making the right decisions. But I am also convinced that underestimating your opponents is a big mistake. So I prefer a careful and thoughtful game.

Overestimating them is as bad if not worse xD

Originally Posted by Mikeloti13

Do you sometimes overthink your game? I often overestimatee my opponents and play like they are on a much higher level than they really are and i dont adapt to their level. Its a huge flaw that i need to work on.

Hello there Mikeloti13, how you doing today? Very nice question, and hard to answer.
I use to overthink my game when I am analysing one session that I've played.
When I am at the tables, I try to use the valuable information that I have:

1) Colors to identify players types
2) HUD/Statistics to help my decision making postflop easier
3) I try to adapt to the level of the players.

The last one is the hardest to do: it requires some kind of phycologial reading about the player, plus range and hand reading. Also it requires a good postflop gameplan and decision making (Extreme Hard). Example:

You are playing a MTT and has 12.82 blinds of effective stack and you are in the Big Blind. It comes in gap to the Button, with 10.23 blinds who goes all-in. Folds to SB and it's your time to decide.
You in the Big Blind have AcJs. Should we call? (100% of times?)
Before thinking about odds, about survival in the tournament, about ICM, we must consider who we are playing with: is this BTN player more aggressive? More passive? How many hands do I have played with it?
Let's assume we have 245 hands played with the BTN and it has stats of 8/3/1/3-bet 1.5/fold to 3-bet 0/C-bet flop 25/Fold to c-bet flop 45/ etc
Are we happy to call versus this guy? Probably not
Now let's picture BTN has only 25 hands played with you, and it has stats of 70/48/8 etc
are you inclined to call?
It seems that this type of player the answer is insta-call, but remember, the times you lose your tournament will be at stake. Although it seems a pretty easy call, we don't have a decent sample of hands for decision making.

Cash Games

You are in the BTN, 100 bb stack, and you have AKo, and you raise 3x because you see a recreational player in the blinds who loves to call preflop, VPIP higher than 25 for example. The player in the SB has 97 bb stack, and calls you, BB folds.
The flop comes TK2 the player in the SB checks, what's your action?
The leveling way of thinking is very sophisticated and elegant: many professional players will say that we should C-bet this flop almost 100% of times versus a calling station.
Nonetheless, we must consider that BTN has a pretty wide stealing range, varying from 28% to 50%, depending how good the player is postflop. (also SB calling range is wide)
So, when we open from the BTN and the SB calls, we don't have too much AK, AQ, AA, KK on our range. We have weaker aces, draws, medium and low pairs, etc. If we bet here, we can scary a passive fish and enter a difficult situation versus an aggressive fish.
By cheking back we are giving the SB the chance of hitting something of its huge nonsense calling range vs BTN.
Because we believe that the calling frequency is so high that this player will miss most of flops, and because there's a king in the flop, it could be scary and fold to a C-bet flop.
So we check, and the turn comes a seven (7x) , and the player in the SB donks for pot size.
Well, we have a very strong value hand, considering the calling range, there are no flushes, straights, the better case scenario for SB is if it has two pair or sets, and we don't believe it will have many of these hands.
By checking the flop, a recreational player will think we got scared of the king and gave up of the pot. So it will feel more comfortable to bluff if it hits any part of its huge range.
If we raise the fish in the turn, SB can easily fold worse aces, any Tx, any 7x, etc and we want this player to keep bluffing its Tx, worst Kx and 7x, we want it to build the pot for us!
The river comes a 3 and the player again, bets pot. Should we raise here and get called only by better hands and folds of marginal ones? Nope, we call and the SB shows 87o!
It hits a 7x in the turn and believed it was a good spot for bluffing, since we have checked-back the flop.
I am not saying that we must check a 100% of times our TPTK versus fish out of position, but many times we have a strong value hand versus a calling station, we will be wildly ahead, and we must give it a chance to try to bluff us out of the pot: most of recreational players don't know how to use exploitave game, at least in a profitable manner: any sign of weakness they will explore you to the bones! (by betting and raising a huge nonsense range).
By weakness I mean checking and calling, even some very good players will fall into this trap, for example when we bet flop and check turn with a strong value hand, when we check-flop and check-call or check-raise turn (depending on the board texture), when we c-bet flop, check-call turn and donk river, etc.
It is very complicated, I'm afraid I didn't say anything I wanted but this text is far too long and I don't intend to be boring out of proportion and make our CardsChat's friends to go to sleep.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Originally Posted by Katie Dozier

This is where becoming a reg in a game type is particularly advantageous—because of you play a ton in a specific format then it’s extremely likely that if someone you have never seen before sits down at the table (wether live or online) then they are pretty likely to be a novice player.

