Game Theory at on-line micros?

[Shillx]

It applies to a lot of the behind the scenes stuff. Anytime you can deal with complete information the solution can usually be solved with GT. So it would include...

- Bluffing in heads-up pots (doesn't really apply to micros)
- Pre-flop play (mainly opening)
- River play when both you and your opponent have a big hand (been covered about 1000 times)

Example - Why do we raise AJs UTG? The correct answer isn't for [censored] & giggles.

[HitNRunPoster]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]



nah.

[Ampelmann]

[ QUOTE ]
Game theory assumes that both players are attempting to maximize their return.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the typical assumption if we have no further knowledge. But against the typical micro-player we do have additional knowledge and we should adjust some variables/parameters in our game theory accordingly.

[ QUOTE ]
The best strategy at micros is and always has been solid ABC poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is exactly what game theory tells us.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Game theory assumes that both players are attempting to maximize their return.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the typical assumption if we have no further knowledge. But against the typical micro-player we do have additional knowledge and we should adjust some variables/parameters in our game theory accordingly.

[ QUOTE ]
The best strategy at micros is and always has been solid ABC poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is exactly what game theory tells us.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you're wrong on this one. Check page 179 in ToP.

[fabadam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Game theory assumes that both players are attempting to maximize their return.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the typical assumption if we have no further knowledge. But against the typical micro-player we do have additional knowledge and we should adjust some variables/parameters in our game theory accordingly.

[ QUOTE ]
The best strategy at micros is and always has been solid ABC poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is exactly what game theory tells us.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you're wrong on this one. Check page 179 in ToP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think David Sklansky gets to define what game theory is. Game theory is, in essence, any time you apply maths to a game to come up with an optimum strategy.
It's applying game theory when you steal-raise 72o OTB against 2 blinds who fold over 70% of their blinds to a steal. It's applying game theory when you isolation-raise a 88/50 preflop maniac with ATo.

Sklansky's application is specifically about situations where you have a tough decision and not a good read, where there is a game theoretical optimum that achieves a certain EV regardless of your opponent's strategy. I agree that that thing has little application in the micros.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Game theory assumes that both players are attempting to maximize their return.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the typical assumption if we have no further knowledge. But against the typical micro-player we do have additional knowledge and we should adjust some variables/parameters in our game theory accordingly.

[ QUOTE ]
The best strategy at micros is and always has been solid ABC poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is exactly what game theory tells us.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you're wrong on this one. Check page 179 in ToP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think David Sklansky gets to define what game theory is. Game theory is, in essence, any time you apply maths to a game to come up with an optimum strategy.
It's applying game theory when you steal-raise 72o OTB against 2 blinds who fold over 70% of their blinds to a steal. It's applying game theory when you isolation-raise a 88/50 preflop maniac with ATo.

Sklansky's application is specifically about situations where you have a tough decision and not a good read, where there is a game theoretical optimum that achieves a certain EV regardless of your opponent's strategy. I agree that that thing has little application in the micros.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, but it's pretty obvious OP was talking about game theory as in Sklanskys definition (after all we're on the 2+2 forum). The only thing I've read about game theory comes from his books and according to him it seems to be a branch in mathematics. I assume when you talk about game theory you could believe it's only a theory of games but according to Sklansky it's not.

[Zeldark]

I'll chime in. Being very general...

Another application of game theory if I remember correctly is just a way of randomizing your actions against an opponent that might be better than you. You now have a system where he's not sure what you're doing even if he knew you were using game theory. So if you have a good game theory system in place, and you're playing micro limit and frequently involved in hands with the superior opponent, game theory might not be a complete waste of time.

But pretty close? Heh.

[Ampelmann]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, but it's pretty obvious OP was talking about game theory as in Sklanskys definition

[/ QUOTE ]
He was asking about game theory. I haven't checked your citation of TOP yet, but I doubt that Sklansky doesn't know what game theory is in general.

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing I've read about game theory comes from his books and according to him it seems to be a branch in mathematics. I assume when you talk about game theory you could believe it's only a theory of games but according to Sklansky it's not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Game Theory is a branch of mathematics dealing with the problem(s) of making optimal decisions in situations where you are interacting with others. It's not only applied to "games", but also to economics, negotiations etc.

I haven't read it completely, but the Wikipedia article on game theory seems to be quite good.

[seano34]

I can assure you that Game Theory is indeed a branch of mathematics - I have memories of 3 years at University struggling through it on a Thursday morning with a hangover

[bbbushu]

you know a thread has devolved when one side is quoting sklansky and the other is quoting wikipedia

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
bbbushu