Knowing you're beat, but calling anyway?

[tw082]

It's when I have that tiny bit of doubt that I have a small chance.

I'm guessing gut instincts count for a lot in Poker.

Why i think it's very important to always have fun and enjoy playing because it's hard to hear that gut instinct if your nervous, mad, or scared it's also really hard to have confidence in these states and confidence is key to winning whether it be poker or anything else.

 

[tw082]

Yeah I think the format I play probably rewards aggressive players more. If they go out, they just move into another tournament.

With me, I like to do the maths in my head - that's part of the fun and really, if you know the best starting hands, know pot/implied odds you should win more than you lose - I guess I know what I need to do to improve - trust my gut instincts as I know 9 times out of 10 it's correct.

Which I guess brings onto reading the player. If I have a poor hand I find myself doing other things whilst the hand is playing out - checking email, getting a drink etc. Offline, I can spend more time reading the player as there's not as many things to distract me.

If you want just try checking people's win% crossed with vpip, checking good players with very high over70% and good players with low under 20% someone told me this recently and findings were informative and disappointing for any nit.

 

[tw082]

The problem there is you rarely meet the same player twice.

I'll often take losing hand to river if i can fairly cheap and still looking slightly aggressive because you will get a call from most of the players at table next hand you have against them and maybe even after.

 

[Vallet]

When I feel my kicker isn't good enough, I make decisions from walking out on the odds of the pot and the opponent's bet. Try a wait-and-see position to gain without putting a lot of chips on the table. Minimal losses will help to open the enemy and understand what he is playing.
https://translate.google.ru/

 

[tw082]

If you know you are beat fold simple answer.

Never thought of that...thanks......It's pronounced nah doi...I think referring to times you let 5-10% uncertainty win because never 100% sure or at least rarely. Why waist time with obvious condescending answer.

 

[finaltable1]

Overall, I'm a decent player, know the pot odds, implied odds, my own starting hand guide (changes slightly, depending on the opposition), etc, but this seems to be a slight weakness that I have, when I'm becoming irritated against poor players.

9 times out of 10, if I have a gut instinct, that my hand is beat, I am. Yet I'll still sometimes call, and go against it, due to being impatient of not getting any decent hands/flops.

A rough example would be when someone bets most of their stick when a King comes down on the River - I also have a K, but a lower kicker, and just know they also have a K, at least (maybe even 2 pair), and a higher kicker - yet I'll sometimes call it anyway - get beat, and knocked out of the single table tournament in 4th place (top 3 finish).
Are any in the same boat? They pretty much KNOW they are beat, but think, "Hmm... just on the off chance I'm wrong, I'll go with it" - and lose.

Don't get me wrong, it's not that frequent, but I go out and then think to myself, "You know you shouldn't have called them, so only yourself to blame".

Is this message of yours regarding online poker? If so the I have a general question:

Do you understand the difference between subjective thinking and objective thinking?

Such things like "I know that I'm beat" Are subjective, objectively you may find it out only at the showdown.

Such things are staying in the memory of subjective thinking people for a long time
1) big bad beats
2) hands like you've described above "I had a feeling... " or " I knew that he has it"

You will keep such hands in memory much much longer than any other hand. Also you will quicly forget about bad beats that you've provided to others, cause on your road to success, those wings of positive tilt will be moving you ahead with no regrets and no hard feelings or deep thoughts.

So such wall of yours, made of your subjective "brick" ideas, is the main reason why today your equation says "9 times out of 10". Tomorrow this wall of yours will become a massive tower and you'll be screaming from the top of this tower " IT'S RIGGED! DON"T PLAY ONLINE POKER!!"

Try to think objectively and play your hands objectively. There is no room for instincts or feelings in online poker. Do you understand this? You either play like a robosapiense and win by changing gears and doing maths, or you're a victim of positive or negative tilt and explain your actions to yourself with some theories of yours.

Poker player must think A) positive B) rational C) objective D) mathematically correct.

For offline poker you also need to know psychology well.

And what I call "3d thinking" is really helpful. Each situation, like bet\check\call actions can be observed in three dimensions in your brain. 1st dimension is your point of view, 2nd dimension is opponents point of view, 3rd dimension is what independent observer thinks.