In general I tend to assume that much but of course always seek to improve upon a starting assumption—looking for easy to get “clues” such as their preflop raise size as well as aggression. Those that tend to raise to standard sizes and are playing aggressively instead of passively (profitable moves especially in the games I play) get upgraded from me thinking of them as a total novice rather quickly

Hello there Katie Dozier, thank you very much for your professional comments. It help us a lot here. You are right about what you say, if you playing small, mid and higher stakes: at the micros there are new players everyday, and we cannot say they are "bad" indeed, we simply have no information to deal with this guy.
If I am playing 100 NLHE, for example, I know it is a very restricted field, the regulars are there everyday, and everyone knows each other. When it comes a new player in the pool, one I never seen it before, I elect to treat it as a GOOD REGULAR, until the player proves itself the contrary:
Because, if we are playing 100 NLHE, there are other playing 500 NLHE and 1000 NLHE, so it is very easy for this guy to appear from time to time at 100 NLHE "to play", in the sense of kidding. They are monster players and if we don't know that this guy plays mostly higher limits and is just kidding at 100 NLHE we might get into very tricky spots.
Sorry for my candor, I am not an experienced player, I am just a novice and I have a lot to learn, but I simply have to be sincere here:
Many players posted in this thread that we don't need to think at all! As less as we think better, omg, I read very strange words here sometimes!
Now we see why the vast majority of the micro-stakes players (99% at least) are not profitable at all, and will never be: okay let's not think example:

It comes in gap for Hero in the MP with AKo, it raises to 3x and folds, folds, etc and only the BB calls. Both players have 100 blinds effective stack.
the flop comes K32 (very good!) and MP C-bets for 1/2 pot and the BB check-raises. As long as we don't need to think at the micros, it is an insta-call or insta-raise! (I am being sarcastic).
So MP calls, the turn comes another K (Awesome!) and we check for BB to bluff, which it does indeed, by going all in: as long as we don't need to think about position, about player types, about tendencies and vices, about postflop hand reading and range reading it is call 100% of times when BB goes all in in a very dry board like this! BB shows 33, the river is a brick and MP loses 100 BB, because it doesn't need to think about the game!
After all, there were only USD 2, or only USD 10..who cares about thinking, when so much money (money, not blinds!) are involved!
Thank all the Gods and also Karl Marx for players who believes they don't need to think because the micro-stakes is "cheap", "easy" level, when in fact it is not:
99% of the players at the micros are breakeven actually: either they lose a little, which induces them to keep trying, or they win just a little and lose next, so they will keep trying forever, groping in the dark.
Sorry for the long text, I will try to adapt and write less, but sometimes I just can't handle.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Think long, think wrong. Lovely adage, not always the case. If you put the whole hand together street by street, and it still makes no sense, I call. I'm at about 50% correct. That's as good as I'm probably going to get. I agree that feel at the table is always the overridding factor on decisions.

Originally Posted by Mikeloti13

I often overestimatee my opponents and play like they are on a much higher level than they really are and i dont adapt to their level. Its a huge flaw that i need to work on.

Your problem is lack of confidence in your game, and this confidence is acquired through work, you have to work on your game and practice at the tables, in this way you will develop a solid confidence that will allow you to develop yourself at the tables.

My recommendation is first to build solid preflop ranges and second learn the basics of the postflop game, watching videos mainly, this way you will have a solid foundation to overcome the low limits.

If you have to think and analyze the game and each of your opponents at the tables trying to read his game and realize the smallest detail of your opponent and try to predesir your game and be more likely to win

Overthinking - only always.

