[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know why so many people on this forum have to start insulting others in their posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sorry bud I have bad day and I am **** up. Sorry again.

[ QUOTE ]
So now you are metagaming their metagame. I suppose, they will then metagamge your metagamed metagamed, which you will then in turn metagame back. I'm not psychic

[/ QUOTE ]
No no. There is only one level you assess how they will play and they will. The better person win.

[ QUOTE ]
don't follow. Of course you put pressure on them by moving all in with a bluff

[/ QUOTE ]

No you dont because it doesnt matter what they do. You only put pressure on them if you bluff too much or to little. They have to guess what you are doing and if they are wrong they lose. Of course they can *try* to use optimal strategy but they wont because its too difficult in practice. They will reason something like "hey he doesnt bluff in an hour but he went allin and didnt show last time.. hmm what to do about it?" If you use optimal bluffing frequency they will be no pressure because they cant go wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, if you can get into the mind of these people that well, and know for certain that they are thinking that way, then my hat goes off to you. You are above the game if you can really metagame that well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont follow your multilevel metagame stuff. You just simple evaluate your opponent and his state of mind. If the conclusion is "he will fold p% of the time if I bet 100" and "he will fold q% of the time if I bet 500" you just choose the better option. If you think about why do you want to bet always the pot for example the answer is probably "because I dont want him to know if its bluff or value bet" but you dont gain anything if he "doesnt know" you only gain if he "knows" wrong. You can go allin now as a bluff got called and then next time go allin and hope that he will call again isnt that the very same thing as your "multistep metagaming" ? Ddecent opponent will realize that you dont always bluff if you bluffed just once and you dont gain anything by being able to go allin with the nuts next time. You only gain if your opponent is naive enough to think you always do the same.

[ QUOTE ]
you are probably better at metagaming at such deep levels

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. I suck bad at it. I just understand some basic theory points which are not too important to practical play anyway. Many great players dont understand basic game theory things but they are so good at actually evaluating their opponents that they crush the game. Its because understanding of game theory is relatively unimportant in today poker. Try to read analysis of the hands by some great players like Green Plastic and Samoleus for example. They dont think "I have to go allin now so I can go allin in the future with the nuts" they think as this : "I think he will call now because I am doing it second time in a row and he is upset" or "he thinks I will go allin now as last time I checked behind so I will checked behind again and fool him". This is how you win not by some abstract optimal strategy.