#61
|
|||
|
|||
Re: prove higher level thinking to me
"the chance of you guessing this correctly is a 50/50 chance" - Only if you're making a simple binary decision, e.g. call or fold, by literal dumb luck.
There are times to randomize your decision, but it's rarely a clear 50-50 decision. I often suspect I'm behind and don't want to call a river bet, but I feel that always folding would make me soft. So supposing I think I should call 20% of the time, I pick two digits 0-9 out of the air, look at my system clock, and call if I see a match. That's not a 50-50 decision. That's an binary 80-20 decision. Not the same thing. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Re: prove higher level thinking to me
I have done level 4 on occasion in cash games to run some crazy bluffs. This is generaly vs very solid players. Tight is right, as it makes these players very predictable, (keyword PREDICTABLE), and very cautious (keyword CAUTIOUS). Another important aspect, is it is much easier at NL than say limit to pull this off. Even when a player thinks he's so smart and figured that you had him beat, he may not resist doing a crying call for a tiny bet in the screaming hopes that he misread you. And sometimes they just call in frustration feeling certain they have no hopes of winning regardless.
If you really want I can post some examples, but we are not talking about 100K cash games here, so don't get too excited. But I'm pretty sure this happens VERY often. Surely it must? There are plenty of cash games going on every day, with plenty of tight players, as well as donkeys. I highly doubt I'm one of the only ones. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Re: prove higher level thinking to me
Ok, I was trying to remember this hand since I read this thread and I finally found it...Phil Ivey vs. Paul Jackson heads up 2005 Monte Carlo Millions...if this isnt lvl 4 its damn close.
the following is taken from Paul Jackson's blog/website/whatever: "I put up a little resistance at first and increased my stack a little to the rapturous applause of the on looking 10 man bad beat team ( yes no ladies were in the team but if Vicky Coren applies she can have my vote) and others that like to see an underdog have a go . The most meaningful hand of the heads up battle and one that I look forward to seeing on television to hear the commentators interpretation occurred when I limped from the small blind ( blinds 24K) and called a raise to 72K ( he had made this raise almost every time I limped in the small blind) . The flop came JJ7 I checked he bet 80K and I raised 90K . He dwelt a while and re raised another 150K . I thought about it and convinced he did not have a jack tried to make the strongest move I thought possible and re raised another 150K leaving myself about 300K in chips. At this point Phil Ivey dwelt for what seemed like 6 weeks at least, as he stared into my soul. The tension was amazing as I attempted to remain motionless and the crowd tried to imagine what hands we had and what would be his next move. Surely a fold I thought and hoped . He asked me how many chips I had left and I gave him a rough count in the most unemotional way I could muster. Maybe I should have pretended I was talking to my ex wife to make it more convincing , as shortly afterwards he moved all in . I was forced to show Matt savage my 56 off suit saying " I guess I will have to lay down this monster" , which he found quite amusing . I later discussed the hand with Phil and he advised me that he had Q8 off suit. What can I say? That is why he is who he is . In my eagerness to learn I asked him later that night ( he came out drinking with us afterwards) how it was that he could make such a move and he said that he knew when we got heads up that I was not going to let him run over me and that given the strength of my move I probably had the absolute goods or no hand at all . With me having just 300K left ( and leaving myself a playable stack sort of) he could take the value chance that I had no hand because if he was wrong he would still have a 4 to 1 chip lead even after doubling me up. " |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Re: prove higher level thinking to me
1997 WSOP, Stu Ungar vs Ron Stanley. Take a close look at Ungar taking his time and coming above all odds to force Ron to fold his hand to a phantom hand. If we COULD interview Ungar today, I would expect this higher level thinking to show up in the analysis.
|
|
|