I hate this game. The more I study the more my head goes around in circles. I am now at a point where I don't know what to believe any more. A check can be a trap, or a check can mean trash. A big bet can be a bluff or a big bet can be strong value. These are the decisions we have to make, and we better get good at them.

I actually cashed more when I knew less - proof that ignorance is bliss. I think what I am finding is that 90% of the hands we review online or with videos only apply to 5% of the game we actually play. By trying to apply these very uniquely situational concepts to the majority of our hands, we can actually go backwards in our ability. What I mean is, that I used play 95% of my hand just fine, and I may have played the unique 5% poorly. If now i have improved on the 5% of those hands , but now I am misplaying the 95%, then i have gone backwards. This is an exaggeration of course, but I am in the middle of trying to really figure out how to make better decisions all the time.

Man, am I overthinking this, or what?

yea i find myself overthinking in the higher stakes, and dont do very well. i often overthink hands and it gets me off my game. always trust your gut

Originally Posted by Mikeloti13

Do you sometimes overthink your game? I often overestimatee my opponents and play like they are on a much higher level than they really are and i dont adapt to their level. Its a huge flaw that i need to work on.

It's okay to pretend everyone is a professional at first, but you should be adapting and taking notes. I mark people as red who are complete noobs (relative to me); most of them don't change their habits much. Sometimes putting why they're noob in notes, which really depends where you're at in terms of poker skill.

I've made the same mistake too, so good luck.

I think that the adaptation to the player's level is more related to cash games, all the time the same players, all the time stacks of 100bb, there are ranges, and the draw of cards depending on the range.
In tournaments in a different way, the size of the stack affects, with different stacks, tournament players play differently, because of this, and the position is more important than in cash games.

in online poker you need to use several tactics during the tournament

Originally Posted by Mikeloti13

Do you sometimes overthink your game? I often overestimatee my opponents and play like they are on a much higher level than they really are and i dont adapt to their level. Its a huge flaw that i need to work on.

Yep. It's often a good idea to take a very short break (a day or two) and then come back with a clearer mind.

Originally Posted by Aballinamion

Hello there Mikeloti13, how you doing today? Very nice question, and hard to answer.


I'm afraid I didn't say anything I wanted but this text is far too long and I don't intend to be boring out of proportion and make our CardsChat's friends to go to sleep.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Carlos, you just go right ahead and be as "boring" as you wish....I think (and I'm surely not alone) that your posts are terrific. Very thought provoking. Thank you for the thought and work you put into them.
Regards
David 'gon4iypes' Harriss

You must believe in yourself, but sometimes it is better to have the courage to throw a good hand if you feel lost!

Originally Posted by gon4iypes

Carlos, you just go right ahead and be as "boring" as you wish....I think (and I'm surely not alone) that your posts are terrific. Very thought provoking. Thank you for the thought and work you put into them.
Regards
David 'gon4iypes' Harriss

Hey, thank you very much gon4iypes, I am very soft touch one and I appreciated.
However, I will try to make more short texts and more objective lines of thought, so I can make the lives of the readers easier.
I also believe that irony and sarcasm are good from a pedagogical point of view.
Have a nice day!

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

It all depends on many factors. As they say, watch the game and watch how others play. An aggressive player often loses because he often bluffs. You need to trust your playing style.

Mikeloti13-

What a great thread!

Yes, I constantly overestimate both my poker opposition and their hand strength. It doesn’t matter how many times they get exposed as playing a marginal hand (and winning or not) when the next hand is dealt I revert back (like a squirrel) to default position, presuming they are Phil Ivey holding a strong hand. Gradually I am weaning myself off this position. I force myself to call down some hands to the river just to see where I and the villain stands (there is no other way around the issue- painful though it is at times).

I have also spent considerable time trying to analyze why I think this way. To be frank one conclusion is I just don’t recognize stupid in poker as I do in other places. In any other area in life I find it quite easy to assess someone’s intelligence and capability. In poker, likely as I am new to the game, not from a gambling background, I automatically credit others with playing smartly. This makes no sense. Contrary to what many assume poker players are not (when it has been studied) any more intelligent than any other group.

