Some top players dislike NLHTAP: Why?

[fraac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is an excellent section on this topic, p. 168-175, "Multiple Levels of Thinking." Basically, it explains that you need to think one level ahead of your opponent. Which seems pretty obvious, but I hadn't thought of it until I read it. For example, what good does it do to act on what I think he thinks I have (2nd level), if he only plays his cards (0 level) and doesn't think about what I have (1st level). In that instance, thinking on the 1st level is optimal, and 2nd level thinking will give you problems. Against a 1st level thinker, you need to think on the 2nd level. And so on. It's a really interesting concept that seems well explained.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll say it until you're all dead, Sklansky knows nothing about levels. There are two: game on and game off*. Making the right moves at the right time is purely about multidimensional pattern modelling, not the pseudo-rigourous Sklanskian logic of 'levels' ffs.

Who actually thinks "What does he think I'm thinking?"

I bet Sklansky doesn't. He couldn't explain the process he really uses, so he rationalised a load of 'logical' crap. I'm certain of it.


* Truly enlightened ones see only 1 level, of course. Maybe less. I don't know. They won't tell me.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you come to this conclusion?

[/ QUOTE ]
Acid trip.

'Levels' crumble when you realise that you can't get into your opponent's head. He isn't a rational, shallow thinker. He may be a deep thinker, that isn't the point, because his head is full of weird angular junk and he'll check-raise the turn just to piss you off. I would. Against good opponents, of course, levels average out into game theory. You can apply that directly. 'Levels' are a totally ass backward way of thinking.

Sklansky, the autistic, the android, slowly working it out...

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
DATA
Counselor, Commander Riker will
assume that we have made this
analysis, and knowing that we know
his methods, he will alter them.
(a new equally bad
thought)
But knowing that we know that he
knows that we know he might choose
to return to his usual pattern.

TROI
You're over-analyzing. Human
nature cannot be denied.
(a beat)
What kind of man is Commander
Riker?

DATA
He is a fighter.

TROI
Yes.

DATA
The weaker his position, the more
aggressive will be his posture.

TROI
And he won't give up.

DATA
Then despite whatever logical
choices he is offered, he must
be --

TROI
-- The man that he is. Yes.

DATA
Is that a failing in humans?

TROI
(rising)
You'll have to decide that for
yourself.</pre><hr />