Re: Question for David Sklansky or other probability/poker theory experts
[ QUOTE ]
Unless the a priori probability that you're a winning player is exceptionally high.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's the point, I think it is. What do you mean by exceptionally high by the way?
[ QUOTE ]
so it's possible that the same strategy you've been using has gone from +EV to -EV.
[/ QUOTE ]
I haven't been playing a single robotic strategy all this time. My core strategy has improved a lot, and I'm adapting to my opponent's particular play style quite a bit.
|