The Mathematics of Poker

[FoxInTheHenHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
finished the book, though i haven't read this thread.

for NL cash (i play small stakes), experience is much more important than the math approach presented in this book.

after having played hundreds of thousands of hands of NL cash, i don't need math (beyond basic probability/odds) to make decisions. if i am the pfr and the caller leads small on the flop, they have a draw or marginal hand and will fold just about every time to a raise. if i raise pf, unless the opponent is shortstacked, a reraise is never AK/QQ or worse - they call with those hands. if someones minbets turn, they have a draw/marginal hand. if someone raises a three flush board on the river, they have the nuts or 2nd nuts. if i am the pfr and get check-raised on the flop or turn, my top pair (especially if it is a K high board) is no good. and so on. i don't use math for any of these because the scenarios keep repeating themselves.

so, i would definitely try to get as much experience as possible for NL rather than try to use the book's math approach of "opponent will bluff X% of the time here yet fold to a rebluff Y% of the time, so I have to win Z% of the time for it to be profitable." that appraoch is fine once in a blue moon against a tough player but for 99% of the hands, using hand reading that comes with experience is the way to go in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you!! This is the first post in this thread that makes any sense!!