On-line tells
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
