Taking notes & classifying players

[rghy2]

Well...the ROI I generally use is the one in the middle of the page on OPR, in the players' Poker Statistics chart, where the first column is Prizes Won, then Net Profit, followed by ROI. When I'm first classifying someone, I'm using the row of stats at the bottom of that chart. Keep in mind that on OPR you can adjust that chart, so I always make sure I'm using the Full Tracking option and I'm seeing all games. I play a lot of mixed games and Omaha...note that when you pass your cursor over a row on that, the ITM Finishes and MTT Avg Finish charts change, so make sure you're getting all the stats.

More importantly, though, is that after a while - that is to say that after you get used to looking players up quickly, scanning the vital stats that are relevant to what you want - you will get better and better at simply getting a "feel" for whether you are looking at a great player, a good player, or a superfish, all in an instant. This can be the difference between making those calls around the bubble with QT on the button, or folding AQ in the same spot.

I put a little weight in the last 120 days, but don't get caught up trying to overthink it. Remember, if they have a large sampling - like the guys I played with 5k games, no 120-day stretch is going to change the way their skill is reflected in those stats. Less games means obviously the most-recent games might be closer to accurate, but the overall is the overall. Binking one good game, or having a few drunken sessions recently, can throw off the 120-day stats. The most important reason to be looking at that line, for me, is to see how that player IS FEELING about his game. Is he likely to be on tilt, or is he going to be thinking he's god's gift to poker? (How many "I just won the PO Freeroll" threads have you read where the player honestly reflects that they taught the entire field a thing or two, lol.)




Your Carbon must be different than my Carbon, or you're simply not trying very hard. Right-click>Player details...a box will open with their Accolades (turn yours off IMO - no easy info for my opponents and there is enough narcissism in poker already), and room to type. You can also change their color by clicking on the colored box right there. I can usually get my whole table marked in the first lap, if not sooner.

You give a lot of good information, and you're right about the 120 days not really being enough time to judge someone by. I really like your perspective on the 120 day stat. And using PO FRs is a great example, especially at the micro levels I'm still at. Is there anything else you look for when scanning over someone's stats? And what's your opinion on blocking your own stats?

[TheHaversham]

I knew it was going to be skewed since I play such low limits, but I expected to see more greens. ...

Just to follow up on this: keep in mind that when your game improves to the point where you are bringing your A-game every time, you're not going to stay in the micro's very long...hopefully. (Understandably, there comes a point where you're pulling checks offline, so you might hit a bit of a ceiling, but consistently solid play has rewards, one of which is moving up the ladder.) Win a freeroll and you're like, "zOMG!!!!...I won $10!!!!" and you're starting threads congratulating yourself. Win a micro and you're like, "zOMG!!!...I won $40!!!" and you're prone to letting your ego blow it in 4 $10 games at once. But get to where a win is substantial - relatively, like $300-$600, which is only substantial compared to when you were praying to cash for 30 cents in a freeroll - you start to think about how much of it can you take off and still be able to move up to better games without risking too much of your bank.

The easiest and most-profound BRM concept anyone taught me was to simply look at your own MTT Avg finish. Are you ITM above 10%? If so, how many of those are top-3 finishes? The higher those numbers go, the more of your bank you can risk in any one tourney. But now I'm off-topic, lol. What I'm trying to say is a lot of the players who should be green actually end up jumping out of their own league too soon and never get the chance to realize winnings. The players who can hold their ego in check, who can show up with their A-game every time they register, and who can sit on $500 as easily as they can $50, are actually pretty few and far between. And that's why we're taking note of those players. In the micro's, a green opponent should be considered formidable; they are the top of the micro food chain. But like anywhere else, just because they're good at poker doesn't mean they can be a consistently good poker player.

You give a lot of good information, and you're right about the 120 days not really being enough time to judge someone by. I really like your perspective on the 120 day stat. And using PO FRs is a great example, especially at the micro levels I'm still at. Is there anything else you look for when scanning over someone's stats? And what's your opinion on blocking your own stats?

