Overthinking in Poker

Graham

After trying to respond to one of Cadillac's hand analysis questions, I think I have come to the conclusion that I overthink my poker decisions wayyyy too much and it often causes me to make the wrong plays. I have a very analyitical personality which most likely factors into this.

The more I think about it, I play the best when I can turn my subconcious off and make my plays based on pot odds, the cards I hold and my opponent's plays/position.

Anyone else experience this? What do you do to turn off that voice in the back of your head that says "well maybe he is doing this because of this" kind of thing?

JimmyHo

I often think this when I watch players try to put other players on hands every single hand like this is the end all, be all. They seem so fixated on 'guessing' the others guy's cards and are often way off the mark. Sometimes they ignore other aspects of the game because they are so convinced the other guy has the nuts. They basically talk themselves into folding.

cadillac

Graham wrote: »

The more I think about it, I play the best when I can turn my subconcious off and make my plays based on pot odds, the cards I hold and my opponent's plays/position.

Anyone else experience this? What do you do to turn off that voice in the back of your head that says "well maybe he is doing this because of this" kind of thing?

It seems to me by this post that you are confusing the issue a bit.

I don't think you can be capable of over analyzing the situation. There are many bits of information out there to use and you should be trying to spot them all and factor them all into your decisions at the table.


We all have our own distinct personalities and tendencies. The cynics never believe their opponents bets and are constantly fighting the urge to call too much. The believers make a habit of folding too much.


Do you use the information as just a piece in the puzzle or do you grab on to the bits that will let you make the decision that will please your personality type?


What is your personality type?

Graham

cadillac wrote: »

I don't think you can be capable of over analyzing the situation. There are many bits of information out there to use and you should be trying to spot them all and factor them all into your decisions at the table.

Do you use the information as just a piece in the puzzle or do you grab on to the bits that will let you make the decision that will please your personality type?

What is your personality type?

See, for example, when it comes to making a decision I can find arguments that support both sides and I tend to think people bluff way more then they actually do. I do factor in everything, but eventually I get stuck (based on the time pressure) and essentially just flip a coin and take a guess. For example, if someone makes what looks like a value bet, I can probably talk myself into thinking he is making what looks like a value bet because he doesn't have anything. You know what I mean?

When you say what is my personality type, which model are you basing that on? I have taken several personality tests but there are quite a few different models. Essentially I am very analytical.

Quinner

Well I play micro limits so my decisions are WAY easier than most on here, but personally...it's all a big puzzle! I start off with the assumption that they are not bluffing (this is just to start) now I watch EVERY single thing they do in a hand against me. It starts off ok, how aggressive are they, have they been showing down decent hands after making big pf raises or are they spewing off chips? After thats been established its the range playing game what could he possibly be holding based on his tendencies in the past but more importantly bet sizing. Does he look scared or super strong? The river I think is where all the bread and butter decisions come from. Alot of players know the only way to win the hand is to bluff at you, and bluff big. Find out whose tricky and basically just exploit exploit exploit!! But anyway more to the point, as for whether an opponent is bluffing at you the only way to determine this is to find the flaw in the bet sizing (online at least) bercause its the only way to be able to tell. Would your opponent bet that way with what you think he has?

The better your hand reading skills the better you get at this. The whole hand just continue to narrow his range. Lately what I've been doing to determine if he's bluffing is that I'm also assuming my opponent is narrowing down my range, so if his range beats mine a good portion of the time but he's played the hand in a weird way and he's not normally a tricky player I will usually look them up assuming they pick good spots to bluff. If they don't then great I make a note and can exploit that by bluffing them in obvious spots that they will completely miss. Poker is just cat and mouse.

I hope my poker personality is....

Annoying as hell.

Quinner

Oh and I guess I should add, although it sounds so cliche, but just believe in your skills and TRUST your instincts. You've all been playing long enough you should have great "poker" sense (closely related to spidey sense.....)

