Balancing Bluffs vs Balancing Strategy

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
You are insane.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you are... the brightest bulb on the tree?

leaponthis

[jogger08152]

The brightest? Dunno. Bright enough to understand that "a winning strategy" does not guarantee a win in a particular session? Yes.

[Jerrod Ankenman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


In real poker there are card removal strategies and in order to balance for new public information (like the community cards to come) there is probably a little mixing for several hands around. But almost certainly many hands use pure strategic options. (this means they do one thing or another 100% of the time)

In general, when a player deviates from a strategic option that is pure, he will often lose value.


[/ QUOTE ]

Jerod, aren't you equating real poker with something like your 0-1 games which result in pure strategies? In actuality aren't there groups of hands that are broadly equivalent - e.g. all flush draws? If this is the case, then real poker is similar to the AKQ game which requires a mixed strategy.

Or were you talking about pre-flop play specifically.

[/ QUOTE ]

Flush draws aren't equivalent. Some have showdown value, others have almost none. Some have stronger pair draws than others. Some block the opponent from having random gutshots and some don't, etc. All of these are selection factors for playing them in different ways - if it's necessary to do so.

It's probably true that there is a little bit of blurring near the threshold hands, to prevent the opponent from exploiting cards that come on future streets. This is probably limited to just a few hands. But my opinion is that the bulk of hands throughout the tree are pure. The reason is that if a hand is mixed, then playing it both ways has to have equal equity, and I just don't think that broad swaths of hands are indifferent between two actions.

jerrod

[George Rice]

[ QUOTE ]
The brightest? Dunno. Bright enough to understand that "a winning strategy" does not guarantee a win in a particular session? Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I fell over laughing myself when I read this:

[ QUOTE ]
If there existed a workable (winning) game theoretical strategy, guys like Sklansky and Fergusen and Weideman, etc.. would win all of the heads up championships. But they don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the kind of mistake a novice would make. On second thought, I take that back--most novice's know better.

[BrandiRose]

David ~ Being a woman (and a young woman at that)... I find it difficult to bluff. Men tend to call me down with anything, or check-raise me with nothing (and then show me their cards to rub it in). I've found that my best way to make money is to wait for position and good starting hands. Sometimes if I've won a huge pot, and have played very little hands... I am able to bluff. But most of the time, guys will say something like "I wanna see what the little lady has" and call me down ~ no matter the size of the bet, the odds they are getting, or whether they have anything on the board or not.
The only problem with this, is that sometimes the cards don't come. For example, I just started playing again Thursday night. I sat down short stacked at a 2-4 game. The action was insane. Almost every hand was $50 preflop with 3 to 4 callers. Because of my stack size and to analyze my opponents, I waited for top hands. During that hour, I was lucky enough to get pocket jacks and call the $50 preflop bet. There were 3 other callers and I was in mid position. The flop came down J A J giving me quads. The first hand I played!! Of course, I ended up tripling my money when one guy made a huge bet, another went all in, I called, the initial bettor folded. Piece of cake. During the next round, I re-raised to $30 (it was $15) with AXs in late position. I once again had several callers. The flop came all diamonds, giving me nut flush. I was able to get another all in on that hand too.
But even after only playing the nuts, every time I got into a pot I would be bluffed out. I folded the better hand quite a few times, because there were too many things that could have beaten me and I wasn't getting the proper odds to call. (For example AJs, would flop top pair and get pushed out of the pot with A2.) You'd probably say that I should know how these guys play ~ and I did ~ But I didn't want to make a call without the right odds holding only top pair ~ when these guys could be playing any two cards (in fact, they played almost every hand) and it was more than possible I was up against 2 pair or even a straight.
So by the time my stack got down to $350, I stopped playing hands. I waited for hours (somewhere between three and four) with patience. Flirting with the guys and talking them into drinking more. Then, I started playing again. In less than two hours, I got my stack well over $1200. By that time they were getting tired and not betting as much. Then I left.
I always tend to do very well in the games I play and ~ when I'm deep stacked ~ also mix up my play and variate my bet sizes so that no one can put me on a hand. But it aggravates me sometimes that I'm almost always called down and have to wait so long for cards.
I know you're not a woman, but do you have any advice???

~ Brandi

[BrandiRose]

By the way, I wanted to say thank you for writing you NLH Theory and Practice book... I did well even when I first started, but understanding the mathematics of poker has greatly improved my game. Things that I normally would not have called, lately I have been ~ because I am getting the right odds ~ and what's more, is that I've had the winning hand. I also do not go on tilt anymore or get upset when someone makes a bad call and then outdraws me. Instead, I've simply said "Nice Hand" and waited ~ knowing that if they were going to make bad calls, I was glad to have them sitting at my table, and that I would get all their money and more on another hand.
So thank you, thank you, thank you. Best book ever. [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[FatalError]

welcome back brandi, i'm sure 2007 will be your year!

[Gobgogbog]

David,

It bothers me a little when you say "It might be better to play a hand differently almost every time from the way it should be played if it was the last hand of your life. For the sake of future hands. "

Game theoretically you should play the hand unpredictably if it's the last hand of your life as well. The reasoning has nothing to do with future hands.

Is this just an effective way of explaining game theory to people that you use because it's effective even though it isn't correct?

[jogsxyz]

It's possible no optimal strategy exist from
street to street. Let's start the game from
the turn.
Two person fix limit game. Pot is P after the
flop action. Each bet is 1 unit.
You hold TPTK on the turn.
Opponent checks. You bet. Opp check/raises.
Now your options are fold, call, reraise. If
you reraise, opp has options of fold, call, cap.
Now you have fold and call options.

You---fold----call-----RR-----fold-----call
Opp
fold___-1_____M1____P+2_____xx_____xx
call___xx_____xx_____M2_____xx_____xx
cap___xx_____xx_____xx_____-3_____M3

In matrix M1 the new pot size is P+4.
M2 is P+6. M3 is P+8.

Many of the cells are empty. Other cells
lead to another matrix. The river matrices
must be solved to have values to enter
into those cells. Only then can the
indifferences between line strategies be
solved.
Your linear hand strength will change from
the turn to the river dependent on the river
card. So instead of one M1 matrix, there
may be 46 M1 matrices. This matrix may be
unsolvable. Optimal strategy may not exist.

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
Bright enough to understand that "a winning strategy" does not guarantee a win in a particular session? Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

You call me insane...o.k. I might be..but for sure you are a nut case. The heads-up championships of which I spoke...were just examples (they are actually tournaments). Yes a particular strategy cannot garauntee winning a particular session but a strategy of the type these math wizs speak does predict dominance by those that employ it over those that don't. If you don't believe this just ask them.

leaponthis