If I'm scanning over someone's stats, I might take note of things like how many rebuys do they play? Is the frenzy of a rebuy going to throw them off or are they used to that? Another good one is the ABI. I've found 3-betting light is usually much more successful when my opponent is playing well above their normal limits. Consider, if you (hypothetically) won a $1 satellite into the $215 Main Event of some series. 3-bets are going to give you much more stress than if you were playing a $1 Turbo.

I don't block my stats, but I see why some would, and like I said, it's generally because they are very good or very bad. In general, if you block stats on yourself, you often can't see stats of anyone else, either. So, if you have a HUD running and your HH database is like 3 million hands and you've got a good sample on most of your regular opponents (there are only so many Americans playing nosebleed stakes online these days, sadly), you might not need to opt in to sites like OPR or SharkScope. Also, if you like to talk shit and you're absolutely horrible and your stats show it, you might have been derided once or twice and just hid your stats out of tilt and frustration. Sure, there are exceptions, but not enough to worry about. I don't block mine because I'm neither very good nor very bad, and I use the sites often. What I don't do is allow a site to post Accolades next to my avatar or name. I don't want anyone to know how much rake I might pay, or that I won some freeroll or OPS game. What is the value in giving opponents that information other than simply stroking my own ego? To me, that is one reason why some females seem to play more consistently - I apologize if this seems sexist. I think a lot of testosterone-driven egos are killed by hubris, whereas women seem to be able to show a little bling without it going to their heads. It's like jewelry, maybe. They wear it to look pretty, but a lot of men wear it as status symbols. Again, there are always exceptions, but in general, a player who's proudly brandishing some icon that says they won a tourney last week is just vain.

[rghy2]

Just to follow up on this: keep in mind that when your game improves to the point where you are bringing your A-game every time, you're not going to stay in the micro's very long...hopefully. (Understandably, there comes a point where you're pulling checks offline, so you might hit a bit of a ceiling, but consistently solid play has rewards, one of which is moving up the ladder.) Win a freeroll and you're like, "zOMG!!!!...I won $10!!!!" and you're starting threads congratulating yourself. Win a micro and you're like, "zOMG!!!...I won $40!!!" and you're prone to letting your ego blow it in 4 $10 games at once. But get to where a win is substantial - relatively, like $300-$600, which is only substantial compared to when you were praying to cash for 30 cents in a freeroll - you start to think about how much of it can you take off and still be able to move up to better games without risking too much of your bank.

The easiest and most-profound BRM concept anyone taught me was to simply look at your own MTT Avg finish. Are you ITM above 10%? If so, how many of those are top-3 finishes? The higher those numbers go, the more of your bank you can risk in any one tourney. But now I'm off-topic, lol. What I'm trying to say is a lot of the players who should be green actually end up jumping out of their own league too soon and never get the chance to realize winnings. The players who can hold their ego in check, who can show up with their A-game every time they register, and who can sit on $500 as easily as they can $50, are actually pretty few and far between. And that's why we're taking note of those players. In the micro's, a green opponent should be considered formidable; they are the top of the micro food chain. But like anywhere else, just because they're good at poker doesn't mean they can be a consistently good poker player.



If I'm scanning over someone's stats, I might take note of things like how many rebuys do they play? Is the frenzy of a rebuy going to throw them off or are they used to that? Another good one is the ABI. I've found 3-betting light is usually much more successful when my opponent is playing well above their normal limits. Consider, if you (hypothetically) won a $1 satellite into the $215 Main Event of some series. 3-bets are going to give you much more stress than if you were playing a $1 Turbo.