Can you see a logical solution to your problem? In the described hand, you've been victim, because both of participants had Kings and you had a lower kicker. Why not change status quo and quit playing garbage hands and instead just sit tight waiting for like 7% of hands so you can feel yourself comfortable each time all the way till the showdown, extracting value at all possible streets? Are you one of those who like to limp often and see a lot of flops? If so, then I must tell you that you're one of the "best opponents" at the table. The best to extract value from.

 

[screamingmidget]

Is this message of yours regarding online poker? If so the I have a general question:

Do you understand the difference between subjective thinking and objective thinking?

Such things like "I know that I'm beat" Are subjective, objectively you may find it out only at the showdown.

Such things are staying in the memory of subjective thinking people for a long time
1) big bad beats
2) hands like you've described above "I had a feeling... " or " I knew that he has it"

You will keep such hands in memory much much longer than any other hand. Also you will quicly forget about bad beats that you've provided to others, cause on your road to success, those wings of positive tilt will be moving you ahead with no regrets and no hard feelings or deep thoughts.

So such wall of yours, made of your subjective "brick" ideas, is the main reason why today your equation says "9 times out of 10". Tomorrow this wall of yours will become a massive tower and you'll be screaming from the top of this tower " IT'S RIGGED! DON"T PLAY ONLINE POKER!!"

Try to think objectively and play your hands objectively. There is no room for instincts or feelings in online poker. Do you understand this? You either play like a robosapiense and win by changing gears and doing maths, or you're a victim of positive or negative tilt and explain your actions to yourself with some theories of yours.

Poker player must think A) positive B) rational C) objective D) mathematically correct.

For offline poker you also need to know psychology well.

And what I call "3d thinking" is really helpful. Each situation, like bet\check\call actions can be observed in three dimensions in your brain. 1st dimension is your point of view, 2nd dimension is opponents point of view, 3rd dimension is what independent observer thinks.

Can you see a logical solution to your problem? In the described hand, you've been victim, because both of participants had Kings and you had a lower kicker. Why not change status quo and quit playing garbage hands and instead just sit tight waiting for like 7% of hands so you can feel yourself comfortable each time all the way till the showdown, extracting value at all possible streets? Are you one of those who like to limp often and see a lot of flops? If so, then I must tell you that you're one of the "best opponents" at the table. The best to extract value from.

Yes, this is online poker. I disagree that there's no room for gut instinct - there is, because that's your brain telling you that you know this player is playing a way and wouldn't raise like that unless he has something good, based on how the game is going so far. I can also often tell if someone has a super hand, as they'll take longer to make their call. Obviously not all the time, but I can often just notice something is amiss and different to how a player has been playing - that's when I concentrate and watch the other players.

Since I posted the OP I have got a bit tighter on my hands. Whereas before I would play a K3s, I now will often not bother. In fact now the only K I tend to go with is down to KTo if nobody has raised and I'm in late position. I've definiely noticed an improvement because I'm not running low on chips as quickly.

I don't limp in often - quite the opposite. I'm normally the one folding mostly, especially in the early stages of quick tournaments. But there does sometimes come a time (if I've not won a hand, often due to terrible flops + raises), where in tournaments you either bluff, limp in more, or lose your stack.

As for value, I think the strongest part of my game is flop to river and normally having a good idea. That's my point - most of the time, when I'm fresh as a daisy and watch the opponents, I don't fall what I've put in the OP. So maybe that's how I solve the problem - if I feel myself losing focus and losing a few on the bounce - log out and don't play until another day.

 

[tw082]

Is this message of yours regarding online poker? If so the I have a general question:

Do you understand the difference between subjective thinking and objective thinking?

Such things like "I know that I'm beat" Are subjective, objectively you may find it out only at the showdown.

Such things are staying in the memory of subjective thinking people for a long time
1) big bad beats
2) hands like you've described above "I had a feeling... " or " I knew that he has it"

You will keep such hands in memory much much longer than any other hand. Also you will quicly forget about bad beats that you've provided to others, cause on your road to success, those wings of positive tilt will be moving you ahead with no regrets and no hard feelings or deep thoughts.

So such wall of yours, made of your subjective "brick" ideas, is the main reason why today your equation says "9 times out of 10". Tomorrow this wall of yours will become a massive tower and you'll be screaming from the top of this tower " IT'S RIGGED! DON"T PLAY ONLINE POKER!!"

