Huge Hole in My Game That Needs Repair

I haven't realized until recently that I have a huge hole in my game. It's not that I don't know the math behind the game; that is something I know I need to brush up on. My biggest glaring weakness in my current game is that I can't see past my own cards. Many poker aficionados consider certain levels of poker. Level one is a general knowledge of the game and how to play the hand your dealt. Level two is an understanding of your opponents hands and how they play.
I do not excercise this practice enough. What good is knowing my own hole cards when I don't know what my opponent is holding. 2 + 2 equals 4... not 2 + 0 = 4!
So  lets try to break down the readily available information that we can use to gain more information about an opponents hand.
1. Board Texture
2. Betting Pattern
3. Timing
Board Texture:
It can be pretty easy to pick out a flush, but a straight tends to be more tricky, especially if your opponent holds a suited one-gap (two cards like 7,9  or 8,10 of the same suit).  What is even harder is putting an opponent on a sneaky small set, or a higher boat (full-house) than you have. This is where most people lose the majority of their money; either those instances or if you run into a higher pair than you have. However typically if you hold pocket 6's and your opponent is holding 8's the pot shouldn't ge that big. So how can we get a clearer idea of what our opponent is holding?
Betting patterns tend to give away what an opponent is holding. The old adage is that weak is strong and strong is weak. Try to wrap that one around your head if that is the first time you are reading those words. I often find that if I am holding the nuts I try to entice my opponents to walk right into it. It tends to be more difficult then you think though. On the flip side, in lower limit games that I have been playing the adage seems a bit defunct. If a player acts strong he tends to be strong ,and for that matter if he acts strong he is also weak. The lower limits tend to rule by constant aggressiveness though, however I would like to try potting more of my bets. By this I mean that in later betting rounds I would like to try to bet the amount that is currently in the pot. Sometimes I feel as though my continuation bets, or my standard 3x raise does not do enough to scare my opponents into folding a marginal hand, a better hand, or a drawing hand. I think I will attempt to make pot sized bets more often to see if this affects my outcome.
Timing seems to be everything to me lately. Often I will watch an opponent act very strong pre-flop. When the cards are dealt on the flop though they tend to lack a certain confidence that I can pick up in the timing of the bet (which tends to be smaller than at first) or check. This has worked out for me recently by re-raising in these instances.
It can be very hard to call an opponents range, or even try to put an opponent on a specific hand, but I don't really do this ever. In order to improve my game it needs to be something I incorporate into every hand I am dealt or it will decrease my chances of making money. Every hand needs 100% conentration and every hand should be used as a learning opportunitiy to find out what my opponents are playing with.

Buying in for the table minimum, table maximum or in between?

When I started to play poker online I was completely unaware of any rules, suggestions or etiquite that would accompany a more seasoned poker afficionado. One of the first questions that arise before you even hit the table (online or real life casino table) is how much money should I bring to the table?

My first instinct was to play the minimum amount. If I am learning, I don't want to lose any money during a session that I need to, right? Plus, if I'm lucky I can double up and I'll have plenty of money to work with after that ...

To Wait or Not to wait for the big blind when you sit down to a table??

Conventional Wisdom seems to suggest that you should wait for the big blind to reach you before you jump into a game. Why pay in more money for a round of poker than you actually have to, right?... Well as far as I am concerned, being the fish that I am, I don's see a lot of good reason in this.

If I sit down to a 9 person table and I end up on the button I am supposed to wait 8 full hands until I should play? That could take up quite a bit of time. As far as I am concerned, unless I am one or two hands away from the big blind I don't mind buying in early. I make it a point to buy in for the table maximum anyway, and paying an extra .05 when I buy in for $5 (100x the big blind) doesnt really make a sizeable dent in my stack.

Going All-in My Thoughts and Strategy

Here is the hard and fast rule: All-in for yours truly should only be saved for certain specific situations. Either I have the nuts and will definitly be paid off or I am in a dire situation (such as short stacked in a ring game, or tournament) and I have no other alternative. I have one addendum to the rule, Do Not get fast played into an all in moment by the end of the Turn card or River, UNLESS you hit the nuts.

I have been playing for several years online now and have developed several bad tendencies during that time. First, I get curious. This leads me to call other players all-ins with marginal hands, or with worse. Next, I tend to get fast played easily. I know this is the wrong technical term, but maybe if i lay it out for you, you can better understand.

Playing Big Stacks vs Small Stacks in Ring Games

I have a new strategy I hope I can stick to most of the time. I would say that as a poker player i am NOT a math based/odds based player. i find that situations call for different strategies that math cannot exactly csalculate, like big stacks vs. small stacks.

Countless times i have seen a larger stack at the table force a small stack to make the penultimate decision for all his/her chips. There can be nothing more difficult than making that coin flip decision in all of poker. Either you double up or you have busted. You may lose your tournament seat or (as in my usual case) you are playing with the last few dollars in your bankroll. How do you calculate the fear/aggression balance in that situation? More than likely, in my case i would fold to the more aggressive, bigger stack... unless I have a premium hand (AA, KK down to 10s or combinations of suited face cards). If you continually force a short stack to make that decision for all their own chips you can only have a handful of options. They fold and you take a smaller pot, they call and you take the full stack, or they call and you lose a finite amount of money, probably an amount you felt comfortable shoving into a coin flip. I often hear the rail chat call this, gambling with their opponents money; it couldn't be any more true. Often I have been on the wrong end of this transaction, but hopefully if I step through the minefield more carefully in the future I will have the advantage more often than not, and may benefit more from this opportunity in the long run.

ShareThis