Some verbal analysis of Eric Persson from a High Stakes Poker hand

Examining some behaviors pointing to evidence of relaxation and a strong hand

Thanks to James Davis, who sent me this hand, and some thoughts on it. This is a hand between Daniel Negreanu and Eric Persson from a recent High Stakes Poker show.

There's a lot of verbal stuff in this hand from Eric: a lot of talking. I won't talk about everything in here, but I'll go through the things I noticed on a watch through that stood out to me as likely to be meaningful. This isn't to say there aren't other things (verbal and nonverbal) but just to say this is what stood out to me most from the verbal stuff.

If you're interested to learn more about such things, I recommend my book Verbal Poker Tells (which happens to be the book of mine I'm most proud of). You can learn more about that at www.readingpokertells.com/products/verbal-poker-tells.

Also, a caveat: I haven't watched that much of Persson, and haven't seen many of his big bluffs, so the caveat is that it's possible that Persson does these kinds of things I'll mention even when he's bluffing. But I highly doubt it, as the patterns I'll talk about are just very rare from bluffers no matter their habits or skill levels. (But if you do have some interesting Persson-bluff hands, send them my way; use the contact form at www.readingpokertells.com/contact)

The river card arrives at 2:00 and that's when the interesting interactions start.

At 2:40 Negreanu asks him whether he has a flush. One of the things he says is, "How big is your flush?"

Persson pauses and says, "Flush?" in a kind of funny, questioning way, as if to convey, "Why would you assume I have a flush?"

As I write about in Verbal Poker Tells, bluffers will seldom want to weaken their own hand range, even jokingly. They don't want to make what I call "weak-hand statements." They don't want to accidentally make a call more likely by removing hands from their range. This is a subtle statement from Persson but it is a weak-hand statement, along with several others he'll make. And a big part of the value of the verbal stuff is that often there will be several signs pointing in the same direction.

At 3:10, Negreanu is questioning him, saying, "What do you got, buddy?" and "you gotta give me something."

Persson responds, "I felt like you just got a little excited." He also says, "I want to teach you a lesson," with the lesson being "don't count your chickens before they hatch."

Let's break down these few statements.

First, Persson is implying that the reason for his big bet is that he thought Negreanu might have "gotten a little excited." This seems to be a way of saying that the reason for Persson's bet is that Negreanu wasn't raising the turn because he was strong but because he was "excited." He seems to be saying Negreanu's hand is weak. When people making big bets say or imply an opponent's hand is weak, it can be seen as a subtle, indirect way of weakening their own hand range. The implication is "If I don't think you have a strong hand, I don't require a strong hand to bet." And as discussed, bluffers have an instinct to not want to weaken their own range, even indirectly.

Also, Persson's statements can be seen as goading: the "I want to teach you a lesson" and "don't count your chickens." Bluffers also have an instinct to not want to insult or agitate their opponents, out of fear agitation might trigger an opponent into a "spite call" (which I think is something Mike Caro talked about). (Bluffers will tend to behave in more conciliatory ways and that can sometimes be a tell in itself when a usually combative, irritating player is being more placating.)

Again, none of these things are foolproof and behaviors can vary, but they are generally reliable and they become even more reliable when you can find a few of the clues present.

Also worth noting just how loose and relaxed Persson seems: he is moving around a lot, his mouth/smile are dynamic (move around a lot). Again, I haven't watched much of Persson bluffing but I'd be surprised if he's this loose when bluffing.

At 3:45 Negreanu says, "Do you have the nut flush?" During all this, Negreanu's intent seems to want Persson to imply he has the nut flush, because Negreanu knows that's not true because he himself has the Ace of diamonds. So it seems like he's trying to induce a lying strong-hand statement from Persson. So he's looking for evidence of overstatement for Persson, and instead he is getting the opposite: weak-hand statements.

Persson says several things, including, "You don't want to be stuck this early" (another goading statement) and "or maybe... it'll just get your heart pumping... you know what I mean? One way or another."

This is another subtle weak-hand statement. Persson is saying, "Your heart will be pumping when you call whether you'll win or you'll lose." The important part is that he's saying "You might win." Something a bluffer wouldn't want to say.

But stepping back to a meta-level analysis of many of Persson's statements: often times the simple fact that it can be hard to interpret the meaning of the statements of someone making a large bet makes it more likely that a player is relaxed and has a strong hand. In other words, if Persson were bluffing, he'd be very conscious of how his words are perceived, and would generally avoid indistinct, fuzzy language where it might be hard to understand what Persson is saying. The basic fact that Persson's language can, on the surface, be hard to parse and seem ambiguous can itself be a clue to his relaxation. If Persson were bluffing, he might talk a good amount, but in general I'd predict his language would be more superficially precise and less prone to wondering what he was saying.

To sum up that idea: relaxed people are more comfortable using ambiguous and potentially confusing language than are anxious people.

At 5:50, Persson takes up Negreanu on his offer to take $20K to turn over a card. This is interesting because Negreanu was clearly in the process of folding, as he was trying to make a sidebet that Persson was going to show a bluff. When a player interrupts an intended action, that can be a major clue. In this case, if Persson were bluffing and heard an indicator that Negreanu was getting ready to fold, he would have no incentive to get in the way of that. (The opposite version of this is when a bluffer sees an opponent getting chips together to make a call and tries something desperate to get in the way of that, like saying something, or holding their cards defensively, things like this.)

Instead, in this case, Persson, realizing he might not make any more money, tries to get the $20K from Negreanu. This behavior alone would have been enough for me, if I were Negreanu, to fold and not pay Persson for the card.

Regarding Persson showing the 5, James Davis (who sent me this hand) said the following, "He shows the 5: I think it would be very rare to see that from a bluff. Not impossible, as in some rare cases it might be [a reverse tell], but bluffers usually like to retain all the possible winning hands and that five reduces it to a bluff or a flush. It's a slightly different way of saying 'I don't have the straight'."

There are a good amount more interesting things in this hand, but these are some of the things that stood out to me as most important.

Again, if you like this stuff, I recommend reading Verbal Poker Tells, available at www.readingpokertells.com/products/verbal-poker-tells/