Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,292,000 Posts!
Poker ForumBeginners Circle

Level 1a thinking and ranges

Results 1 to 27 of 27
  1. #1
    bjsaust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,347
    Location
    Ballarat, Australia

    Default Level 1a thinking and ranges

    Just a short post that hopefully someone will find helpful for where they are atm.

    Hopefully most of you are familiar with the concept of thinking levels. To recap:

    lvl 0: What are my cards?
    lvl 1: What do I think his cards are?
    lvl 2: What do I think, he thinks my cards are?
    Lvl 3+: Just gets more confusing, but you get the picture.

    For beginners, you mostly start with lvl 0, hopefully move to lvl 1 fairly quickly, and lvl 2 is probably all you need for a fair while. Short sidenote, but going too deep is a mistake if your opponent isnt. "What do I think, he thinks I think he has and therefore what would that bet of his mean he wants me to think?" is pretty meaningless when your opponent is thinking "Sweet, I have a pair".

    I've come to the conclusion most new players go through another phase, which I'm calling 1a (because I can). This is where they think they're using level 1 thinking, but in fact they're thinking "what hands could he have that beat me?". Typically this is epitomized by asking them what range they give villian in a HH they post, and they answer with all the possible hole cards that beat them, and none that dont.

    Hopefully you can see why you need to move beyond that as quickly as possible. If not you'll find yourself folding a lot of hands postflop, and wondering how your opponents get so lucky all the time. You need to think of a realistic range of hands that villian could be holding, compare the number of hands that beat you, to the number that you beat, throw in all other kinds of data such as pot size, pot odds, stack sizes, implied odds, and then come up with the best move based upon their whole range, not just the portion of their range that has you crushed.
    Just dipping my toes back in.
  2. #2
    You can beat even high stakes with just level 3 thinking. (Ie, what range does villain think I'm putting him on), anything more than level 3/4 is just a coinflip as to whether or not you have gone one level too far/short (both of which often yield the same results.

    You are definatley right about the level 1a thinkers although I think it's really level 0.5 - I like to call them weak/tight donators (which is exactly what they are in short-handed LHE). You cannot be pessimistic or optimistic in poker - realism is what gets the money. If you find yourself on level 0.5 thinking, try to determine what hands villain could have that you are ahead of, then determine what hands he could have that have you beat, then use this information to make an educated guess at how often you are behind/ahead, make your play, and re-evaluate on the next street.

    Always remember - you can't use level 3 thinking unless your opponent is on at least level 2, you can't use level 4 unless villain is on atleast level 3 etc etc. Over-thinking a hand against someone who isn't thinking at all can lead to disaster.
    PLEASE READ ULTIMATE BET THREAD IN "ONLINE POKER ROOMS" FORUM
    Wait, this is .05/.10 and you got sexied, I can't believe that shit, limit must really be dying.[/quote]
  3. #3
    ....
    Level 3: What he thinks I have?
    Level 4: What he thinks I put him on?
    Level 5: what he ....erm...fuck it, I'm showing down my hand.
    "How could I call that bet? How could you MAKE that bet? It's poker not solitaire. " - that Gus Bronson guy
  4. #4
    spoonitnow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    14,219
    Location
    North Carolina
    In all honesty I was owning 100nl FR for like 4 ptbb/100 without 2nd level thinking at all.
  5. #5
    Enlightening post. Thanks.

    I think i do this at times when things are going bad.
    It's like a form of tilt for me.
  6. #6
    you forgot level -1: Cards aren't important. I can just bully people out of their money.
    Poker is easy, it's winning at poker that's hard.
  7. #7
    While I see your point, and this is probably because I'm new... I think that beginners like me think of the worst he could have... then figure out what he has to hit to beat me...

    Let me try to explain... if I got in with Q's and the flop is K 10 3 I immediately think he could have flopped Kings, either a pair or trips... now if he bet weak or just called initially, especially if he just called, I figure he hit the pair of kings, but if he checks it back to me (assuming I have position), he missed...

    Now this is how I reason it out, but sometimes it doesn't work.

    Maybe I'm on level .75

    Suggestions? Comments?
  8. #8
    how much experience i need to ding?
  9. #9
    Two thoughts-

    First, I think "1a" thinking is just poor level 1 thinking. You're putting your opponent on a range, you're just not doing it well.

