Why You Can’t Beat Low-limit Games — Part V

Parts I and II proved that you don’t lose because your opponents are too stupid. You lose primarily because it’s very hard to get a large enough edge to overcome the extremely high costs. Parts III & IV suggested ways to increase your edge. This part will discuss an easy, but neglected, method for increasing it: thoroughly studying your weakest opponents.

We all know that poker is a people game, but many moderately competent low-limit players pay little attention to their opponents, especially the weakest ones. They expect to win by playing “properly” (such as by rigidly applying some book’s rules). When they’re not playing a hand, they frequently ignore the action, chat too much, play with cell phones, watch TV, or even read. They make silly excuses for not studying weak players:

“It’s boring.”

“I can’t understand them.”

“I can’t learn anything from them.”

“Why bother? They’re idiots.”

They don’t understand that it’s critically important to study the weaker players.

First, they’re the primary, perhaps the only, source of your profits. You can’t get enough edge over good players to cover your costs. The weaker players are the only ones who give you that indispensable, huge edge. If you don’t get enough value from that edge, you have absolutely no chance to win. And you can’t get that value without studying them.

Second, they’re extremely hard to read because they don’t know how to play. For example, when good players cold-call your raise, you can put them on a fairly narrow range of hands. When they three-bet preflop, they probably have at least pocket queens. Bad players will make both plays with much weaker hands. We occasionally see the opposite pattern, extreme timidity: Someone who never raised shows down pocket aces.

Third, their play changes rapidly because they have less emotional control than good players. Normally passive players become wildly aggressive because they’re on tilt or on a rush. When aggressive players feel discouraged, they may not bet or raise without the nuts.

Fourth, their body language is very revealing, because they don’t control it well.

Fifth, studying them relieves the boredom you get from playing very tightly, and you must play that way.

DAI

One of my favorite notes is “DAI” (“Don’t Assume Intelligence”). I take many notes about what players do and try to decide why they take actions that – from an expected value (EV) perspective – seem hopelessly stupid. But that’s the wrong perspective.

Instead, I apply The Law of Subjective Rationality. My book, The Psychology of Poker, explains that law. A person’s actions may appear irrational, but they are usually, “subjectively rational: They make sense to him…If you can…understand why he plays poker, what he wants to do, and how he sees the situation, you can understand actions that are now utterly inexplicable. They may seem ridiculous to you, but they almost always make sense to the person taking them.” (p. 48)

For example, you’ve seen people fold plus EV draws because, “I never make a flush,” or check the turn with a good made hand because they put a woman on a flush draw and think, “She always makes her flushes.” You’ve also seen people make extremely negative EV plays because they felt they were due, wanted the kick of gambling, or were just bored.

To beat weak players, set aside your ideas about what they should do. Learn how they think and what they’re trying to do. Do they want to win? Or just have fun? Or minimize risks? Are they superstitious? Angry? Drunk? Showing off?

Instead of dismissing weak players as “idiots,” try to answer two critical questions:

• What kind of idiots are they?

• How are they playing now?

You can’t answer either question without carefully studying what each opponent does, looking for patterns, and then analyzing his reasoning. They do have reasons for playing badly, and the better you understand those reasons, the more money you will win.

What Kind of Idiots Are They?

At least three types of players have been called idiots: Maniacs, Calling Stations, and (less frequently) Rocks. Unless you correctly identify and adjust to each type, you can’t beat low-limit games.

Maniacs: They’re the easiest players to identify because they overplay so many hands. But every Maniac is not the same. Some are more aggressive preflop than post-flop; others are the opposite. Some love to check-raise; others rarely do it. Some bluff very frequently; others don’t.

If you just label someone as a Maniac and don’t learn how he actually plays, you’ll make serious mistakes. Since they make huge pots, those mistakes will be very costly.

Calling Stations: They’re fairly easy to identify because they just call, call, call, rarely bet, and hardly ever raise. But not every Calling Station plays the same. Some limp with almost every hand, while others are more selective. Some limp with almost anything, but won’t cold-call raises without a reasonable hand. Others cold-call raises with utter trash. Some will take off a card on the flop with almost any two cards, while others need at least a piece of the flop. Some will call two bets on the river with a straight on a four-flush board, while others will fold.

Rocks: They’re less likely to be called “idiots” because they’re less obviously stupid. We hardly notice them because they just fold, fold, fold, rarely bet, and almost never raise. We usually don’t realize how badly they play until they show down pocket aces or a flopped set without ever raising.

If you don’t go beyond the labels and identify how this person plays, you can’t win.

How Are They Playing Now?

Nobody always plays the same. Sometimes Calling Stations tighten up. Sometimes Rocks get loose and aggressive. Good players vary their style to fit the situation; bad ones change for emotional reasons. They get angry, scared, drunk, discouraged, overconfident, and so on. If you don’t recognize how they’ve changed, you obviously can’t adjust correctly.
What Can You Learn From Their Body Language?

Hopefully, you’ve read Mike Caro’s and Joe Navarro’s books on body language. But understanding theoretical principles won’t help you if you don’t study your opponents. Body language is extremely individualistic. The meaning of any action depends upon the person.

Let’s take a principle you’ve probably read: Weak equals strong. Many people act weak when they’re strong and vice versa, but some people act weak when they’re weak and strong when they’re strong. If you don’t study them, you’ll completely misread their signals.

When Should You Study Your Weakest Opponents?

I could say, “All the time,” but you won’t do it that often. So, do it after you’ve folded. When you’re playing a hand, you’re primarily concerned with making the right decisions. After folding, you’re more objective and can look for patterns. Besides, if you carefully study your opponents, you won’t be as bored. Instead of just waiting for the next hand, you’ll have something important to do: observing and analyzing your opponents. If you also take notes and review them after playing, you’ll find that you finally understand how and why various “idiots” play. Better yet, you’ll take their money. ♠

“Dr. Al” ([email protected]) coaches only on psychology issues. For information about seminars and webinars, go to propokerseminars.com. He is David Sklansky’s co-author of DUCY? and the sole author of four poker psychology books.