the problem with poker forum advice
We listen, commiserate, and give our input, all in a vacuum. But so what? At least we are giving a "default" answer. The answer to any question of "what would you do?" is always "It depends." If you aren't astute enough to see that, to take it for what it is, then you shouldn't be here.
It is still helpful. Sometimes I say "aha .. i didn't think of it that way." Hopefully you still have those "aha" moments too. Isn't that why we do this?
-------------
Isn't the optimal play, or mix of plays, wholly dependent on the makeup of your table and the hand? Game theory is nice, but all it does is analyze empirically certain truths that the best players know instinctively.
Leaning too much on empirical study of poker is like learning how to pick up girls by taking Mystery's class -- you can get functional, even skilled, but you're still lame. Lean too much on numbers and you miss out on a whole lot of the mindgame, which is what makes poker glorious.
I think we are all right -- kind of -- but dancing around the question, approaching it from different angles. I think that this is the great part of poker forum advice.
|