I don't block my stats, but I see why some would, and like I said, it's generally because they are very good or very bad. In general, if you block stats on yourself, you often can't see stats of anyone else, either. So, if you have a HUD running and your HH database is like 3 million hands and you've got a good sample on most of your regular opponents (there are only so many Americans playing nosebleed stakes online these days, sadly), you might not need to opt in to sites like OPR or SharkScope. Also, if you like to talk shit and you're absolutely horrible and your stats show it, you might have been derided once or twice and just hid your stats out of tilt and frustration. Sure, there are exceptions, but not enough to worry about. I don't block mine because I'm neither very good nor very bad, and I use the sites often. What I don't do is allow a site to post Accolades next to my avatar or name. I don't want anyone to know how much rake I might pay, or that I won some freeroll or OPS game. What is the value in giving opponents that information other than simply stroking my own ego? To me, that is one reason why some females seem to play more consistently - I apologize if this seems sexist. I think a lot of testosterone-driven egos are killed by hubris, whereas women seem to be able to show a little bling without it going to their heads. It's like jewelry, maybe. They wear it to look pretty, but a lot of men wear it as status symbols. Again, there are always exceptions, but in general, a player who's proudly brandishing some icon that says they won a tourney last week is just vain.

Lol, I'm definitely that player that got excited over any little freeroll win, and now I get really excited about my $30 wins. But just a few weeks before black friday I really started understanding how important BRM is to being a consistently winning player. For me personally, following BRM is the only way to tell if I'm truly a winning player. I also decided that I would pull off 10% of whatever I won and use that as motivation to improve enough to at least have a 10% ROI to maintain my stakes and more to move up. So when I get excited over a little win, I'm excited that I'm making progress, not because of the value of the win. I guess I never realized how few people thought the same way. I really thought there would be more good players that just aren't comfortable at larger stakes so they keep playing the micros.

I wouldn't really be interested in blocking my own stats, because I've become a little obsessive about checking them now that I'm putting some volume on Merge and getting the occasional win. If I had any accolades I would go ahead and display them, because I like to use a little bit of truth to misguide my opponents. It's a habit I've picked up playing live since it's very easy for me to deceive the table as a young woman. Since I've started playing on PO and got to know some other female poker players, I have more respect for online female poker players. However, I have yet to play against another woman live that is any competition to me. My goal is eventually to play in the WSOP Ladies Event.

Instead of focusing on making it to the highest ranks of online play, I like to treat online poker as a training ground to become an excellent live player. My game has improved so much this last year and I'm really looking forward to my next trip to Vegas to see what I can do.

[TheHaversham]

Lol, I'm definitely that player that got excited over any little freeroll win, and now I get really excited about my $30 wins. But just a few weeks before black friday I really started understanding how important BRM is to being a consistently winning player. For me personally, following BRM is the only way to tell if I'm truly a winning player. I also decided that I would pull off 10% of whatever I won and use that as motivation to improve enough to at least have a 10% ROI to maintain my stakes and more to move up. So when I get excited over a little win, I'm excited that I'm making progress, not because of the value of the win. I guess I never realized how few people thought the same way. I really thought there would be more good players that just aren't comfortable at larger stakes so they keep playing the micros.

I wouldn't really be interested in blocking my own stats, because I've become a little obsessive about checking them now that I'm putting some volume on Merge and getting the occasional win. If I had any accolades I would go ahead and display them, because I like to use a little bit of truth to misguide my opponents. It's a habit I've picked up playing live since it's very easy for me to deceive the table as a young woman. Since I've started playing on PO and got to know some other female poker players, I have more respect for online female poker players. However, I have yet to play against another woman live that is any competition to me. My goal is eventually to play in the WSOP Ladies Event.

Instead of focusing on making it to the highest ranks of online play, I like to treat online poker as a training ground to become an excellent live player. My game has improved so much this last year and I'm really looking forward to my next trip to Vegas to see what I can do.

