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.
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.