Try to think objectively and play your hands objectively. There is no room for instincts or feelings in online poker. Do you understand this? You either play like a robosapiense and win by changing gears and doing maths, or you're a victim of positive or negative tilt and explain your actions to yourself with some theories of yours.

Poker player must think A) positive B) rational C) objective D) mathematically correct.

For offline poker you also need to know psychology well.

And what I call "3d thinking" is really helpful. Each situation, like bet\check\call actions can be observed in three dimensions in your brain. 1st dimension is your point of view, 2nd dimension is opponents point of view, 3rd dimension is what independent observer thinks.

Can you see a logical solution to your problem? In the described hand, you've been victim, because both of participants had Kings and you had a lower kicker. Why not change status quo and quit playing garbage hands and instead just sit tight waiting for like 7% of hands so you can feel yourself comfortable each time all the way till the showdown, extracting value at all possible streets? Are you one of those who like to limp often and see a lot of flops? If so, then I must tell you that you're one of the "best opponents" at the table. The best to extract value from.

When playing online I play mtt & have only been playing really strong pre hands lately but keep getting called all-in only to be beaten by lower pockets or some kind of hand that was worse at time of shove about half the time or more when i had 75% odds or better. Look to my thread posts under vents for examples. Am i just full of bad luck because i try to live by the numbers online but failing me of recent. yes and its pushed me towards believing it's fixed for action and helping to level playing field for the casual player.

 

[tw082]

I believe gut instinct is not just some bs illusion from past events but your mind accessing all factors in a situation some of witch are subconscious and rendering a best possible answer if we were not infected with so much doubt in daily life I believe this to be much more credited attribute.

 

[screamingmidget]

I believe gut instinct is not just some bs illusion from past events but your mind accessing all factors in a situation some of witch are subconscious and rendering a best possible answer if we were not infected with so much doubt in daily life I believe this to be much more credited attribute.

Yep. I agree totally.

I've watched the player, taken into account the cards I have, taken into account the bets he's made not just in this hand but in previous hands, and basically come to the conclusion that he has me beat. I've 5 seconds to make a decision, so guess the instinct is taking all of this into account and just knowing that something isn't quite right.

 

[screamingmidget]

When playing online I play mtt & have only been playing really strong pre hands lately but keep getting called all-in only to be beaten by lower pockets or some kind of hand that was worse at time of shove about half the time or more when i had 75% odds or better. Look to my thread posts under vents for examples. Am i just full of bad luck because i try to live by the numbers online but failing me of recent. yes and its pushed me towards believing it's fixed for action and helping to level playing field for the casual player.

If I get a bad beat (like I saw a 48o beat AA all-in pre-flop), it's hard to take, but for me I don't let it bother me. They're a lucky sod and they hopefully know it.

It's when I make a bad choice and as soon as I'm out of the tournament, I'll think, "You know you made a bad call there" - so guess it's a case of learning.

The time to worry would be if you play poker and lose a hand because you didn't call when the maths showed you should have - so you fold and then the card you needed comes down on the turn or river.

One of the only times I refuse a call when the maths says I should, is if for example there's 4 people left in a top 3 finish STT and I know if I fold, one of the guys is likely to be knocked out, putting me into the final 3. In that situation, I think that can be a sound option, as calling doesn't guarantee you getting the card and could end up 2 players going out at the same time and you finishing 4th.

 

[leogetz79]

man, i wish i knew the answer for the reason i still call even though all my instincts are telling me that im beat. sometimes i really want to see what the other player has. so i learn a little. but other just dam stupid i think

 

[screamingmidget]

man, i wish i knew the answer for the reason i still call even though all my instincts are telling me that im beat. sometimes i really want to see what the other player has. so i learn a little. but other just dam stupid i think

Yeah, wanting to know what he has I'm sure plays it's part.

 

[tw082]

Yep. I agree totally.

I've watched the player, taken into account the cards I have, taken into account the bets he's made not just in this hand but in previous hands, and basically come to the conclusion that he has me beat. I've 5 seconds to make a decision, so guess the instinct is taking all of this into account and just knowing that something isn't quite right.