    Two- the pocket Queens on a KT3 board example. I also feel that I play too weak at these spots. I think the reason is reading and rereading all those posts that explain, quite logically, why betting KK on an Axx is a bad idea (you only get better hands [aces] to call, so it would be a losing bet; also not protecting against much). Any advice?
  10. #10
    bjsaust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,347
    Location
    Ballarat, Australia
    I posted this last night while I couldnt sleep, just thought of a disclaimer I should have added.

    Please dont use this as an excuse to give optimistic ranges in order to justify bad play either. You need to be realistic. The question to ask yourself for level 1 is "What range of hands could he realistically have to play this way, based upon what I know about him. How much of that range do I beat?". Remember its somewhat opponent specific. If you've seen someone stack off with TPNK and you have AK on an A high flop and get reraised, then a large part of his range is weaker aces. If the same situation occurs with someone whos been a passive nit and suddenly he's playing back, then his range is much smaller.

    First, I think "1a" thinking is just poor level 1 thinking. You're putting your opponent on a range, you're just not doing it well.
    Thats pretty much the entire point I was making .

    Two- the pocket Queens on a KT3 board example. I also feel that I play too weak at these spots. I think the reason is reading and rereading all those posts that explain, quite logically, why betting KK on an Axx is a bad idea (you only get better hands [aces] to call, so it would be a losing bet; also not protecting against much). Any advice?
    Theres some great threads on here by much better players than me with advice on these kinds of situations, the point I want people to get is that a K high flop shouldnt mean you automatically assume your pocket Qs just got beaten.

    Theres a great post by Gabe (although it was aimed at tourney players at the time), which I believe is linked to in one of the stickies in the SNG forum about how to play KK in a 3-bet PF pot when an A hits the flop that I've found very useful as a guide for similar situations.
    Just dipping my toes back in.
  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by GatorJH
    you forgot level -1: Cards aren't important. I can just bully people out of their money.
    Used it, and made money from it.

    Monty:

    It seems to me that you are trying to put him on a range but are missing the mark in two spots.
    1) You're doing it at the wrong point in the hand. Sure you can put someone on a general range preflop, but (especially at lower stakes) that range is usually too wide to make any informed decisions from. If you have position, create a possible range only after he acts. If you're OOP, then act to gain information.
    2) When I had this problem not even too long ago, I did some practicing on my HH's. I used the feature in PT where you can watch the hand unfold. After each opponent acted after each street, I put them on a range. I found that I was prone to narrow my results too quickly to 1 or 2 specific hands rather than a full range. Maybe that's a problem for you also.

    I have seen these things and worked a lot on them in my own game, and maybe this helps you too.
    "$80 million Submarine mansion. Think about it."
  12. #12
    bjsaust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,347
    Location
    Ballarat, Australia
    Let me try to explain... if I got in with Q's and the flop is K 10 3 I immediately think he could have flopped Kings, either a pair or trips... now if he bet weak or just called initially, especially if he just called, I figure he hit the pair of kings, but if he checks it back to me (assuming I have position), he missed...
    The problem here is that if he knows you c-bet a lot (and you probably do), then if he hit a pair or trips, his best move is to generally let you c-bet and then c/r you. I'm not saying that betting is the wrong move, but dont assume a check means he always missed either. At micro-stakes the only more popular play than bluffing is slowplaying.
    Just dipping my toes back in.
  13. #13
    This was a more generic post that I put together about thinking in levels:

    http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ls-t61364.html
  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by bigslikk
    the pocket Queens on a KT3 board example. I also feel that I play too weak at these spots. I think the reason is reading and rereading all those posts that explain, quite logically, why betting KK on an Axx is a bad idea (you only get better hands [aces] to call, so it would be a losing bet; also not protecting against much). Any advice?
    An ace on the board is much more dangerous than a King because there are soooo many donks out there who will play any Ace, but not nearly as many who will play any King.
    Poker is easy, it's winning at poker that's hard.
  15. #15
    Hopefully you can see why you need to move beyond that as quickly as possible. You need to think of a realistic range of hands that villian could be holding.
    This is something I have raised before. It's all very well telling noobs they have to get to this point quickly but that's easier said than done. It's akin to a music teacher (myself included) explaining improvisation, or playing outside the key, by saying "you just feel where to go and what notes to play. Let your fingers guide you". They know what they have to do but it's completely alien to them. And as it's very abstract and subjective, there's no walkthrough guide available.

