Anonymous on Bovada ... how does it affect play?

I hypothesize that it makes bad players play even worse ...

Agree/disagree/no opinions?

I don't know. I think the play on there is really bad, but I am not sure it's purely related to being anonymous.

Personally,I hate it knowing your opponent is a big part of the game!

It just means I have to write notes elsewhere, paper or on pc. I kinda didn't like it at first but now I do. Most on there just assume I'm a loose player makes for an easy strategy. By the final table of a tournament you still have multiple notes on most players.

I just started playing at Bovada a month ago and I too was sceptical of what would happen in regards to not knowing who is who.

Month later, I like it but I've also always been a low on notes and no HUD so Bovada wasn't much change I guess. There isn't much I would take notes on anyways that won't show up after two orbits or so.

I play a lot of SNGs too so the anonymous deal works really good there. After winning or going out in one game I can join another game with most of the same people in it but no-one knows.

I have come to like it but at first did not...I find people seem to loosen up and let inner donk out when they know they won't be called on it...

snklzona said:

I have come to like it but at first did not...I find people seem to loosen up and let inner donk out when they know they won't be called on it...

Click to expand...

This is exactly what I think happens, but find it really hard to validate.

if you were to play live you wouldnt have stats on the person only difference is face to face reads, i agree with no names, and bovada is a great site, pokerstars and bovada would be my top 2 sites cant wait for the day they allow us players back lol

You may not have stats on the other players in a live game, but you would at least know who they are. You don't have to do a statistical analysis on Merson to know that he is a solid player. You would see Sylvia and instantly recognize him as the most agro luck box to ever get his chips in bad, capable of making moves that would leave Vanessa Selbst stunned. You would know that Negreanu is fond of suited connectors and that you might need to be wary of straight and flush boards against him.

But if there identities were masked you would have to play several hands against each of them to figure out how each of them plays. Since they are not likely to play every hand, it might take some time to play enough hands against each of them to make an accurate read. In the meantime you may be losing pots when you call in places where you might otherwise fold if you knew who you were up against, or folding the best hand to a bluff in spots where you might normally call if you knew it was a certain player.

Rather than being able to sit right down and get to work stacking chips, using the information that I've previously gathered, with or without copious notes or HUDs, I have to start all over from scratch. Where I would already have a solid read on several players at the table and be able to concentrate on trying to get a read on the players that I am unfamiliar with, I am repeatedly put in the position of being sat at a table full of unfamiliar players. Without the benefit of the information that I have invested time and lost chips to gather in previous sessions or tourneys, I have to reinvest all that time and effort all over again. I will have to pay for that information over and over again every time I join a table or play another tourney. Not only that, but I will also be unable to take advantage of my own table image as I will also need to reestablish that over and over again.

With all of that being said, I usually do very well on Bovada in both cash games and tourneys. However, I think without anonymous tables I would be able to do even better.

it is a new way of online poker!
think that most of the HUD or metagame play does not in Bovada.
could not collect 2K or 3K hands and use it for creating edges.

SofaKingCrazy said:

I play a lot of SNGs too so the anonymous deal works really good there. After winning or going out in one game I can join another game with most of the same people in it but no-one knows.

Click to expand...

how is this ^ a good thing ever??? I'm being serious.

I can see how it could benefit a player who is really bad (especially in SNG's)... but not someone who's good.

ChronicFish said:

if you were to play live you wouldnt have stats on the person only difference is face to face reads,

Click to expand...

IntenseHeat said:

You may not have stats on the other players in a live game, but you would at least know who they are. You don't have to do a statistical analysis on Merson to know that he is a solid player. You would see Sylvia and instantly recognize him as the most agro luck box to ever get his chips in bad, capable of making moves that would leave Vanessa Selbst stunned. You would know that Negreanu is fond of suited connectors and that you might need to be wary of straight and flush boards against him.

Click to expand...

this ^ & a bazillion more.
Blows me away when players think that the Bovada anonymous setup is so much more like 'live play'. Sorry but I get a ton more info. playing live than I do online w or w/o HUD.