Like hearing myself think..lol...same exact experience, same exact result. :dontknow:When you get that feeling you can break down why so it's not a whim. Just so little time in game, plus $ others watching n a pure competitive instinct to win can play a part in calling or not calling when all signs point to opposite.

 

[DONTSHOW]

Being able to fold when you know you're beat is one of the most important things in poker.. don't overthink it
:icon_rr:

 

[The Driller]

It is a kind of giving up.
you are not sure that your opponent have this hand that can beat you.
the best thing is not to get tilt in poker game.

 

[buzzard925]

9 times out of 10, if I have a gut instinct, that my hand is beat, I am. Yet I'll still sometimes call, and go against it, due to being impatient of not getting any decent hands/flops.
.

I know this feeling. Frustration and impatience, I suffer with the same affliction as yourself. I find when I'm in a more zen mood, often earlier in the day, I can play a lot better and get better results. Can't remember which player said it but you want to play cold as ice, almost robotic. Even if half your entire stack is in the middle of your table, if you know your beat then bin those cards. I wish I could always practice what I preach :S

 

[DizzyDeb717]

Overall, I'm a decent player, know the pot odds, implied odds, my own starting hand guide (changes slightly, depending on the opposition), etc, but this seems to be a slight weakness that I have, when I'm becoming irritated against poor players.

9 times out of 10, if I have a gut instinct, that my hand is beat, I am. Yet I'll still sometimes call, and go against it, due to being impatient of not getting any decent hands/flops.

A rough example would be when someone bets most of their stick when a King comes down on the River - I also have a K, but a lower kicker, and just know they also have a K, at least (maybe even 2 pair), and a higher kicker - yet I'll sometimes call it anyway - get beat, and knocked out of the single table tournament in 4th place (top 3 finish).
Are any in the same boat? They pretty much KNOW they are beat, but think, "Hmm... just on the off chance I'm wrong, I'll go with it" - and lose.

Don't get me wrong, it's not that frequent, but I go out and then think to myself, "You know you shouldn't have called them, so only yourself to blame".

ugh.. this post!!
you are not alone. based on the amount of people that call with nothing all day long lol
i do it myself, way too often lately. i think some of it rises out of frustration at knowing you're being bluffed often, or just can't believe he caught that miracle river AGAIN.
i've also noticed i do it more when i'm really tired.. hmmm

 

[finaltable1]

When playing online I play mtt & have only been playing really strong pre hands lately but keep getting called all-in only to be beaten by lower pockets or some kind of hand that was worse at time of shove about half the time or more when i had 75% odds or better. Look to my thread posts under vents for examples. Am i just full of bad luck because i try to live by the numbers online but failing me of recent. yes and its pushed me towards believing it's fixed for action and helping to level playing field for the casual player.

Like I've said above, our memory is keeping bad beat moments for a long time, but we quickly forget when we're on the other side of the coin.

Any poker calculator will say that AA vs 88 is 80% to 20%
But it's true only for HU game, at a 9max table you never know true data of this equation cause you never know what cards are dealt to the rest of the players. If all aces are dealt, then it's a whole different equation. There are different mathematical systems, in one of them you're calculating things according to cards you've been dealt, but there is another mathematical system and it's dominating one.

What if 2 players go all-in without knowing their cards? Blind all-in. 2 cards vs 2 cards. What will be maths in this case? It's 50/50, or 49 vs 49 and 2% for split.

So in one mathematical system any pre-flop all-in is 50/50, In another system where you know your cards it's 80/20, after the flop numbers will change again, after the turn number will change one more time.

So how can you complain about losing with better pairs? It's usual occasion, happens to me and other players each day. You can beat it only by playing massive number of games.
YOu're a victim of so called gamblers fallacy.
Here, read how the coin flip works in the short run vs long run.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

"If a fair coin is flipped 21 times, the probability of 21 heads is 1 in 2,097,152. The probability of flipping a head after having already flipped 20 heads in a row is

1/2​

."






