Now, before I state all that I want to state, I want everyone to know that I am in no way, shape, or form a professional poker player. I am only 17, and just…well…stating what I see from the next generation. I am just making observations from whom I have played. I feel that being a 17 year old, however, changes the way non-professional poker players shift their style. I am not considered as much of threat as the next person, so I feel I get to see some styles that not all people get to witness. I might be wrong, but I have a feeling I might be on to…something…don’t know what yet. I am only going to explain what I feel are the archetypes of poker players. By archetypes, I mean the different styles, theories, and ideas that players tend to shift toward. Now, most of these styles are already identified, and some might not make sense to many people, but I feel I have pinpointed some of the major archetypes that will influence the poker community in the future. Archetypes of Poker Players: Action Players: Players who like to play marginal hands, and fire into pots, whether they have the best hand or not. - These type of players like to play their hands, and like to see action on the board, even if they are not successful. The soul purpose of this type of player is to put the pressure away from them, so they force their opponents to act against them. This archetype tends to play around 65-75% of hands dealt to them, and prefers higher cards (Such as Q-A) compared to the lower connectors (7-8, 4-6, etc). They like to push the table to play tight, and like to be dominant throughout the hand. They are not considered Aggressive, because they never go in the hand thinking of a possibility of stealing the pot. The style of play, I would say, would be considered “Against All Odds”.- The only problem with this type of player is the fact they fall easily to traps. Even against a flush flop, they like to play strong until they feel there is no chance on winning. The best way to beat these types of players would be to trap them. Let them continue to be aggressive against you, while you sit and wait for the bets to climb or the player to get overly-aggressive. 2) Protective Players: Players who mostly call, and bet hard on the best possible hand during the showing flop. - These players, in my opinion, do not trust the flop or the odds that come with it. These players like to get rid of the fact of luck as fast as they possibly can. The ideal flop for them would be 27X, in which the ‘X’ would be the highest card on the board and they would have the X card in hand. The player would then bet a strong amount on the board to prevent any play on the board. Their idea of protection is making sure they don’t lose to runners. -The weakness of these players would have to be one major thing in poker: Pocket Pairs. Pocket Pairs would be the most unexpected thing for them, since this archetype doesn’t read body language very well. This type of archetype, for the most part, plays on the flop, compared to 4th and 5th street. Now, for sake of argument, not every player can just grab pocket pairs out of the deck. I know that this situation won’t occur AS MUCH as we like to believe it will. All I am suggesting is to milk this opportunity for what you can. Aggressive Players: Players who intend to win every pot they play by force, whether they have the best hand or not. -This topic can be debated for a long time, since ‘aggressive’ can be a stretched word to anyone. Now I do not mean aggressive as in ‘He was aggressive this hand out of the last 200”. I mean aggressive, as in he plays hands as if he were stronger then actuality. An aggressive player is one whom likes to dominate the board with aggressive styles of betting. This player focuses mostly on the person, rather then the cards dealt to them. -The one thing that I believe is the biggest weakness of Aggressive players is not what is expected. One might say that the amount of chips lost when a person has a hand would be one of the problems, but this wouldn’t make sense then. I have seen many aggressive players know when to be aggressive. The simple idea on the biggest weakness, in my opinion, is the idea that aggressive players tend to go on tilt more often then not. Now, I know that everyone has their moments and go on tilt, but aggressive players especially have it. When they read wrong and lose a hand because of over-aggression, or lose a BIG hand when they actually have something strong, tends to make an aggressive person go on tilt. But that is just from what I have observed. Tight Players: Players who only play strong starting hands and only continue when having a good starting hand. (Yes, I know the definition is a bit lacking)-This type of player lasts in a tournament a bit longer then the rest, depending on the situation. I would believe I could be safe to say that tight players have the edge in lasting day 1 or 2 in a tournament. Playing only strong starting hands, and being able to let go are one of the strongest assets in a tight player’s ‘resume’. Tight players are one of the most influential players in the tournaments. When they make a move, everyone else tends to really think. Aggressive players even have to think if they want to continue or not. -The only problem with tight players is the limits of what they play cause more injury then not. This is not necessarily true, but with the same respect, is. One might concur that the biggest problem of tight players is bad beats. Tight players go by the odds, underestimating the fact of luck. To this, I have one thing to say: “YOU CAN MAKE ALL THE RIGHT MOVES, AND UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE GAME, BUT LOSE TO ONE CARD”. As I stated before, a big weakness of the tight players is bad beats. Containment Players: Players who play connectors most of the time, regardless of the strength of the individual cards themselves. These types of players tend to slow-play their hands if they hit what they wanted. -These types of players would be considered ‘tricky’, as some say. I would disagree to a point, just stating them as players who like to play lower hands. Now, before I continue this part, I am NOT saying they don’t play big hands. This would be ignorant to assume. I am just stating these players are more of a loose player when there are odds to their hand. One might agree when I say that this archetype is one of the more successful types, since they go for the hands normally thrown away. This archetype tends to go for the upset hands. -I would say a major weakness in this style of play would be pre-flop. In the pre-flop situation, raising these types of players would (about 85% of the time) cause these players to fold. Containment players like to play the lower connectors, but aren’t willing to pay as much as other players to see their cards unfold. Philosophical Players (Don’t ask about the name >.<): Players who don’t focus on the cards or the pot, but rather why someone would bet something in a certain situation. -This archetype, in itself, is a very powerful archetype. This player really concentrates on the game, and understands it from a different level. This archetype would basically be your worst nightmare if you aren’t diversified enough. This type of player makes the correct reactions to any play made to them, for the most part. They know the ways of betting, and especially focus on ‘mannerism’. -The only problem with this archetype is the fact that they think too much into the game. If one can get on the same level as them, then this archetype can be easily outplayed. It might take a great deal of effort to accomplish this, but can become a game-winning strategy. How you can accomplish this…I really can’t tell, since I have yet to figure out a “SUUUURREEE-FIIIIRRREEE WAAAAAAAAYYYYY” to do it. I would just say experience for now. If you know a way, please comment back
. Now I have a few other archetypes(well, more then a few), but I don’t want to speak of them all, since they would be a LONG list to put on here, and some I still need to pull away from the others stated. I would say…this is the basis of the archetypes of poker. I know there would be one or two more styles that would possibly be fit in here(instinctive, Flop players) but I am too lazy to write about them right now
. So I hope that my long, unnecessary statement made on here helped you a bit, or gave you an idea on something to smash my statement. Either way, I hope you enjoyed/somewhat enjoyed my article. PS: DANIEL, PLEASE COMMENT ON THIS!! I NEED TO KNOW HOW BAD THE ARTICLE IS
!!!
No matter how much you put into a pot for bluffing, you can't beat a good hand.
0
