math.. of poker,how to use it?

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]

Workin' on it, Gel.


[/ QUOTE ]

I know you are and you'll catch up with me soon enough [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]



But honestly, a bloke makes a post, where he states that he is trying to improve his game, so he has bought MOP and is having troubles.

And you reply: Why do you try to improve your game, you don't need skill to beat small stakes.

That is just absurd .... it really is [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Jim C]

As others have said, the thought process is more important than understanding the details of the math.

I feel that one of the most valuable contributions of MoP is a good discussion of exactly how to mix up your play, and an idea of how frequently it may be required (assuming very tough opposition). The whole idea of having overlapping ranges of actions so that you are a favorite to be making the "correct" play while making yourself unreadable is very important. Other literature discusses "sometimes" doing another thing, or "varying your play", but I am not aware of detailed discussions of exactly how much variation is required in different circumstances. Against tough opposition, this stuff is pure gold, IMHO. Again, I am not saying that MoP gives the *answer* to every situation, but it does a very good job of explaining the different factors to consider.

I have a pretty strong math background, so that might be influencing my opinion. That said, I think the book contains *the* best discussion of making yourself difficult to read, complete with mathematical derivations.

The detailed derivation of optimal heads-up shove/fold in NL Holdem is worth the price of the book, assuming one even occasionally plays NL tournaments.

Thinking in terms of "toy games" is a very valuable skill, that has value in many other areas besides poker. Others have called this technique using "orienting generalizations". Clearly, one needs to be able to identify the important factors in a problem so the correct toy-game model is used, but this does not diminish the utility of solving problems this way. Though it might seem "academic" or "theoretical", I think that working through the toy game sections of the book definitely improved my thinking processes when at the table. Working through even one toy game until you totally understand it can't be done just by reading the words, you've got to go over it again and again. In my experience, it has been worth the effort. It might not tell you how to play a particular hand, but really "grokking" these sections will help you. Being able to develop a simple model and use it to test one's ideas is something that many people are not familiar with.

Finally, I think its worth mentioning that this book assumes that you are familiar with all the outs & odds stuff that the other responder mentioned. It is true that this is covered, but extremely quickly; if you don't have your basic poker theory down, then this book isn't going to be helpful. I think MoP needs to be seen as "Theory of Poker 2", for an audience that already thoroughly understands the seminal "Theory of Poker". In that context, its a master work.

After re-reading all this, I realize this comes across pretty MoP-centric, which isn't really what you asked. To answer your question in a more general way: the more you learn about the game, the higher quality your decisions will be. In my opinion, in poker and in *any* other endeavor, once you change your mindset to seek ever higher understanding rather than seeking particular results, the whole world opens up for you. With this view of the world, a process of ever-better understanding and constant self-improvement *is* the use of this material, application is secondary and happens naturally and holistically. That probably sounds pretty fuzzy and non-pragmatic -- I know it would have to me when I was younger -- but I strongly believe that knowledge and understanding is its own reward. If you simply want to make money at the game, you don't need the stuff in this book (though it will help).

Jim

[sandycove]

I know there are enthusiasts here who have an insufficient mathematics background to cope with MOP fully, but who are willing to do the work to get there.

Is there an appropriate omnibus mathematics primer out there, commonly recognized by match teachers, for students to pursue? (Please be specific...)

(I put this question to the authors in a PM immediately after publication. Neither answered.)

[CasinoR7]

I haven't studied MoP yet, but this book was quite helpful to me learning basic mathematics to understand the more complicated math I get in college: http://www.amazon.com/Essential-Mathemat...4651&sr=8-1

And the follow up of that book:
http://www.amazon.com/Further-Mathematic...4985&sr=1-1

IMHO these books are truly amazing to learn math.

[Gallopin Gael]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't studied MoP yet, but this book was quite helpful to me learning basic mathematics to understand the more complicated math I get in college: http://www.amazon.com/Essential-Mathemat...4651&sr=8-1

And the follow up of that book:
http://www.amazon.com/Further-Mathematic...4985&sr=1-1

IMHO these books are truly amazing to learn math.

[/ QUOTE ]

And amazon gets more of my $$.

DAMN YOU! [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

*edited to acknowledge the 666th post*

[mojed]

I'm going to ambush this thread to list a couple of errors I think I've found which weren't in the errata list when I last checked (and my Adobe reader is crashing, so I can't check now). Apologies if this has already been picked up on:

Page 200, the second line:

For Y at y1* (indifference between checking and betting)

should read

For Y at y1* (indifference between calling and folding)


Page 202, paragraph one, line 3:

"Y, of course, calls with hands equal to the range with which X bluffs..."

should read

"Y, of course, calls with hands equal to the range with which X value bets..."

Can anyone confirm? I could be wrong, it's 1am and my brain is a tad fried, but for some reason I feel the need for some late night [0,1] game analysis.

[robsmith82]

It might sound obvious, but "statistics for dummies" will give you everything you need to know for this book in an easily readable format.

[CasinoR7]

Don't play poker if you are a dummy.

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
play poker if you are a dummy, and tell me your SN and where you play.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[CasinoR7]

That's bad advice to newbies.