So, I constantly, like every other player, see hands played in a ridiculous manner day in and out – the constant refrain being ‘I can’t believe they played that stupidly’. And, in the worst instances it is not the times they lost, but the absurd times they bet through every street with nothing but a high card...and won.

So one recent tactic which has helped to a degree is taking very specific player notes. Forget bet sizes and patterns. I write down examples of hands played in a reckless, wild manner. This is something of a leveller when itcomes to certain players who have a strong image and therefore regularly get away with murder on the felt.

It’s one tool you can employ to begin to demystify your opposition, to lessen their intimidation factor.

Originally Posted by Aballinamion

Hello there Katie Dozier, thank you very much for your professional comments. It help us a lot here. You are right about what you say, if you playing small, mid and higher stakes: at the micros there are new players everyday, and we cannot say they are "bad" indeed, we simply have no information to deal with this guy.
If I am playing 100 NLHE, for example, I know it is a very restricted field, the regulars are there everyday, and everyone knows each other. When it comes a new player in the pool, one I never seen it before, I elect to treat it as a GOOD REGULAR, until the player proves itself the contrary

You make many great points and thanks for your nice words

To clarify more about my assumptions when it comes to new players, I def wouldn’t play against them in a way that requires more poker knowledge than a novice would have until proven otherwise. In other words, I wouldn’t make a bluff and/or more sophisticated multi-street like that requires a player to be “thinking” in order to make that unconventional line profitable for me.

Identifying players properly is one skill that needs to be developed. Often times when I see someone bluff once or twice I make the mistake of thinking that they always bluff and get caught by their traps. I've started putting counters by my notes (when I take notes) to see how many times someone does something.
The second skill is in adjusting properly. If you adjust to someone who you think is a weak player it could be easy to over-adjust and treat them like they are weaker than they really are and get caught losing a huge pot or two.
And finally, there's the rest of the table you have to consider. If you're stuck in a 3-way pot with this weak player, you have to be able to play it as though one player is strong and the other is weak and adjust your play accordingly.

Think long think wrong. Your mind is you own worst enemy. Your mind will conjure up its own worst image

I used to believe the same thing, overestimating my opponents hand and always thinking they have the nuts, until someone told me to play like you always have it, I've lost many hands with this method but it has boosted my confidence. Just need to work on it.

Every1 probably has overthinked before once in there life. If you know the game good enough all the outs ect. That's when you start to focus on other people for bluffing and how they play and stuff. Then you take it to next level with say bluffing 1 in every 5 hands just to see ect. Pushing yrself and others no matter what is also rewarding.

I recommend you to overcome this error is that you play passive style that means not to go to all hands you have to choose which hands to go and with what hands depending on the behavior of your opponents according to your location on the table so you will better fit the rhythm and game at the table or tournament you participate

Let's be honest with yourself - you can play in only two cases! First if you played correctly or if the variance! All unfortunately no other reason! Therefore, the time of decision-making is just an attempt to justify! I decided for myself that it is necessary to learn and improve and not to look for excuses!

after analyzing the hands, you just make a decision whether you played correctly or not, just the dispersion is very evil and insidious thing, you can fall into tilt

Originally Posted by Katie Dozier

You make many great points and thanks for your nice words

To clarify more about my assumptions when it comes to new players, I def wouldn’t play against them in a way that requires more poker knowledge than a novice would have until proven otherwise. In other words, I wouldn’t make a bluff and/or more sophisticated multi-street like that requires a player to be “thinking” in order to make that unconventional line profitable for me.

Hi there Katie Dozier, it is very kind of you. I have a hand here that reminded what you've have said about on-line poker tells:

"In general I tend to assume that much but of course always seek to improve upon a starting assumption—looking for easy to get “clues” such as their preflop raise size as well as aggression. Those that tend to raise to standard sizes and are playing aggressively instead of passively (profitable moves especially in the games I play) get upgraded from me thinking of them as a total novice rather quickly "

This is the hand: https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/024uGLT3q

The tells that I found here were simple:

A) Completes from the SB: average regulars are simply never doing it, unless there are a real specific scenario for so doing: 90% 3-bet or fold and 10% call.

