Robotic playing style VS Technical knowledge

[DorianGray]

I am trying to understand how much is really gained by understanding and using advanced poker concepts like $EV, win rate and others. Do you really need to use these things to play winning poker?
Let me describe a simple robotic style that seems pretty reasonable to me
Let's say you play no limit holdem
You select to play decent starting hands. You play less tight in better position. Your flop strategy is basically fit or fold.
When you are in the hand, and choose not to fold, You bet/raise 75% and call/check 25%. You price your bets against people on the draw as follows: 35% of the pot if you want them to call and get a bad price, 50% of pot or higher if you want to push them off the hand, and 25 % of pot if for some reason you want them in with a better price. When betting you randomly bet 25% to 50% of pot against non drawing hands. You only go all in with the nuts, or one of the top 5% of possible hands. You call all in with the same. All of the above is adjusted to multiplayer pots.
You randomize your play 10% of the time to not be to readable. You bluff in favorable situations 10% of the time. You semi-bluff 75% of the time in favourable situations. You agressivly try to steel blinds, and you defend when holding reasonble hands.
I just put this together of the top of my head. I think you could do pretty well doing this a low levels.
But at every level in the final analysis isn't it all Fold, Call, or Bet.
How much in actual win rate is really gained by knowing and using the advanced stategies over a simple robotic style such as I have described? The technical stuff is interesting, but will it really get more money. Does the extra work really mean that much more money?

[JLimbs]

I think other then some of your continuation bets being a little to small and you being a little too tight with your standards to move/call all ins this is basically a solid strategy. Obviously the numbers could use some tweaking, but most of the concepts you are mentioning are sound.

One of the biggest concepts missing is adjusting your play based on your opponent. Things like widening your range when calling all ins against loose players and shortening it when playing tight players make a huge difference in overall results.

You also didn't mention anything specifically about counting outs or making reads about your opponents.

When you play completely robotic like this its too easy for your play to be exploited. If you don't adjust to table conditions your opponents will begin to take advantage after awhile.

Each of these concepts that has been mentioned is like another building block. The more blocks you are applying effectively the more profit you will make overall. Of course its possible to still win with out using certain concepts, but in doing so you are missing out on potential earnings.

Its hard to put a tangible number on the difference between this basic strategy and one that applies more advanced concepts, but in my opinion its the difference between being a good player and a great player.

-Jerry

[Abdullaev]

Very interesting. When you finish constructing your robot, may I suggest that you name him Jerry?

[tarheeljks]

if your bot does not make use of the notions of ev/hand reading (whether implicitly or explicitly), then it will probably lose $.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
if your bot does not make use of the notions of ev/hand reading (whether implicitly or explicitly), then it will probably lose $.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. Your "strategy" ignores the actions and tendencies of the other players at the table. In NL, this will lose money.

[JLimbs]

[ QUOTE ]
Very interesting. When you finish constructing your robot, may I suggest that you name him Jerry?

[/ QUOTE ]

That name is already copyrighted.

-Jerry