Loonbat said:

This is exactly what I think happens, but find it really hard to validate.

Click to expand...

Just with the Cardschat buyin game, the play is quite a bit different in the Bodonka game (imo). ... that might be also partially due to being more US players or more newer'ish' rookie players more willing to play it anonymously 'or' just that there's more of them who play on that site (say vs. Carbon... fwiw, Carbon CC games are fairly decent but have prob the best structure too).

Comparing the play in the higher buyin MTT's, I don't think there's any site that has as fishy of play in it as the Bodog $100k has. (although it was probably the fishiest pre-anonymous tables too).

Generally it does seem like the play is fishier... but really hard to quantify/validate that. Seems like it though.

Maybe I need to get a notepad out & play in some more of them?

Played a couple of CC buy in games & was appalled at the quality of play.

Bovada proudly claims to have a site full of fish, congrats to them.

There are pros and cons for sure, I wish I knew the players who are sitting at 4 cash tables like I do because this info is very useful.
I like to use a hud but sometimes I feel like other players not being able to track my play is a edge that I'm willing to trade my HUD for.
I played for years with out one and I like the fact that I can go with out it.

Kenzie 96 said:

Played a couple of CC buy in games & was appalled at the quality of play.

.

Click to expand...

perhaps the anonymous feature attracts them to the site. (agreed btw)

Poker Orifice said:

how is this ^ a good thing ever??? I'm being serious.

I can see how it could benefit a player who is really bad (especially in SNG's)... but not someone who's good.

Click to expand...

As I said I play a lot of SNGs. I play on different sites too.

When I play on a Merge site and crush a table and find the same players at another game they don't/won't play me and the opposite is true when I'm not playing good, they'll come after me in the next game.

I like to play loose most of the time because I believe I have good post flop play. I also nit up sometimes and change my bet sizes around to keep a healthy mix to make me harder to read, at least that's what I perceive.

I also am willing to take risks because I play at a lower level than my bankroll says I should ($200+ and $1DoNs for example) so to me the anonymous deal is good overall because I can play as I want and when the next game starts you won't know it's me which allows me to play the same hand differently or the same without having to consider if you've seen me do this in the game before.

I'm not trying to say I'm an expert or have all the answers but I don't see myself as fishy either, unless it's late or I've been drinking or something which then I am prepared for a loss for the evening otherwise I would have never played to begin with. Currently I'm just a recreational player but wouldn't mind becoming something more than that. I know becoming truly good takes time and effort so in the meantime I understand what type of player I really am.

I'd think that anonymous players would level the playing field to some extent; undoubtedly what they were meant to do in the first place (the same with not allowing HUDs). The good players would still win, but have to make their reads and plays as the game(s) progress(es) using good ole observation skills rather artificial intelligence. The good and better players would still come out on top but probably have to come out of the blocks a bit slower.

I can't see why people would play fishier just because of the anonymity. I mean $ is $ right? If I lose mine I'm not going to care, in the universe of cyberspace, who knows I lost it or how.

many players prefer to play anonymous poker. this is the only way, they believe, that they will have an equal chance at the tables. but i dont like it. when you play regularly you notice other regular players game and make a note (i do make, dont you?) about them which helps you in next tables

i do think it allows you to focus on what the best play in a vacuum would be, much easier when you cant really get good reads or many reads on villians

We cannot play on Bodog / Bovada anymore on the UK but when we could play I enjoy the fact that there were no names and we were all anonymous.

I'm in the process of depositing on Bovada, so I will let you know in a couple weeks what I think.

Bovada is not allowed in my state.
Probably a good thing.

I don't think Anonymous cares about Bovada. Aren't they more concerned with O'Bama and WikiLeaks?

-

Not a fan of the anonymous players on Bovada.

I like making notes on players, so when I encounter them again, I know how they play.

If I notice something distinctive about a player in a multi-table tournament, I make hand written notes using their players numbers That way if I later have them at my table I know their playing style.