simple game theory question

[Paxinor]

first: i of course know you should adjust to an opponent to exploit him if he plays weak. this has been said OVER AND OVER by various posters including me. i am just saying that its highly inpracitcal to exploit him maximaly because max strategies usually are very extreme (the example where preflop 3bet with every hand made earlier) and the opponent will adjust so its more about "keeping the edge without the opponent adjusting" as i said before. so exploit him, but not as hard as you can...

and no these are not the wrong autors...

the papers of ferguson, weidman chen und ankenman are very very basic models

there are forms of pokers that are already solved (2 streets and more). you are really behind, the group the guy has postet a paper from are far further, there is also gilpin and sandholm who have solved a form of poker called "rhode island poker" which is a simple hold'em

basicly if you want to solve big games you need that koller algorithm, and you'd have to solve it with linear programming

ferguson and the others haven't really developed something new, these [0,1] models are known since 1944 and they are even solvable by hand.

sience is really WAY AHEAD of this.

there are multiple solutions of pretty big dynamic games