"Perhaps the most famous example of the gambler's fallacy occurred in a game of roulette at the Monte Carlo Casino on August 18, 1913, when the ball fell in black 26 times in a row. This was an extremely uncommon occurrence: the probability of a sequence of either red or black occurring 26 times in a row is (

18/37​

)26-1 or around 1 in 66.6 million, assuming the mechanism is unbiased. Gamblers lost millions of francs betting against black, reasoning incorrectly that the streak was causing an imbalance in the randomness of the wheel, and that it had to be followed by a long streak of red"

 

[finaltable1]

Yes, this is online poker. I disagree that there's no room for gut instinct - there is, because that's your brain telling you that you know this player is playing a way and wouldn't raise like that unless he has something good, based on how the game is going so far. I can also often tell if someone has a super hand, as they'll take longer to make their call. Obviously not all the time, but I can often just notice something is amiss and different to how a player has been playing - that's when I concentrate and watch the other players.

Since I posted the OP I have got a bit tighter on my hands. Whereas before I would play a K3s, I now will often not bother. In fact now the only K I tend to go with is down to KTo if nobody has raised and I'm in late position. I've definiely noticed an improvement because I'm not running low on chips as quickly.

I don't limp in often - quite the opposite. I'm normally the one folding mostly, especially in the early stages of quick tournaments. But there does sometimes come a time (if I've not won a hand, often due to terrible flops + raises), where in tournaments you either bluff, limp in more, or lose your stack.

As for value, I think the strongest part of my game is flop to river and normally having a good idea. That's my point - most of the time, when I'm fresh as a daisy and watch the opponents, I don't fall what I've put in the OP. So maybe that's how I solve the problem - if I feel myself losing focus and losing a few on the bounce - log out and don't play until another day.

Really? K3> KT? Well, I'm the on who folds JKs unless I'm on the BB and it's free to check.


Like I've said before - there is no room for instincts in online poker. Nothing objectively tells you that opponent has nuts or he's bluffing. It's jsut your subjective thinking based on past experience. You're trying to play the game "I know that you know that I know, that's why I know what you have" Objectively it's a fail, even at micro-low limits. Game is different at different stakes, but objectively at all levels of online poker there is no obvious signs, it's not live poker and even in live poker players like to give false body signals, in online poker it's easier to send false signals, cause you're sitting alone in a safe place and hide your face behind the monitor.

There are several things than can help to predict players behavior, it's HUD like HM2 and Shakscope.data. Win/Loss ratio is helpful, and data collected by HUD like fold to 3bet, Agression factor and so on. These are objective stats based on collected info, and these stats can increase the chance to make correct decision to 70-80%. ANd objectively such data is NOT BASED ON FEELINGS, cause feelings are subjective, while HUD provides pure facts. This is how experience player with HUD can be playing on your "feelings" like if it's strings of the guitar, and make you think that he has the nuts, while in reality he has just nothing, not even a draw.

Some time ago it was proven by players who played blind game in SnGs... with a sticker glued on top of the cards, betting and folding according to data about the opponents. Influence caused by bet size induced fear and subjective ideas in minds of the opponents and it allowed players to win without even knowing what cards they've been dealt.

Obvious mistake of those who want to play trashy hands like QT-KT, is the number of tables. Players want action and when you're playing just 1 or 2 tables at a time, you might find it boring when you have to wait 30 minutes for some good pocket pair or top ace, so you'll decide to see the flop with garbage, cause time is not a never ending process and you'll begin to feel like you're wasting your life for nothing while you're waiting, that's why you'll decide to play weak hands. If you're playing 6 tables, then you'll get action x6 times more often compared to 1 table, if you're playing 9-12 tables, then you will have almost non-stop action at one or few tables at a time with great hands. Playing 9-12 tables isn't difficult, but there is no room and no time for paying attention to all players at all tables, no room for feelings, no room for doubts. You just have to play mathematically correct and ignore any bad or good luck. This is necessary if you want to be a winning player, read my post above with a link about gamblers fallacy and how the long run works against the short run.

A) 2000 mathematically correct hands per day vs B)200 hands played on feelings per day. How do you think, poker professionals are using method A or method B?

 

[dgroes]

If you're beaten and you can't fold, you aren't a decent player...

True but if most of the stack is already on the table, and you have to take a calculated risk even if the river card may give villain the edge... I think in those situations you just have to go with it...

 

[Darth_Moola]

literally the worst feeling in poker besides losing when you have a hand that wins 90%+

 

[tw082]

Like I've said above, our memory is keeping bad beat moments for a long time, but we quickly forget when we're on the other side of the coin.

