|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 3/20/2010 2:57:09 PM PACIFIC |
 table image vs. Limits., Banning, 14. Jun 2003 00:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Earlier somebody made a poste about how one should have a different image depending on the game. Intimidate is good for texas hold'em and everybody loving you is goof for Omaha. I was then thinking about Mike Caro's statement that the best image is to be the "crazy guy" the guy that supposedly plays anything. That; according to MC is the best image. So I took the two points and thought about it. Here is what I deduced, tell me if it sounds reasonable. The "crazy guy" image is good for higher limits, you want those guys to think you are betting with a shitty hand so that they give you money. This works because there is significantly less "schooling" (when everyone calls and their combined outs make you have the worst of it) Higher limits you want to induce more people to call thus increasing your profits. Mike Caro plays at higher limits so his advice probably applies to this situation. Mike Caro says that his reasoning is that most players make the mistake of calling too often and thus he wants to take advantage of that and thus make the callers call even more. When that other guy said that an intimidating table image is best for hold'em, I believe that is most correct for lower limits. If alot of the table fears your bets. They know that you are betting cuz you have a strong hand. They will be more prone to fold to you. As there is alot more "schooling" at lower limit hold'em this table image forces out alot more people, because they are scared of you. Thus, your marginal position bets hold alot more clout and you can make alot more plays, plus you won't be hoping that your good cards now are still good later. So, to finalize, I think that maybe the "optimal" table image is not just applicable to the game, but also to the limits. It isn't actually the limits you are adjusting to, it is the players themselves. So, your optimal table image should be a intimidating one if you are having a problem with too many callers, but your image should be of a crazy wacky guy if your having a problem with not enough callers. Oddly enough this sort of image stuff should almost naturally happen. If the table folds around to you and your on the button, you know the blinds are two rocks, you would raise thus scaring them out, heck it might even be worth doing that with almost nothing for cards. Thus, your giving off a "crazy" image towards the players that call the least, if after they fold you show your shit ass hand, they will remember and consider you "crazy." On the other hand, if the one rock at the table folds, and all the other calling stations limp in, then you should only be playing the best multiplayer starting hands, so that you can bet out and win against them, and scare the bejebus out of them because every time you have bet out and won with a monster hand, so they will all remember that. Several different players can each have a completely different view of your table image, and people remember moreso the hands they participated in then the ones that they were just watching. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: table image vs. Limits., Mark, 14. Jun 2003 09:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You make some good points, but image is not just dependant on the type of game and limits. It really depends on the table you're at. A wild and crazy image may work at one $10-$20 table, and the "guy to be feared" may work at another $10-20 table in the same casino. Also, you must be comfortable with the image you project. If your not comfortable with it, it will show and no one will buy it. mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: table image vs. Limits., gary ford, 14. Jun 2003 09:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 14. Jun 2003 09:03 Mark wrote: > You make some good points, but image is not just dependant on the type of game and > limits. It really depends on the table you're at. A wild and crazy image may work > at one $10-$20 table, and the "guy to be feared" may work at another $10-20 table in > the same casino. > > Also, you must be comfortable with the image you project. If your not comfortable > with it, it will show and no one will buy it. > > mark Mark--if you are capable of portraying this wide range of emotions , then your place is in Hollywood, hence the expression--Hollywooding Be yourself, play your best and everything will be ok. There's only one Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: table image vs. Limits., mongi, 14. Jun 2003 19:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| At the lower limits I would prefer to win big pots and have lots of callers. If your image is intimidating or tight you are not going to get enough action on your good hands. You may win alot of small pots but when you add in the rake its just not worth it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: table image vs. Limits., Mark, 14. Jun 2003 19:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > Mark--if you are capable of portraying this wide range of emotions , then your place is > in Hollywood, hence the expression--Hollywooding > Be yourself, play your best and everything will be ok. There's only one Mike Caro Gary I can play wild and crazy (my NO limt style) for some games and tight -aggressive (my limit style) for others. Playing either way depends on the game and it's conditions, but both ways feel comfortable to me. I just respond to the game, and try to play a style that i believe will give me the best chance to maximize my profits. Its taken me a long time to be able to correctly adapt to changing game conditions, but i do it fairly well now. There is no need to try to put me down or imply i'm lying. If you don't have any deception to your game, you'll be pretty easy to read. mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: table image vs. Limits., Big_Slick, 15. Jun 2003 20:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| There is no need to try to put me down or imply i'm lying. Hmm. I think you need to re-read Gary's post. I didn't see where he was putting you down or implying you were a liar. You both have different opinions here. All Gary was saying was just be yourself and let the cards take care of themselves. You on the other hand feel that there is an advantage to portraying an image. That's the great thing about the forum... people have different opinions. There's no need to become defensive. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: table image vs. Limits., flintsword, 15. Jun 2003 21:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Like you, the entire idea of table image fascinates me. In "real" (B&M) casinos, I am careful but unwilling to sacrifice my personality for results, because I suspect (note: suspect) that this is not necessary to win at poker. A key seems to be to conceal intent, instead of trying to fit into a sunglass-toting chip weasel mold that seems to be the fashion these days (present chip weasels in UPF excepted, of course ...). I remember being really well dressed in Las Vegas, and swinging by a poker game at the Flamingo (man, ... long time ago ...) and sitting down at a game an hour before dinner. I mean, I looked like the ultimate fish, ... and perhaps I was. I was verbose, jovial, complimentary, and having a good time, without draining chips. In fact, the serious "I have been sucking on a lemon for a fortnight" types were losing more with loose play. I got a super hand, and since it was "very clear" that I had been identified as the biggest fish in recent history, decided to play my hand **strong**. My table image came from my suit, my good humour, and banter ... and the *strong* push of my chips into the table. I had flopped trips. This *strong* bet was interpreted by a few players as a weak hand, ... so they raised me. No hollywooding here, I tried to figure out what they had and told them so ... "I think I have the better hand boys, time to fold." They raised, and that is when I realized that they had branded me as some sort of record-breaking tuna, ... and it made me cold mad. Now I decided to ham it up a bit, to fit the circumstance on the river, which had given me the nut boat, with the Hoyle favourite "Run and hide, little children", and I got raisers. The folders either believed me or saw through my act like a pane of glass. The pot was huge for the limit and they could not believe their eyes as I raked it in. I got a few friendly, "Been playing long?" type of questions after that, and was clearly no longer on the menu as seafood. Ok, so my point is that there as many table images as you think you can create, ... using image to conceal intent is one of objectives of image. I hope this snapshot of one objective of image is useful and I haven't bored anyone to tears. flintsword | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network | Find Vancouver Businesses |
|