B) SB Donks bet flop after preflop raisor in position polarizes its range: it doesn't make many sense for a guy to complete from the SB with AcXc and then donk lead into the flop. Maybe Two Pair, or sets, but giving that SB made a huge donk flop, of nearly 80% of the pot, it will have more bluffs than values in its range. What calls attention, is exactly what you've said: the size that the player utilizes:


C) The turn doubles pairs and SB slows down its bet sizing: now it bets only 1/2 pot, which is also a strange move. If SB had two pair with a Qx now, I guess, it should be betting strong since BB gave tells that it could also have a flush in its range, by calling the huge donk flop.
If SB has a flush nuts, second or first flush nuts, it also should be betting here for value, because BB demonstrated strenght by calling the flop. Betting something between 68% and 150% of the pot would be good both for value and for bluff in a spot like this.
However, if I were in SB's shoes, I would:

A) Open-raise from the SB vs BB 3x or 3.5 giving that we are deep stacked.
The plan is to call some 3-bets (20% of times or more if the 3-bettor is a aggressive recreational) if they come and postflop we are going to check the vast majority of the boards because we are out of position and our opponents know that we open too much from the SB.
When I hit a 7 I would keep checking to call 1/3 pot bets or at maximum 1/2 pot bets because now I have some equity and some turns and rivers can be good, or else, I am already planning a float, depending if BB bets flop and checks turn or if BB checks-behind flop to bet turn. When I call flop I have some floats in the turn in situations like this versus some types of ultra-exploitative players. Besides I have some outs, any ace would be fine, any seven and I could be already ahead of some pocket 6's, missed broadways and connectors, etc. (If BB only calls preflop. When BB 3-bets we need to rethink our strategy).
When I hit an Ace, I would also keep checking, because know I have a very strong value hand, but my image from the SB will give me more bluffs. When I check, BB will think that most of times I have nothing and will bluff more than necessary in a spot like this. Players who love to c-bet flop in pots where BB versus SB, are good candidates. The intention is to call many flops and turns, and maybe bet some rivers for value, depending if BB checks.
Also wil depend it BB called preflop or if BB 3-bets preflop: when SB 3-bets I cannot go very far with my TP Ace, with 7 kicker. I would be nearly breakeven or losing for A8, A9 and losing for AT+.
Summarizing: I would only buff BB in a situation like this when I have a Ace of Clubs or a King of Clubs. Otherwise, I would be unbalancing my out of position range too much. When I have the Ace of Clubs, raise preflop, now c-bet 80% with my flush draw, missed in the river and shoves it will a hard trouble for a average regular to call me with 3rd flush nuts in the river, unless, of course, it has the straight flush. (I say that because I am not crazy: if SB is an average regular and shoves river all-in deep stacked and I have only the 3rd nut flush, I know that this guy will have some bluffs in a spot like this, but those are minimal and I would be folding, if the SB player could really tell a more amenable story. This simply doesn't happen here: by completeting from the SB, giving this is not 2 NLHE but 100 NLHE, the player its screaming weakness at the cash tables. In this case we should give a couple of more speculative calls in the river and be ahead in most of scenarios.
Playing like the SB, bluffing with absolute no equity (it was drawing dead in the flop), shows that we can take good reads and notes on players if we really pay attention in the game and pay attention on what the players are doing.
Thank you for your patience, I am little bit boring sometimes. Trying to improve on that.
Have a nice day!

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

First of all, you need to play, proceeding from your capabilities optimally and first of all, think about your game, and the rest will come with experience

Thanks for the tip, Katie. Are you saying those you see under or overbet the standard raise are playing passively because the are scared of losing?

Originally Posted by Katie Dozier

This is where becoming a reg in a game type is particularly advantageous—because of you play a ton in a specific format then it’s extremely likely that if someone you have never seen before sits down at the table (wether live or online) then they are pretty likely to be a novice player.

In general I tend to assume that much but of course always seek to improve upon a starting assumption—looking for easy to get “clues” such as their preflop raise size as well as aggression. Those that tend to raise to standard sizes and are playing aggressively instead of passively (profitable moves especially in the games I play) get upgraded from me thinking of them as a total novice rather quickly