Shouldn't all decisions be standard for the best payers (theory)(long)

[PlzHelpMe]

Definately tl;dr unless you want to read about some very general and posibly basic stuff, or maybe it's not. But it is occupying my mind at the moment.

Unfortunately this may not be conveyed as clearly as I hope but just bear with me. At the ssnl and below no winner at HSNL or even most MSNL winners should ever face a decision that would not be standard and clear cut.(for one reason or anather there will be at least a very small number of these players playing (br management or other major financial setback would most likely be the causea) This is obviosly the case once these players have a good read on the differnt classifications of players at this level. This includes unknows.

I just don't feel that there are any (maybe an insignificant few) players that play regularly at this level that can think deep enough to put these players to decisions that don't have a clear cut answer. The exception to this exists when the math is too close to decide during the hand and hand ranges are unclear. However these situations are so marginal it matters very little which way you go. Obviously no huge mistake could occur here and they are rare anyways. a Otherwise a person should have an exact play (or couple of plays randomized or weighted one way or the others mostly for metagame because there will always be an optimal play in a vacume but maybe a different play will work better after a little history.

I am specifically talking about players that are able to think on levels beyond the regulars. I hope you guys know what i'm getting at even though this may or may not be clear. I could go into this further but hope this will either generate some sort of discussion leading a discussion of when does this not become possible anymore due to the multiple level of thinking of the competition. I guess what I'm saying is what level can no longer play on almost complete autopilot (with PAHUD and large sample stats but not much else) without giving up a lot or even become a dog in the game.

At this point either discuss or flame away... Or ignore of course... but if you got this far and understood my point hopefully there is something to discuss... be back in 12 hrs.

[Sean Fraley]

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how a post that takes way to long to make the statement "High stakes players are so good that it's easy for them to play and beat all you SSNL and uNL donkeys" contributes in any way to the strategy discussion in this forum.

[centgas]

We do not have perfect or complete information so not all answers are clear or definate. Some decisions will be very close, and the gaps in information will be filled with estimates, which of course differ between different players. Different players have different playing styles, which will also cause variations.

[Beanos]

There is almost always a better/increased ev way to play a hand.

[Dire]

No.

The least of reasons being that you often play the same hand different ways, not even just depending on your opponent but also on your image and things even more abstract like the 'flow' of the game. And this is all outside of regular balancing like you occasionally reraising, occasionally cold calling and sometimes even folding the same hand in the same situation.

[Acemanhattan]

[ QUOTE ]
The exception to this exists when the math is too close to decide during the hand and hand ranges are unclear

[/ QUOTE ]

Not being good at this part of the game, is the only thing that makes poker difficult. So it seems to me like you are pointing out that, that skill is what makes HSNL players great. I would agree with you on this point. However I would say that SSNL may be the spot where a good player would have the hardest time executing a range analysis, because of the sheer volume of players who dont understand their own range, which can make it very difficult for a good player to read a hand well.

Second, I dont think you can play at any level on autopilot without expecting your winrate to drop.

[tunkpirate]

[ QUOTE ]
There is almost always a better/increased ev way to play a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

But, optimally, there shouldn't be. Since the best you can do during most hands is put villain on a sometimes broadish range of hands, your play should always be geared toward being the most EV against that range. Sadly, you might lose or gain a few dollars in EV now and then due to incorrectly evaluating range, but these losses or gains aren't really significant as your play is still overall +EV. If the best players could somehow narrow opponent's ranges to 3-4 hands every time, every play would be standard IMO. They are still sometimes put to close decisions though due to variations in lines and play by their opponents.

Confirm/deny anyone?

[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is almost always a better/increased ev way to play a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

But, optimally, there shouldn't be. Since the best you can do during most hands is put villain on a sometimes broadish range of hands, your play should always be geared toward being the most EV against that range. Sadly, you might lose or gain a few dollars in EV now and then due to incorrectly evaluating range, but these losses or gains aren't really significant as your play is still overall +EV. If the best players could somehow narrow opponent's ranges to 3-4 hands every time, every play would be standard IMO. They are still sometimes put to close decisions though due to variations in lines and play by their opponents.

Confirm/deny anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, not the right way of looking at things. This is entirely level 1 play and in a vacuum at that. Pretty much the opposite of how a strong player is going to play. You're not considering image - perceived and real, what our represented hand range is, recent history with villain, recent history on the table, etc, etc..

[shpanko]

This post seems presumptious, ignorant, and offensive. Yes on average higher stakes players are better. But there are many reasons other than ability to beat higher stakes games that lead players to play ssnl.

Like you said a lot of situations will be so close as to be neutral ev, a lot of posts have to do with those situations and we're trying to make the most optimal play possible. However, because of the lack of information and the erratic play of a lot of players at these stakes, sometimes there is really no way to calculate your ev in a hand, so it's not neutral ev, it's unknown. So sometimes there's no way to know what the optimal line/decision is in a hand because of the large player pool and unknown/strange nature of your opponents.

I agree with some of the other responses that take offense at the tone of your post and I think you don't even really know what you're trying to say tbh.

[Acemanhattan]

I dont take offense. Its obvious OP is trying to work through something, and may have wrote it out before it was thought out. I imagine OP to be a SSNL player, talking about what he aspires to do, and not a HSNL player talking about why he pwns us.