    I'd also think it's harder in SNG/MTT than cash - where you can sit and study your opponenent over a prolonged period of time.



    why betting KK on an Axx is a bad idea (you only get better hands [aces] to call
    I've read this before and it caused quite a lot of heat. My take, along with the majority, is to bet, bet, bet. You gotta know where you stand and can't show weakness and allow a bluff attempt to take control over a monster like KK.
  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    why betting KK on an Axx is a bad idea (you only get better hands [aces] to call
    I've read this before and it caused quite a lot of heat. My take, along with the majority, is to bet, bet, bet. You gotta know where you stand and can't show weakness and allow a bluff attempt to take control over a monster like KK.
    http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...?highlight=ace
  17. #17
    Muzzard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,315
    Location
    Cheshire, UK
    [quote="Thunder"]
    why betting KK on an Axx is a bad idea (you only get better hands [aces] to call
    I've read this before and it caused quite a lot of heat. My take, along with the majority, is to bet, bet, bet. You gotta know where you stand and can't show weakness and allow a bluff attempt to take control over a monster like KK.
    LOL, you along with 'the majority'. You don't half talk some shit in your posts.
  18. #18
    bjsaust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,347
    Location
    Ballarat, Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    Hopefully you can see why you need to move beyond that as quickly as possible. You need to think of a realistic range of hands that villian could be holding.
    This is something I have raised before. It's all very well telling noobs they have to get to this point quickly but that's easier said than done. It's akin to a music teacher (myself included) explaining improvisation, or playing outside the key, by saying "you just feel where to go and what notes to play. Let your fingers guide you". They know what they have to do but it's completely alien to them. And as it's very abstract and subjective, there's no walkthrough guide available.

    I'd also think it's harder in SNG/MTT than cash - where you can sit and study your opponenent over a prolonged period of time.
    I dont think so, I think most people will understand what we mean, but I'll try to explain a bit further just incase.

    Lets say you raise PF with AKo from the button, get one caller in the BB and the flop is a K high two tone board. BB checks, you bet, he calls. Turn brings a 3-flush board and BB leads out. Now whats his range? That line does indicate a FD on the flop, so we weight it fairly heavily there. Theres also some possibility of something like a slowplayed set thats betting "to see where he is", or a weaker Kx doing the same, and perhaps semi-bluffing us (we may fold better Ks), likewise it could be someone who has now picked up a backdoor FD and is "setting the price" to draw to the river. What we do here isnt the point, the point is that most people with lvl 1a thinking go "crap, he hit his flush", and often they'll be right, but villians hand isnt made up only of sooted cards that just hit their flush, there are more hands that could play the same way in that situation.

    Now whilst I say it doesnt matter, most people would be right to make a fold there. So lets change the scenario a bit. This time the turn brings a blank (a different suit from anything out there and low card not creating any straight opportunities). BB checks, and we check behind for pot control. Now its the river that completes the FD and BB leads for 1/4 pot, giving us 1:5 pot odds. Now his range is basically the same, heavily weighted towards made flushes, HOWEVER a lvl 1a thinker says "crap he made his FD" and folds. A true level 1 thinker thinks about opponents entire range, and then has a fairly easy decision, am I ahead of 1/5 (20%) of that range. He doesnt have to believe he'll win most of the time, he just has to think he wins enough times against opponents range to make the pot odds attractive.


    Out of interest, level 2 thinking in the 2nd scenario could go something like:

    "Hmm, from the way I played this hand, villian is probably fairly sure I have TP, so he'd know this 3rd flush card would be a scare card for me, so if he doesnt have the flush, he may still bluff the pot expecting me to fold as I'd think he does have the flush."

    And therefore hero would weight villians range a little more heavily towards a bluff. However to reiterate the point from the original post, this thinking is only valid if villian is actually thinking at level 1. If villian isnt actually thinking about what our most likely hands are, then we cant assume he could be adjusting his play to take that into account, and hence giving a bluff more likelyhood would be a mistake.
    Just dipping my toes back in.
  19. #19
    BJS,

    Great explanation and I don't doubt it. My only comment was that many noobs can't think like this, or even if they can, cannot ascertain villain's level and so are none the wiser and that villain could hold ATC. More to the point, villain often does have ATC.

