Whats the general consensus of the "SAGE" system here?

[ayecappy]

Im all against the whole idea of memorizing cute colored charts of what my plays should be in different situations but when lee claims that under the conditions in which it applies, it is pretty much optimal strategy I do think its interesting.

Anyway. My play is pretty much in line with what sage suggests once the blinds get that big however im sure i could find alot of spots where i deviate from it. Thats where it gets interesting because it says that whenever i deviate im giving up an edge.

I do end up hu a couple of times everyday, hu is where you play for the biggest increase in prizemoney so even tiny edges here should add up. Also its not much effort to learn it.

So is it worth the effort?

EDIT: I guess what im asking is if it is flawed, because i'd be stupid to ask if deviating from optimal strategy is giving up any edge as thats the definition of doing just that [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[kevstreet]

This is old, but I'm bored...

[josh_x]

its that thing that lee jones made up, like a system for knowing when to push/fold HU at the end of a sng. Its like a 'you calculate your hands value according some points system and then >x points you push' sort of thing.

[ayecappy]

yes thats it, the article is here
Similar stuff has been made here too aswell, i think i read an old 2p2 magazine article about it but they arent archived :<

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

Thats where it gets interesting because it says that whenever i deviate im giving up an edge.


[/ QUOTE ]

No it doesn't.

[ QUOTE ]

EDIT: I guess what im asking is if it is flawed, because i'd be stupid to ask if deviating from optimal strategy is giving up any edge as thats the definition of doing just that [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No it isn't.

Unless your opponent is playing exactly optimally (which is almost never the case), playing "optimal" strategy is not the biggest edge you can get. That's the maximal strategy, and it's not what SAGE tells you.

eastbay

[oyvindgee]

The thing is, if you are really clueless heads up then this will keep you from getting pawned and propably give you a small edge over most opponents. However, it is only the optimal strategy if your opponent uses it as well.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
However, it is only the optimal strategy if your opponent uses it as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it is always the optimal strategy. Optimal means it minimizes the maximum edge your opponent can get on you, and that is something that doesn't change no matter what your opponent does, that's why you can write down a system like this without considering your opponent's tendencies. It doesn't mean you are getting the biggest edge you can on your opponent's strategy. That depends on how he is playing, something that SAGE doesn't consider.

eastbay

[oyvindgee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, it is only the optimal strategy if your opponent uses it as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it is always the optimal strategy. Optimal means it minimizes the maximum edge your opponent can get on you, and that is something that doesn't change no matter what your opponent does, that's why you can write down a system like this without considering your opponent's tendencies. It doesn't mean you are getting the biggest edge you can on your opponent's strategy. That depends on how he is playing, something that SAGE doesn't consider.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I have a different interpretation of the word "optimal". It is only the optimal strategy for a given opponent when the opponent uses that same strategy as well. That should be sufficiently accurate, right?