Cerberus

One thing I've found that helps me stop talking myself into folding the best hand or calling with a losing hand is finding a label for a player. I work hard with my note taking to make sure I'm getting a sense of what types of things they do and what category that puts them in. Something that has made the labeling process much easier for me is picking different names than others have been using. I used to use terms like calling station and donkey etc all of the time. Unfortunately, they were such blanket, generic terms that they really weren't resonating for me. Then, I started using names of characters from a series of books my wife got me hooked on: In Death by J.D. Robb. All of the characters had, on the surface, very obvious labels. However, having read all 18 or however many books it has been, there is a lot more under each character for me that make them three dimensional rather than one dimensional. By using them as labels instead of generic names, it makes my reads on them much more concrete for me.

PokerKai

Im all about Occams razor. Given the choice between two equally likely answers, the simpler of the two is most likely to be correct.

Graham wrote: »

For example, if someone makes what looks like a value bet, I can probably talk myself into thinking he is making what looks like a value bet because he doesn't have anything.

Now whats more likely? Hes just making a value bet OR Hes betting with air in the hopes you perceive it as a value bet and lay down your better hand.

The fact of the matter is, the majority of people dont play games often enough or in games with a small enough player pool to develop any sort of history with players that are capable of going that extra level of thinking described above.

So...if you hear hoof beats...dont jump to the conclusion of zebra...just go ahead and think horsie.

cadillac

Nice Post Kai.


Graham - Most personality typing tests and programs have some variation of the following:


Characteristics of Personality Categories


Driver:

Objective-focused
Know what they want and how to get there!
Communicates quickly, gets to the point
Sometimes tactless and brusque
Can be an "ends justify the means" type of person
Hardworking, high energy Does not shy away from conflict


Expressive:

Natural salesmen or story-tellers
Warm and enthusiastic
Good motivators, communicators
Can be competitive
Can tend to exaggerate, leave out facts and details
Sometimes would rather talk about things than do them!


Amiable:

Kind-hearted people who avoid conflict
Can blend into any situation well
Can appear wishy-washy Has difficulty with firm decisions
Often loves art, music and poetry Highly sensitive
Can be quiet and soft-spoken


Analytical:

Highly detail oriented people
Can have a difficult time making decisions without ALL the facts
Make great accounts and engineers
Tend to be highly critical people
Can tend to be pessimistic in nature
Very perceptive



Most people are dominant in one trait and have bits of another. Care to take a shot at where you fall? I would think you are likely dominant Analytical with some Amiable mixed in.


Testing always puts me in the same category without any mix of another. Can you guess mine?

DennisG

PokerKai wrote: »

.

The fact of the matter is, the majority of people dont play games often enough or in games with a small enough player pool to develop any sort of history with players that are capable of going that extra level of thinking described above.

So...if you hear hoof beats...dont jump to the conclusion of zebra...just go ahead and think horsie.

Hey, Kai, glad you heeded my advice..lmao..but seriously, yeah, this is what I was thinking..I don't see the same players near enough to warrant any detailed notes. If they do something stupid, or tricky..then I make note of it..I am typically running 2-4, 20-50 buck sng's at any given time.
I take everything at face value unless given reason otherwise.

-edit..I do have notes on the regulars that frequent the tables I do..that is pretty easy..lol...TAG.

Something that has helped my game tremendously this month..and fitting for this thread...Alan Schoonmaker's "your own worst enemy". My mental errors are the biggest downfall of my game...playing trash, calling when I shouldn't (pot odds)..etc...

That being said, I do try to replay the hand in my head, to figure out why the betting went the way it did, and possible holdings...but that is slowly coming more natural..

blackmagicz

My biggest leak is thinking everyone plays as well as I do. It sucks to say but a lot of times I fold winners because the villian plays the hand a certain way that I normally play a big hand.

I have lately tried to "dumb" down my analysis. It is just so hard sometimes because I can't believe people would play a hand a certain way that makes no sense and has literally no value in the way they are playing it.

In the past year I have gotten better though only giving people credit for being smart after I have seen 3-4 hands played out, other than that, if I haven't seen you show a hand and you have played your hand unorthodox (overbetting the river when a brick comes,etc) I tend to call down and be a pay off wizard....lol (providing I have a hand as well...)

Graham

Thanks guys for the feedback, kai I see what you are saying. Very good point.

Caddy, I am predominately analytical with characteristics from all the other 3. I don't know you that well, so its hard to say, but I guess I would put you as expressive based on your good story telling abilities.

Blackmagicz... I think I do the exact same thing sometimes.