Any poker calculator will say that AA vs 88 is 80% to 20%
But it's true only for HU game, at a 9max table you never know true data of this equation cause you never know what cards are dealt to the rest of the players. If all aces are dealt, then it's a whole different equation. There are different mathematical systems, in one of them you're calculating things according to cards you've been dealt, but there is another mathematical system and it's dominating one.

What if 2 players go all-in without knowing their cards? Blind all-in. 2 cards vs 2 cards. What will be maths in this case? It's 50/50, or 49 vs 49 and 2% for split.

So in one mathematical system any pre-flop all-in is 50/50, In another system where you know your cards it's 80/20, after the flop numbers will change again, after the turn number will change one more time.

So how can you complain about losing with better pairs? It's usual occasion, happens to me and other players each day. You can beat it only by playing massive number of games.
YOu're a victim of so called gamblers fallacy.
Here, read how the coin flip works in the short run vs long run.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

"If a fair coin is flipped 21 times, the probability of 21 heads is 1 in 2,097,152. The probability of flipping a head after having already flipped 20 heads in a row is

1/2​

."






"Perhaps the most famous example of the gambler's fallacy occurred in a game of roulette at the Monte Carlo Casino on August 18, 1913, when the ball fell in black 26 times in a row. This was an extremely uncommon occurrence: the probability of a sequence of either red or black occurring 26 times in a row is (

18/37​

)26-1 or around 1 in 66.6 million, assuming the mechanism is unbiased. Gamblers lost millions of francs betting against black, reasoning incorrectly that the streak was causing an imbalance in the randomness of the wheel, and that it had to be followed by a long streak of red"

It's happened to me 4 times in one tourney over course of 100 hands..I lose with 75% favs or better at shove almost every tournament. You can spout digits all day I took statistics. Fact of the matter is you take a hundred, thousand, or ten thousand hands online and compare with same number live and tell me what you get.


If you want i can post link where published mathematician along with computer engineer and programmer compared hundreds of thousands of hands online vs live and came up with same results i do. Math professor said one in a million chances the online cards would ever fall in the same manner or equal too in real live game. He found reoccurring patterns paying under cards at extremely high rate and much more unscrupulous behavior.


But i have a feeling if your trolling this thread looking for people to attempt to discredit you have already seen maybe one of the times I have previously posted.Do you think true random is even possible do you know how a software algorythm works. Only looks random in small portions if you wrote it or even know the time coalition that rng was started you could figure it out with correct software.

These are facts if you need I can post link's where it's explained by people you might trust. Depending on how much blind faith you have in these corporations to not play with numbers to increase profit. I took bushiness classes in Columbus (OSU) And it's pretty much considered unethical as far as business ethics goes to not do this if possible for the share holders are who your obligations lay with not the customer.

It's laughable to me that people think this is not obviously happening even with no proof. Every major corporation you use daily has done this and much worse for monetary gain. If you doubt these statements google and gain knowledge then we can talk. If not then you are already stuck in a belief and refuse to accept information if this is the case you can never truly know anything.

DROP MIKE!

 

[zinzir]

Overall, I'm a decent player, know the pot odds, implied odds, my own starting hand guide (changes slightly, depending on the opposition), etc, but this seems to be a slight weakness that I have, when I'm becoming irritated against poor players.

9 times out of 10, if I have a gut instinct, that my hand is beat, I am. Yet I'll still sometimes call, and go against it, due to being impatient of not getting any decent hands/flops.

A rough example would be when someone bets most of their stick when a King comes down on the River - I also have a K, but a lower kicker, and just know they also have a K, at least (maybe even 2 pair), and a higher kicker - yet I'll sometimes call it anyway - get beat, and knocked out of the single table tournament in 4th place (top 3 finish).
Are any in the same boat? They pretty much KNOW they are beat, but think, "Hmm... just on the off chance I'm wrong, I'll go with it" - and lose.

Don't get me wrong, it's not that frequent, but I go out and then think to myself, "You know you shouldn't have called them, so only yourself to blame".

I know exactly what you are talking about as it happens to me as well. In my opinion, only experience can patch this leak.

 

[zinzir]

Really? K3> KT? Well, I'm the on who folds JKs unless I'm on the BB and it's free to check.


