Comment by c22
2 days ago
If reading your opponent is a strategy that confers advantage then it stands to reason that deceiving your opponent is as well.
2 days ago
If reading your opponent is a strategy that confers advantage then it stands to reason that deceiving your opponent is as well.
I feel one of the most useful skills picked up by poker that people don't explicitly speak about is managing your information effectively.
Deceiving my opponent has the connotation of this happening in one instance. After you realize that you can't convincingly deceive your opponents in poker into perpetuity, it becomes a game of managing your image —revealing the right information while being conscious of information that you shared in the past (if you're playing someone skilled or perceptive, that is).
On the flip side, what an excellent game to help people pay attention to signals, figure out how to weigh them appropriately, and appropriately act on them when the situation calls for it.
The original claim is that people misconceive "that poker is about lying or that you need to lie to play poker"
Just because other people may try to lie to you, does not mean that you need to lie in order to succeed.
No one said "lying can't be used at all"
My claim is a bit stronger, not only can you play without lying, but you don't sacrifice anything, you can play at top level without lying, and you gain no advantage by lying. In essence at optimal play you ignore whatever your opponent says, there is only the bets and game actions, which are independent from the cards held.
Skilled players read their oppononts' hands (i.e. the cards they're holding), not the opponents themselves.