The hardest players to read are the most straightforward

The players that are the hardest to understand are not the smartest players but the dumbest players. The ones that bet when they have something and check when they don't means that they have no ulterior motive to their game. I find bad dumb players the hardest to read because they do the most obvious things. The problem with that is you are not supposed to play in way that increases profits. If you have no deviation in your game that means one can understand exactly what play to make is certain situations.

They raise with certain cards and always do the same things in the same situations. Always the same thing. Always! Well that is a mathematical-like, playing the odds mentality. That is a strategy rooted in a pragmatic philosophy that just do the most likely things and it will result in the best outcomes. The problem is it's predictable.

If you are multi-table playing, or just don't think too clearly about your strategy then it makes sense to stick to a cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all approach.  If you don't want to win or lose too much, you just bound your winnings and losings into a range and this makes sense if you are trying to float at poker and just win or lose within a range.

If you play that game against the same kinds of players, I find them working their bad play on capped low limit games, then I guess you are just there treading water anyways like they are. Live and let live.

The problem with that isn't that it is wrong. The problem you have is when you meet a player that studies how you play they make the game about exploiting your weakness.  The game then isn't about cards or what you have, it's about making plays you won't expect and taking your money when you give up too easy. Most importantly, to let you play your game and then trick you into losing your whole stack when top pair isn't best. 

I'm Lying

In order to run an effective deception campaign, sometimes you need to tell the truth.

I won about $200 last night telling people what I had but never showing them. I told the truth for once. These two players didn't realize that I did in fact get Aces, Queens, and then Aces again on the same table in about four hands.  So I chatted what I had, then didn't show them. Until the last guy threw in $100 with a pair of fours because he refused to believe me.  They threw their chips away because they assumed I was a regular table bully who was running a scam.  I was, only it wasn't the scam they thought.

I was varying how I do things. I was adjusting how I play to make sure I don't give off a predictable pattern. That's part of making sure they call when you have a set and they have an overpair. You make yourself unpredictable so they don't know where you are in the hand.  Since most are players are on autopilot it helps to throw in misdirection. You can't just worry about other players, you need to be unpredictable as well. That is what guarantees they play wrong against you.  Most European players can't get over themselves long enough to pay attention. Exploit them!

I'm Back

I once had a poker seat on poker stars with $1200 on it.  Then I got stupid not thinking and lost it.  I once took first place in a tournament and won $2700 on pokerstars, then I frittered it away playing too big tournaments for my bankroll, assuming my skill would outrun luck. I didn't.

I was on my way to be professional many times. Then didn't.

But now I'm back.

I started with $140CDN / $100US and ran it up to this in about 30 hours:

~$959 US with some VIP Rewards money - about $200 US - in 30 hours playing mainly cash games. I do play above the recommended buy-ins but that is my skill edge, I have played up to $2/$4 so I know in general how these players play.  I pay attention, I record their moves.

I show you my player ratings on the screen in that submenu - LPP weak all the way to LPP Fish. The biggest threats are not tight players or the most loose aggressive players.  They are the mostly tight players that bluff, those medium players are the hardest to read in the situation - paying attention to the action, the betting patterns, and so on. The most predictable players are the ones with a set game plan like tight aggressive because you know a reraise means a big hand.

So my book works. My pattern recognition strategy can pay off. I know when to bet against a tight player just to bluff the pot. I know that a call from a landmine means big trouble. I reraise weak LPP players with nothing.  I use a recent called bluff to exploit a set for his whole stack. I lie. I tell the truth. I use deception strategies. I ask for information. I player bigger pots in confidence against opponents I can read. I am cautious against tighter players that reraised me.

I am not saying I'm omniscient. I don't have these reads every hand. Lots of times I get confused. Lots of times I call with weaker hands than I should. But today's poker is not about every right decision. It's about making MORE right decisions overall.  Because human beings are pattern animals, they play in predictable ways unless the realize they do it. They stick themselves into a computer for many hours at a time doing the same thing over and over.  Exploit their normalness. Exploit their behaviour patterns.

Who do you study at a table?

When you are looking at a table of people and they all play differently, then whom do you study?
You might have time to read them all but where does it pay to concentrate?

Of course the math is not really helpful if they all have money and it's a toss up if they all have the same money. What is helpful is their style of play.  You don't want to waste too much time studying the tight players, they are predictable. They play few hands, they fold often, and when they have a very good hand they bet hard and often.

Fish are predictable also, they play all drawing hands and bet when they have the nuts, calling other times. Smart fish cut their losses. Loose ones are easy to beat

What you want to find is the loose aggressive players. You want to concentrate on loose players that have recently won a bundle. Or lost a bundle. They are the ones that would be willing to call with second pair.  Trust me, I've played against them and I've played like that.  My biggest swings in emotion and winnings come when I play loose aggressive. LAGs can triple up in a couple of hands. It's really the way to amass chips in a tournament. These days lucky flops take out players more than anything else. Luck is a major part of it because skills are so close. LAG's make plays - button raises, position reraises, flop c-bets etc. - with drawing hands and then hit the flop or luck out on the river. Down goes the skilled player...

LAGs are the main reason I hate low stakes tables. I know I was one so I can't complain too loudly, but they make it hard to stand when they have no idea how lucky they were and yet they don't really care.  They can't see, in general, how foolish they were. If you want to understand a little of how it is you need at some point to take some money, kiss it goodbye, then sit down at the table with the plan to play aggressive, bluff, make position plays, and lose the money. If you win, you will understand how much better it is for adrenaline and skill. It's intense. But it doesn't last. You can't keep hoping for luck over and over.  Trust me I've been felted many times this way. But for me, I didn't care about winning or the money so much as using it to understand how to out-think even thinking players. It is the mental combat I crave, not an award much to my own downfall.

Experiencing it will make you a better player than just playing straightforward poker. You will realize whole new dimensions to the game. My personal problem is when I play at low stakes I don't take those morons seriously and then they felt me. Ok, so how can I reconcile these two positions; you learn lots and it's great to play but you hate them and they are stupid? Sounds like some sort of hostage syndrome, you love them and hate them. Well I will make an artificial distinction between them: there are good ones and there are bad ones and mediocre ones in the middle. There are players that think, and those that don't. Shoving bluffs get called many times. So separate out the unthinking mediocre LAGs from the rest of the continuum and those are the ones that inhabit the lowest stakes tables.  That's as far as that gets you playing on no thinking and luck.  They felt or get felted. Of course the reason why it's an artificial distinction is that when bad ones start out they are no more bright  than low intelligence cuttlefish. But the average ones learn some tricks, and stop losing easy money so fast.    And the best ones become famous players. But the dim ones are brain locked into a pitiable existence that doesn't change. They get lucky, they gain lots, then they lose it all. Rinse. Reload. Repeat.

This is a swarm of value you want in on, not just grinding against the regulars. 
You will be in position against LAGs every few hands.  They know people try to bluff them.  You can be patient and wait them out. But in order to be ready you need to have learned what they do and why. It's not just hand ran...

sorry multitabling...pokerstars or jokerstars  depending on how I'm doing...

hand ranges they are likely to be holding, that's the normal information you know in general - drawing suited connectors, when they squeeze - how much and what cards are present. But you need to know what cards they think are good ones to bluff, and what a hesitation means when they are acting. Sometimes hesitation means a super good hand, and most times it means whoa I am in big trouble. When you put the player's patterns together with the action and the cards it's easier to see what they are thinking and what they are preparing to do. Sometimes a loose player sees an ace on the river and you can see the idea that to bet at that ace might win the pot. They go all in and you call them with a Jack. They looked stunned. I looked stunned.  This is what happens when you try to flaunt your manhood instead of thinking. If you can see that, so can other people.  This is why I hate those nonthinking LAGs. - they are helpless in their foolishness.  Hate is a strong word for a Buddhist, I don't really hate them I just have real frustration thinking about how they are locked in a box.   When they make a bad play and get rewarded, they don't take the chance for a little soul searching. Realize how fortunate they were and resolve to change for the better. There's no adjusting to reality.  Why fix what isn't broken? So in the end it's karma that gets them.

I can't fix them so learn how to exploit them. I try to make amends by writing it all down here and maybe they will read it?

You need to know if they semi-bluff or check raise only with a drawing hand, or not. Do they bluff raise the river? How often? People are predictable when they fall into patterns because they use what worked last time if they don't think it through every time. And people winning on luck fall into their own traps; that's the beautiful hubris of being a gambler.

Remember folding a hand is not a defeat. Gaining information by watching their hands, replaying the hands in your mind, folding to watch the action, and so on will gain you more in the long run if you learned from the information they gave you for free. Then when you have the right hand and remember those particular patterns it pays off then. Or, in other words, patience pays. Many times I sit down and some loose player has won a bunch. And then in the end, my stack is bigger and they are leaving for the door. I did it myself.  One time in Calgary I sat down with $100 and ran it up to $500 in a matter of a few hands. Then I got bored and pissed it away. I didn't realize why until later. I was satisfied that I could do it. I should have been more satisfied to keep it.