    Sometimes I make good reads and other times I am utterly in shock (sometimes nicely so and other times not) about what he actually holds. I don't doubt the advice - just that it's very hard (otherwise they'd all be making killer reads) and it's something that I am often stumped on, despite reading and learning. Interestingly enough, when I sit the tests in magazines, I always perform well. But they usually involve opponents that aren't liable to go all in pre flop with J6, lol.


    PokerMuzz, you're right, I'm wrong. There wasn't a thread about holding KK on an Axx board on another forum, and the vast majority of replies didn't argue, rightly or wrongly, that you have to bet out. Thank you very much for that correction.
  20. #20
    bjsaust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,347
    Location
    Ballarat, Australia
    No, most noobs cant think like this straight off, but they need to be aware that this is how they should be thinking, and trying to do so. Just stopping for 5 seconds and thinking "What else could he play this way" when you think you're beat is a good start.

    And yeah, reads can be hard, and they can be wrong. Villians could be thinking completely differently from how we can expect. We just need to make a note next to that player for future reference, and also make a mental note and try to think through whether there was something we missed when making our read so we can hopefully do better next time.
    Just dipping my toes back in.
  21. #21
    Especially at my level. The "KK on an Ax flop" thread Warpe provided is a great example (and also very though provoking) as I read many comments advocating betting due to the kind of players I regularly come across, where they could have anything from AA to 44 to 10Jo. And so judging them on their play isn't necessarily going to give any answers.

    Of course, there is little more you can do than work with the info you have. I fully agree with what you say and am just pointing out that many know what they have to do, but getting there is a different matter. I make pretty good reads when sitting the tests but am often at sea when playing.
  22. #22
    bjsaust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,347
    Location
    Ballarat, Australia
    Start another thread if you want to discuss the KK thing further, its really getting off track here.

    As for the thread in general, I'm not sure what you're getting at Thunder. Its better to inform new players of these levels of thinking, and point of common mistakes made with them, than leaving them in the dark playing lvl 0 poker.
    Just dipping my toes back in.
  23. #23
    Already edited the KK thing before I read your reply.

    As for my point, it should be quite clear: agreeing wholeheartedly whilst just pointing out that many know what they have to do but getting there is a different matter. And I offered myself as a prime example.

    So hopefully you can see, I'm not getting at anything, just making a comment and how it can be somewhat of a chicken and egg situation.
  24. #24
    bjsaust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,347
    Location
    Ballarat, Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    I make pretty good reads when sitting the tests but am often at sea when playing.
    Two probable reasons for that:

    1- The tests assume a logical/standard opponent. Sometimes at microstakes in particular, thats just not what you get. That said you're normally best to assume your opps are at least somewhat logical.

    2- You're taking more time to think about it in the tests, but rushing too much at the table. Run down time if you need to think things through.
    Just dipping my toes back in.
  25. #25
    pankfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    854
    Location
    On Tony Romo's nuts
    Quote Originally Posted by bjsaust
    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    I make pretty good reads when sitting the tests but am often at sea when playing.
    Two probable reasons for that:

    1- The tests assume a logical/standard opponent. Sometimes at microstakes in particular, thats just not what you get. That said you're normally best to assume your opps are at least somewhat logical.

    2- You're taking more time to think about it in the tests, but rushing too much at the table. Run down time if you need to think things through.
    It's just easier to think logically when there is no money at stake. Really when you think about it, are we ever stacking off once the ace hits? Probably not. Just check behind, call one street, if he over bets we can fold and if he two barrels we have a decision to make.
    <Staxalax> I want everyone to put my quote in their sigs
  26. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by bjsaust
    I dont think so, I think most people will understand what we mean, but I'll try to explain a bit further just incase.
    Great Post. I should copy / paste that somewhere. \rave
  27. #27
    Thank you all for the responses and the input... but here is a thought... maybe one of the more adventurous out there want to put together some simluator for this type of 'level training'?

    Hey, maybe I just found a way to make a little side cash.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •