An intriguing topic...

[JackSevenSuited]

at least to me... Anybody who's read NLHE:TAP has at least a brief understanding of multiple level thinking. I have one question based on the section. I came to the conclusion that:

zeroth level thinking is knowing what you have

first level thinking is thinking about what your opponents have

second level thinking is what your opponent likely thinks you have

third level thinking is thinking about what your opponent thinks you think he has

and the one i dont understand, directly quoted from the book which i cant wrap my head around

The fourth level would be to think about what your opponent might think that you think he might think you have.

I read it over and over and cant get it, lol. EXAMPLE PLEASE!

Lastly, i believe this multiple level thinking is a dangerous weapon, but like the section says you can only think one level ahead of your opponent, meaning if your opponent only thinks on the first level, your third level is useless. My question is how do you know which levels your opponent are capable of playing on. Is there a technique or do you have to play with your opponents for a long long time.

PS- I would love to hear what other people have to say about multiple level thinking.

[fraac]

There are only two levels. Game and non-game. Get to this state of enlightenment and much unnecessary detail reduces away.

[fraac]

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre> DATA
Counselor, Commander Riker will
assume that we have made this
analysis, and knowing that we know
his methods, he will alter them.
(a new equally bad
thought)
But knowing that we know that he
knows that we know he might choose
to return to his usual pattern.

TROI
You're over-analyzing. Human
nature cannot be denied.
(a beat)
What kind of man is Commander
Riker?

DATA
He is a fighter.

TROI
Yes.

DATA
The weaker his position, the more
aggressive will be his posture.

TROI
And he won't give up.

DATA
Then despite whatever logical
choices he is offered, he must
be --

TROI
-- The man that he is. Yes.

DATA
Is that a failing in humans?

TROI
(rising)
You'll have to decide that for
yourself.</pre><hr />

[cdlarmore]

what it basically comes down to is that you need to properly vary your play to disguise your hand, as you advance levels, they will be doing to the same, and at some point reads become near damn impossible (just theoritically of course)

[fraac]

I'll bet dollars to donuts you can get anyone to play exploitably/exploitatively. Then it's just a question of stack size.

This, incidentally, is why I disagree with Ed Miller's vision of online poker being killed by bots. More likely a bot arms race than a bot ceasefire, and humans can survive amidst those rapidly swinging big edges.

[cdlarmore]

ive ripped into bots plenty of times...i think most of them run fairly weak tight, and dont bluff semibluff enough. After a while, seems to me like even the best bot can be understood...

[fraac]

Clearly you've thought about it.

[KipBond]

I haven't read the book (yet), but it seems to me there needs to be a level before that level "0" -- where the player doesn't even know what he has. And people play between levels: most of the people I've played with play their own cards mostly, with a bit of consideration of their opponents cards.

[Big_Ham]

Beyond level 0 is ... FISH. You should always know when you're dealing with one of these.

Our local games get very big into Sklansky's different levels. We are all average to above average players and a few of us really like to test each other. We often have conversations about the "game within a game" that's going on since we are constantly seeking reasoning behind plays to validate our thoughts with each other. The more you discuss it, the deeper the levels go.

We are at constant war trying to figure out if he bet big because he knows we're capable of folding a fairly strong hand, or if he's betting big because he knows we know that he knows we're good enough to fold a fairly strong hand and he holds the nuts hoping to get paid off.

I find that tells are worth their weight in gold so you can avoid this multi-level quandary and go for the throat. However, worth noting is that tells are so hard to be 100% about, you really only get maybe 2 per game that you can exploit for +EV.

[KipBond]

[ QUOTE ]
Beyond level 0 is ... FISH. You should always know when you're dealing with one of these.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think most fish are at level 0. But, you can be a fish at any level, really. If you don't know you are being outplayed by someone on a higher level, you're the fish. You might be a big fish, but the shark's gonna eat you.

Less than level 0 is actually pretty hard to play against. Well, for anyone that likes playing anything besides level 0. If your opponent doesn't know how good/bad his hand is, it's really hard for you to know. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

For example, I saw someone go all-in (about twice the pot) with the donkey-end of a straight, with a 4-flush on board. That's level -1 or something. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]