Do you play with the auto muck on or off?
And what are your reasons for your choice?
This question is prompted by watching those who go all in pre-flop then showing their hands after everyone else folds. This ticks me off but I’m wondering if that is their intention behind this action of showing their cards - a little bit of table psychology at work.
I leave Auto Muck on all the time and hardly ever show a hand. I do that because I do not want the smarter players to know how I think. It may be the single biggest mistake a novice can make, that is, to show your hand.
I know some people enjoy angering others but I doubt they do that for strategical reasons; my guess is they do it to arouse. It is rank.
Scratch
I don’t use the auto muck because if in a hand with a friend I like to show that I wasn’t bluffing them. I am nice that way …lol…or maybe should say was nice that way , friends always muck me and know that they bluffed me … sooooooooo no more nice to friends from me.
I leave Auto-muck off… there are times that showing your hand either helps the story you told in the hand, is a courtesy to another player, or reinforcing your table presence…
I don’t think I could agree with Sarah more on this one. I typically show strong hands when I go to a new table because of building a reputation on said table.
Would others not then assume, when you choose not to show a hand, that you have nothing/were bluffing?
I ONLY show bluffs - and not every time. A bit of psychology I suppose. Sometimes I use it to burn a little more clock time in tourneys - in later levels usually (near the bubble cut).
My default is auto muck “on”.
Just as in a hand , you are telling a story… You are telling a story with everything you do, bet, say, don’t say, ect ect ect, at each table you are at. Even silence at a table says something…
I ALWAYS automuck.–Tis better to be thought a fool, than show ones hand and remove all doubt.
I agree with Scratch. Never let anyone know how you play.
I do the same thing as Scratch, keep automuck on. Sometimes I tell my opponents what I had because I just don’t care that much about having that advantage, and rarely I lie.
I think the other approach is valid, to show your strength or bluffs for table image, but it can backfire unless it’s balanced. For example, if you show a bluff you take bluffs out of your game until you can show the table that you aren’t always bluffing, or if you show strength you will need to add some bluffs, otherwise your opponents will fold to your strong hands in the future.
If someone gives me their guts then folds looking for the river or flush or fullhouse I will show them my hand to let them see I was not bluffing
Joe - I think you and Scratch are giving 99% of the people too much credit here. I very much doubt most people could even tell you what they themselves had last hand, never mind recall what you did. That being said, if you have a particularly tilty opponent, show the bluffs to send him/her into orbit and then tighten up and trap. Make them call your next crazy oversized bet and felt them.
Use every tool in the book ladies and gents. Well timed and well thought out shows of hands can be a huge advantage if you are playing against opponents who you can “train” or tilt. As Joe said, balance is the key. Every last thing you do is information to the better opponents. If you can get any slight edge through showing or not showing, do it.
As a side note to the above comments on the level of players I’ve seen here lately, I’d like to say, just wow. Maybe its just random luck but I’ve seen some of the worst play in my life lately, on both ring games and tournaments. I haven’t played much this month and that is a huge reason why. There are some good players around but the dufus-donkey-herd is huge and growing larger daily it seems. Very sad to say and to see.
Personallly I much prefer sitting on a table with weak players playing any 2 cards and gettin luck from time to time than being on a table full of players with a 2 digit rank.
Cheers
I agree with 1Warlock, though I don’t know what stakes you have been playing at. I always try to say it gently, but the level of play on Replay is usually very bad across most stake-levels. Then again, watching real-money poker like the WSOP shows how bad “good professionals” like Gordon Vayo can be and how successful “bad” players like Qui Nguyen can be. But at least Nguyen actually had a plan to bluff his opponents. Most bad play here is being passive and calling too much (although bluff attempts are usually really bad here too).
Going along with the other thing you said 1Warlock, if your opponents aren’t thinking about what you are doing then there is no reason to be balanced. Just crush them for value and don’t bluff unless you are in the right situation.
Galak, I actually disagree. I would much rather play against the single digit ranked players and try to figure out how to beat them than keep chipping up by beating bad players. It’s hard to learn from playing against non-thinking players because you can’t use more complex approaches to beat them. The problem when facing the elite players is, not only are they really good, they have so many chips that losing 12m or 25m doesn’t phase them, but that’s 1/3 or 1/2 my bankroll.
Joe, I know you and Jo to be good to great players so I say this with a certain sensitivity; I think you are both having a senior or junior moment. The nine player table containing the perfect combination of players for anybody is to have two players 10% to 20% better, five players marginally worse than you by a few percentage points, and one seat that sends through a series of fish to keep the other players replenished. The reason we all want the donk is because we all subscribe to the notion that the best swordsman in the world doesn’t fear the second best swordsman, as he knows well the moves of the second best swordsman. He worries about the swordsman who is a novice and will swing the sword in ways never anticipated. Yes, one looming donk is good for the poker soul.
Scratch
I agree completely. The beauty of poker is that it can be played so many different ways and at so many different levels. Playing the same really good players all the time wouldn’t be great because you would end up on some weird meta-level game that doesn’t resemble most poker, and playing against fish all the time wouldn’t be great either. Poker is like life, it takes all kinds.
Quite true. Its the idiot drunk driver that crashes through the arena walls and runs over both swordsman that you cannot defend against. These are the “players” who frankly annoy me.
Poker has been defined as a game of skill rather than of pure chance in a great number of jurisdictions across the planet. If you play with even a modicum of skill, as a novice, then I have respect for you for trying. if you come to a table and throw chips at 1:5 longshot draws and suck-out on actual players, like satchypaul, then I have zero respect for you.
Yes, there is always an element of luck in poker. That keeps it interesting. Yes, give me a table of good players and 1 or 2 donks and I’ll make money almost every time. Sit me down with someone who thinks any 2 suited cards are playable or thinks the game is about who can hit the flop hardest regardless of hole cards or position and I’m not a happy boy.
There was another thread on whether people were using algorithms to calculate odds as they played. Frankly, most people here wouldn’t know an algorithm from a sinus rhythm from the rhythm method. That’s not a put-down ion the site at all, just the nature of the beast.
EDIT TO CLARIFY - I re-read this and it could be interpreted as an insult to satchypaul. It is not. I saw someone suckout on satchypaul while he was trying to win the SnG leaderboard. It was a horrid play against someone who puts a ton of time and effort into good play. I am sorry if anyone read it as me saying satchy throws chips around. I’m hoping everyone knows I have more sense than to even think that for a second.
I agree - this is why I qualified it by saying that if you have opponents who pay attention, then you can employ this tactic.
Where on earth are you playing Joe? I need to get onto a table with you somehow. Do you ever play stakes that are somewhat affordable (say 500/1000 tables)? If Replay Poker develops the tools for hosting private games, it would be great.
Yeah, having private games would be great (although probably hard to schedule). Recently, I haven’t been playing that much, maybe 2 days a week from 8am to 11:30am Eastern US, though I would like to play a little more often.
I usually play the 250k MTT at 9:30, sometimes the 50k MTTs in the morning and sometimes the 1m MTT at 10:30. I play ring from 2k/4k up to 20k/40k (and higher if I am being really stupid). I will occasionally play 500/1000 (I try to only play full-ring), but the standard of play is not great and I usually don’t care enough to take it seriously for 200k. I love SnGs, but they don’t start regularly, so I will play the occasional SnG from 10k up to 500k or some medium stakes MTTs if I have time. Hope to see you at the tables.