Like I've said before - there is no room for instincts in online poker. Nothing objectively tells you that opponent has nuts or he's bluffing. It's jsut your subjective thinking based on past experience. You're trying to play the game "I know that you know that I know, that's why I know what you have" Objectively it's a fail, even at micro-low limits. Game is different at different stakes, but objectively at all levels of online poker there is no obvious signs, it's not live poker and even in live poker players like to give false body signals, in online poker it's easier to send false signals, cause you're sitting alone in a safe place and hide your face behind the monitor.

There are several things than can help to predict players behavior, it's HUD like HM2 and Shakscope.data. Win/Loss ratio is helpful, and data collected by HUD like fold to 3bet, Agression factor and so on. These are objective stats based on collected info, and these stats can increase the chance to make correct decision to 70-80%. ANd objectively such data is NOT BASED ON FEELINGS, cause feelings are subjective, while HUD provides pure facts. This is how experience player with HUD can be playing on your "feelings" like if it's strings of the guitar, and make you think that he has the nuts, while in reality he has just nothing, not even a draw.

Some time ago it was proven by players who played blind game in SnGs... with a sticker glued on top of the cards, betting and folding according to data about the opponents. Influence caused by bet size induced fear and subjective ideas in minds of the opponents and it allowed players to win without even knowing what cards they've been dealt.

Obvious mistake of those who want to play trashy hands like QT-KT, is the number of tables. Players want action and when you're playing just 1 or 2 tables at a time, you might find it boring when you have to wait 30 minutes for some good pocket pair or top ace, so you'll decide to see the flop with garbage, cause time is not a never ending process and you'll begin to feel like you're wasting your life for nothing while you're waiting, that's why you'll decide to play weak hands. If you're playing 6 tables, then you'll get action x6 times more often compared to 1 table, if you're playing 9-12 tables, then you will have almost non-stop action at one or few tables at a time with great hands. Playing 9-12 tables isn't difficult, but there is no room and no time for paying attention to all players at all tables, no room for feelings, no room for doubts. You just have to play mathematically correct and ignore any bad or good luck. This is necessary if you want to be a winning player, read my post above with a link about gamblers fallacy and how the long run works against the short run.

A) 2000 mathematically correct hands per day vs B)200 hands played on feelings per day. How do you think, poker professionals are using method A or method B?

I have read all your posts in this this thread and in my opinion you show a deep understanding of the game, and your advice is of excellent quality, especially for the advanced players. For players like myself and the thread's author, unfortunately, very few of the things you have covered in your posts pertain to our problem. This instinct or gut feeling is not about playing garbage hands and having kicker problems, it happens with any type of hand, all the way to aces. Basically, at some point after the flop sometimes I get the feeling I am beat, and I can't point to the exact reason, but it is true in the vast majority of times when I ignore it and go to showdown. And I am talking about online play, where you don't get to see your opponents' face or get to study their mannerisms, but you still have a lot of information from the way the hand played. Daniel Negreanu when he faces a big bet on the river goes back and analyses everything that happened in that hand from the beginning, and sometimes guesses the opponent's exact hand based on how the hand was played, not on the opponent's face. I am not Daniel to be able to remember and especially analyze what happened in a hand especially online where there is less time, but instinct aka gut feeling aka subconscient still gives me valuable advice that if I follow every single time I would be better off. It's like not having gps on my car and making the wrong turn, if I listen to my instinct most of the time I drive back to my route in no time, and if I don't I get lost even more. The subconscient uses roughly 80% of one's brain power, and ignoring it is never a good idea. Don't take my word, listen to what Johnny Chan said at the end of this amazing 1 minute video:

Now, you might not experience this situation as often as us, and a possible explanation is your habit of playing multiple tables at a time. If your attention is scattered between so many tables, your subcoscient will not be able to keep up with all the details of a particular hand, and you have to rely only on math and volume to maintain profitability, which is really a waste of your skill, because it reduces your play to a bot like activity. Also, you are more profitable by playing 9 tables at a time because you are a skilled, disciplined and math savvy poker player not because playing multiple tables is profitable per se. In other words, you need to beat the game before playing multiple tables achieves positive expectation. A player who is not profitable playing one table is going to lose more by playing multiple tables. Advising a novice player who plays more starting hands than he should, to go ahead and start playing multiple tables, hoping that the move in itself will patch his leak and he will become a winning player, in my opinion, will have the exact opposite effect.