[MLG]

[ QUOTE ]
Check-raising is not 'best'. The combination of 70% check-raises and 30% leading out is 'best'. It sounds like this is what MLG is saying. How can this be the case? Because your opponents are always playing against a range of possible hands you could have, and you gain EV every time they either incorrectly estimate your range or incorrectly play their hand against a correctly estimated range. The latter occurs quite often at lower buy-in tournaments, which is why it is less important to use mixed strategies at those levels. Your opponents aren't likely to estimate your range correctly (though they are putting you on a range, even if they don't think they are), and they often misplay their hands even when their estimation is correct (drawing with improper odds, for instance). You ought to be able to exploit these mistakes without mixing up your play too often.


[/ QUOTE ]

Against players who do think you are quite correct, that mixing up your play is usually pointless. Against a passive calling station, you always value bet and you never bluff and you basically never go for a CR because they rarely bet. Against a thinking player, however, one who can say to himself, my opponent may have this or may have that, then it becomes harder to exploit them. That's the point. If they think I have a draw 90% of the time I lead, and a set 10% of the time, when in fact my range is closer to 33% a hand that beats top pair, 33% a monster draw, 33% a bluff then if they raise with pretty much anything they are making a mistake. I have created a range for myself, that is very difficult for an opponent to exploit and one that.