How do you all stereotype people at the table based on age, race, gender, accents, dress, appearance, chipstacking etc. absent any other information? How much and for how long do you rely on this info?

I realize I’m a pretty #woke person and miss a lot of racial and gender stereotypes just from being programmed to not notice. I do seem to be more in tune with stereotypes about clothing and age though and Im not sure whether I overvalue or undervalue the stereotypes (or even get them right).

For instance, I played a few pots against a white lady in her 70s last weekend and had two people say they couldn’t believe how hard I pushed my strong semi-bluffs against that player type because they tend to be call stations. I in fact was operating on the opposite assumption!

As a black presenting, biracial person, I would like to say that I understand if this question needs to be left for a less sensitive time and place as I’m afraid it may rile up people. That being said, please act like civilized adults or don’t participate.

My experience with little old ladies is that they're nitty as hell pre-flop, but when they get AA or KK they're going to call you down almost regardless of what the board shows, so bluffing is futile in such spots. When you hit that 2p, flush, straight, w/e, they'll pay you though.

It's definitely an interesting topic, but I'm not sure it's one I think is necessary. When I first show up, I play ABC poker, try not to do anything crazy until I get reads that I am confident in. Depending on how things go down I may be confident in 1 orbit or it may take 10, just make sure that you're comfortable with it. ABC doesn't mean no bluffing. I still continuation bet bluff when theoretically appropriate, and I still look for the rare bluff spot that makes sense regardless of a read.

And that's not to say that stereotypes don't play in, they definitely do, and I consider that as I develop my reads, but they're not perfect. For instance, I've played with a few spewy OMC's lately which took some adjusting (e.g. OMC calling with down with a flopped mid-pair on wet boards, etc.).

I mean, they are stereotypes for a reason...After many years of dealing and playing, I can safely assume that most of my stereotypes are correct against unknowns

But like Frank said, it only comes in to play for the first couple of orbits or so of playing with someone, after that I pretty much have a strat against them based on how they are playing, not what they look like (although more often than not they are playing exactly like how you would expect someone who looks like them would play)

I stereotype people pretty hard, particularly at 1/2.

As to the morality of it, I'd say 2 things. 1) Deluding yourself, or refusing to acknowledge reality at least internally can't be moral. All people are shaped by their backgrounds, experiences and culture.

2) I'm not a cop. I'm not a potential employer or a university admissions officer. I'm a guy playing a game against other people who are there voluntarily. Nothing I do as part of normal game play can really be oppressive, unfair or cruel.

Being in a stereotyped group, one should be aware of the stereotypes and do nothing to dispell them. Not that you should go out of your way to play against them, necessarily. Sometimes maybe. Like OMCs can print with limp reraise bluffs. But you have a leveling advantage. Don't give it away.

There was a CLP call recently from a woman and Bart correctly observed that older men, particularly from certain ethnic groups, often play very differently against women. No reason not to understand that.

FYI, if I played with you, a lot would depend on your appearance and demeanor. However, black people don't generally seem to be that into poker. It wouldn't be a huge deal, but I'd think you were more likely to be a rec/gambler who doesn't play very often. Unless you made the mistake of talking about ranges and stuff.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...types-1248020/

- Men tend to be more aggressive than women.
- Asians tend to be more gambly/over value draws.
- Older people are more likely to be nut peddlers.
- Younger people are more likely to 3!
- Younger people are more likely to suffer from FPS.
- The worst dressed and best dressed players in the room are unlikely to be regular players.
- Indians (dot not feather) seem to be bad at poker for some reason.
- Everyone calls too much preflop.

I have no opinion on black people at the tables, don’t see enough of them to make a judgement. Sexuality is usually difficult to determine and AFAIK seems to be irrelevant.

This kind of stuff definitely has a use, like if I sit down and an old lady 4bets me preflop and we’re 170bb effective, I am quietly mucking KK. But you can overdo it as well. Table reads are more reliable.

EDIT

Poker is a game of facts over feels. I think it’s absurd not to use population reads to your advantage, regardless of whether that’s some kind of thought crime. Of course there’s a big difference between calling a guy light because you think his range has all the flush draws and loudly saying ‘you chinese just have to gamble don’t you? LOL I call!’

Don't know why I laughed so hard at this

What do you do when management and security constantly and consistently stare you down?

^^when you are on the receiving end of being stereotyped

I appreciate everyone being grownups so far about this potentially sensitive topic. All the wisdom is appreciated. I realize it is imprecise. As a black presenting guy, I probably have more Asian and white tendencies due to growing up around and working around those groups my whole life.

To add some wisdom of my own, one stereotype that I have is trans people tend to be excellent poker players. My sample size is under 10 but if I suspect someone of being trans I avoid clashing with them until I’m proved wrong. One of the best players at my local casino and also a good player at another casino I go to often are a trans man and woman respectively.

Again, thanks for not turning this into a shipwreck.

Your primary objective at the table (at least for most in a strat forum) is to make money. A big part of making money in live poker is acquiring reads. Before we have any reads we have to rely on population priors. It’s perfectly valid to distinguish between different sub-populations based on things like age/race/sex because they have different life experiences and cultural backgrounds which can influence their playing style. To ignore this is only sacrificing EV.

You can mostly discard stereotypes after a few orbits of play. You’ve likely established some player specific reads by then.

Jamaicans and Haitians are superstitious and gambly

Obviously be careful about forming stereotypes too easily. It’s hard to get enough of a sample to help you make accurate priors.

Play your balanced base line game until you get reads . By reads I mean what they have shown at showdown. Not what they look like.

I have seen plenty of old grinders who look like OMC but play lag or good balanced tag game. I have seen few "fake fish" who drinks and talk a bunch at table but turned out to be grinder who was trying to establish fish image to get paid off.

Bottom line is dont judge book by it's cover.

The biggest difference maker in poker players is the amount of information that they observe and process before making a decision. You start off in poker just looking at your hand and deciding how to play based on what it is. As you get better, you start observing more things. Stereotypes is just one additional piece of information.

OP, one of the things that will feel odd to you is that you're been trained to ignore things about others. In poker, you'll want take into account everything. Poker is an amoral game. The goal is to take money from other people. Beyond the rules, everything else can and will be used against you to take your money. If you chose to not do some things because they are against your moral code, you are playing at a disadvantage.

I would like to note that while ethnicity does correlate with culture, including cultural attitudes about gambling, aggression, etc., ethnicity is far from our only stereotype marker. Dress, expressiveness, chip stacking, etc. can also be markers to how people are likely to approach the game.

My husband and I are typical, upper middle class, 50-something white people. However, at the tables, my husband dresses like a splashy gambling BJ player on vacation (expensive flashy shirts, nice pants, expensive flashy shoes, nice watch, etc.) to get action, and it works. I just use the fact that I'm a 50-year-old woman and most of the time I bet, they fold

I do stereotype others when I sit down, and this is pretty dead-on with a few additions:

- Men tend to be more aggressive than women.
- Asian and black men tend to be more gambly/over value draws, unless they are older, then they are nits.
- Asian and black women tend to be tight, regardless of age.
- Older people are more likely to be nut peddlers.
- Younger people are more likely to 3!
- Younger people are more likely to suffer from FPS.
- The worst dressed and best dressed players in the room are unlikely to be regular players.
- Indians (dot not feather) seem to be bad at poker for some reason.
- Everyone calls too much preflop and post flop.

I try not to stereotype but I do judge in three criteria

1. Behavior
- how do they react after winning/losing a big pot
2. Speech
- how do they talk and what are the words coming out of their mouth
3. Chip stacking
- you can just tell someone is a noob scared money