[jogsxyz]

[ QUOTE ]

Fallacious Concept 1: Game theory is very useful for poker players

Strange that I would write this in a poker article about game
theory, but this is a misnomer. Other than a few select examples
such as bluffing described in The Theory of Poker, game theory is
generally not practically useful. Even these examples are of
little use (see Fallacious Concept 4 below). One of the reasons
for this I alluded to above. The assumption that agents are
rational is clearly not valid when you are playing poker. If that
were the case the Noted Poker Authority would certainly have far
less to write about. Players seem to bet, raise, and call for no
good reason all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]


Most of the players are semi-rational. It's just that they may not
be on the same wave length as us on strategy. Are they consistent
and predictable? To some degree they are. At least we can make
assumptions which should produce better results than assuming
all actions by opponents are random.
On earlier streets, streets before the river it's less game
theory doesn't apply than with our limited understanding of game
theory the simplistic models are not very useful for most game
situations. In the future we should be able to construct better
models to solve more game situations. But game theory will never
be able to quantify and assign proper values to opponents'
tendencies. That will be an exercise for each player.