I would say you are certainly taking the right approach. I'm certainly no pro, but I trained with some. My main "problem" (if you could call it that) was that in order to justify all the time I spent playing, I needed to pull checks off. It got me a nice car, paid for my wedding and honeymoon and put some $$ in the bank at home, but it kept my bankroll from properly growing. If I was single, or had no family, I'd like to think I'd be in Canada or Costa Rica right now crushing dreams. Or maybe I'd be a hobo living behind 7-11, who knows. Eventually I was lucky enough to find backers, who provided the buy-ins which allowed me to play higher than my bankroll would allow but keep drawing the profits home to the wife and kids.

Every win is worth celebrating, by the way. I was just saying that by the time you start winning bigger games, ppl like us who started micro are kind of used to it.

[lorenz0wns]

such an excellent thread bro. i have one question though, how do you take notes and classify players if you were to play live tournaments?

[TheHaversham]

such an excellent thread bro. i have one question though, how do you take notes and classify players if you were to play live tournaments?

Ahh, that's a great question. I started as a live player. I was tournament POTY at my local casino the year before I got internet access. (The prize was a hat, lol.) I don't take notes live, but obviously I'm constantly classifying players. Live is MUCH more internal, and when I play live now I see MANY online players giving obvious physical tells that they likely are not accustomed to worrying about when they are alone in front of a monitor. Also, I see them struggling with figuring out bet-sizes, likely because they can't keep track of the size of the pot and other stacks, etc. It's just something you have to work on, and practice as much as you can. Once I started playing with a HUD, my live game went to shit for a while. I was so used to seeing what % a player entered pots, how often they c-bet, etc, that I forgot to pay attention to that stuff at the table.

Best advice I've gotten was to watch EVERY hand...try to make reads in hands you're not involved in. You'll be lucky if you get a line on everyone, so focus on the 2-3 from where most of your chips are going to come: on your left. The first thing I do is monitor the player on my left VERY closely. Once I get him squared away, I start in on the player to his left. Chips roll downhill, so all things equal, these players should be your main source. Of course, you also want to watch the guys on your right for how they play blinds or how they react to your plays. Pick out the fish, pick out the rock, pick out the shark, and then choose your battles appropriately.

[rghy2]

Any advice for using a HUD?

[lorenz0wns]

Ahh, that's a great question. I started as a live player. I was tournament POTY at my local casino the year before I got internet access. (The prize was a hat, lol.) I don't take notes live, but obviously I'm constantly classifying players. Live is MUCH more internal, and when I play live now I see MANY online players giving obvious physical tells that they likely are not accustomed to worrying about when they are alone in front of a monitor. Also, I see them struggling with figuring out bet-sizes, likely because they can't keep track of the size of the pot and other stacks, etc. It's just something you have to work on, and practice as much as you can. Once I started playing with a HUD, my live game went to shit for a while. I was so used to seeing what % a player entered pots, how often they c-bet, etc, that I forgot to pay attention to that stuff at the table.

Best advice I've gotten was to watch EVERY hand...try to make reads in hands you're not involved in. You'll be lucky if you get a line on everyone, so focus on the 2-3 from where most of your chips are going to come: on your left. The first thing I do is monitor the player on my left VERY closely. Once I get him squared away, I start in on the player to his left. Chips roll downhill, so all things equal, these players should be your main source. Of course, you also want to watch the guys on your right for how they play blinds or how they react to your plays. Pick out the fish, pick out the rock, pick out the shark, and then choose your battles appropriately.

Awesome man! And also whats the best way of keeping up with everyone's stack sizes and what are those obvious physical tells?

[Samweis3]

@TheHaversham really well sayed, after playing long time online it is pretty hard to sit in front of others on a real table, you have to concentrate even more

[chadherczeg]

Very good strategy. I use a similar strategy for base notes when playing against "new to me" players, but I use more personal play notes when sitting at a table with someone plus a HUD. Looking at a person's stats are definitely great for establishing whether someone is "bluffable" or not though. Good players are thinking players and pay attention to your play, so if you are paying attention to your own shown down hands then you can use that to your advantage against them.