Originally posted by mineriva
ps. I did not stay to see MC own JB HU in the 8 game but all is well in the world today so I am sure it happend.
Once NLHE and PLO came around, pwnage ensued. Sorry. ♠_cool:
Notifications
Clear all
Manu and I finally managed to play some more HU today and...
NL 27SD 0-1
FL 27TD
NL 27TD 1-0
PL 5CD 1-0
FL 5 Card Stud 0-1
PL 5 Card Omaha 1-0
PL 6 Card Omaha 0-1
ML 7 Game 0-1
FL Badugi 1-0
PL Courchevel 0-1
PL HA 1-0
FL HEROS 0-1
FL HORSE 1-0
PL HE 1-0
FL HE 1-0
NL HE 1-0
NL Irish 1-0
FL O8 0-1
PL O8 1-0
NL O8
PL O 0-1
FL Razz 1-0
FL Stud8
FL Stud 1-0
It's 13-8 to me. Like god did I run, although I was unhappy to get completely pwned at deepstacked 7game, before it even got to the NLHE round. 
Hopefully we can play the final three as well. 
Currently not playing much, but instead working on Bonus Maths Article No. 3.
Watching the latest Breaking Bad tonight.
Cool fish.
You know better than anybody else that this result is not significant. Too much variance in HU.
Originally posted by TwiceT
You know better than anybody else that this result is not significant. Too much variance in HU.
Piss on my parade why don't you. I'll be sure to make it best of 24000 next time instead of best of 24.
Originally posted by jbpatzer
Originally posted by TwiceT
You know better than anybody else that this result is not significant. Too much variance in HU.Piss on my parade why don't you. I'll be sure to make it best of 24000 next time instead of best of 24.
what is the life expectancy of a math prof?
Originally posted by mineriva
Originally posted by jbpatzer
Originally posted by TwiceT
You know better than anybody else that this result is not significant. Too much variance in HU.Piss on my parade why don't you. I'll be sure to make it best of 24000 next time instead of best of 24.
what is the life expectancy of a math prof?
Low and falling.
Originally posted by jbpatzer
Originally posted by TwiceT
You know better than anybody else that this result is not significant. Too much variance in HU.Piss on my parade why don't you.
![:]](https://www.pokerstrategy.com/_forum-runtime/wp-content/uploads/wpforo/emoticons/pokerstrategy-legacy/basics/pleased.gif ":]")
♦
if there was no variance HU i'd have won every game i've played against jb
o wait.
Originally posted by chenny8888
if there was no variance HU i'd have won every game i've played against jbo wait.
I just finished reading Matthew Janda's book, Applications of No Limit Hold'em. A Guide to Understanding Theoretical Sound Poker, and I have some thoughts.
Firstly, the negatives:
1) The title makes no sense. I don't think anybody's ever written a book called 'Applications of Chess'. There's a reason for that. And surely it's 'Theoretically Sound Poker' isn't it?
2) There are lots of typos. Even one of the equations is wrong, and, it being a simple quadratic, he fails to write down the trivial solution.
3) It's a bit of a turgid read.
4) His bet sizings preflop seem a bit on the big size. They're designed so that you can get all in by the river easily with 100bb stacks if I've read it correctly, which fits in with his advice on numbers of bluffs needed on each street.
Secondly, the positives:
1) I really enjoyed it. It was refreshingly different to the usual fairly random poker books. It's well organized and said things that I hadn't heard said before. I was pleasantly surprised by how many of the things that he says, particularly about board texture and hand selection, agree with things that TT and Manu have said to me and which appear in our book. I think that if you read Harrington on Online Cash Games and/or Easy Game, followed by The Education of a Modern Poker Player, then Janda's book, you won't go far wrong.
2) I really like the idea of trying to play close to optimally, but making adjustments to exploit the specific nonoptimal features of your opponents' strategies. It's certainly what I recommend for FL 5CD in our book, but NLHE is so much harder. I've spent a lot of time this weekend on my iPad playing one table of Zoom NL10, trying to think about the optimal line in each spot with no HUD. Fuck me it's hard.
Here's something TT wrote for our book.
Level 1: You look at your hand and the board. You focus on absolute hand strength.
Level 2: You look at your hand and the board. You think about Villain’s range. You mostly focus on absolute hand strength
Level 3: You look at your hand, the board and the action on previous streets. You think about Villain’s range, Villain’s perception of you and your range in combination with the board texture and recent history. You mostly focus on relative hand strengths.
Level 4: In addition to thinking at level 3, you also assume that your opponent is thinking on level 3, so you think one step ahead.
Level n: This game of ‘he knows that I know that he knows… …’ can be played forever. As JB said, the endpoint is a GTO strategy.
Janda wants us to try to play at level infinity, which is the GTO strategy. You can start to see why people don't think poker is a hard game when you look at it like this. If all you do is look at your hand and see whether it's strong, then bet, poker is a very easy game. If you have to think about your hand, Villain's range and perception of you, history, metagame, it's very hard. But if you want to play optimally, you have to think about how you play your whole range in a given spot, on each street, and then think about what ranges a GTO Villain would play too and, on top of that, pick the right bet sizings. 
The way people play at the micros is no doubt so far from optimal that trying this is pointless, but it's a really interesting exercise, and probably more rewarding than losing to a six year old at Mario Kart, which was my other option for the afternoon.
3) Janda emphasizes having balanced cbetting, check/calling and check/raising ranges on each street, particularly the flop. In his attempts at optimal ranges, he often only cbets 30-40%, but defends a total of 60-70% of hands by check/calling a balanced range too. If, like me, your accustomed to looking at your HUD, seeing somebody who only cbets 30-40% and thinking, 'if he checks, the pot is miiiiine, all miiine!', then you're going to get into trouble. Manu and TT have told me the same thing frequently.
Overall, I liked it and found that it gave me a lot of food for thought, and I'd be interested to hear what my co-authors have to say about it (I know Eee Man You Ell is reading it).
Does your 6yr old play mario cart online?
I played quite a bit of it, online and offline, and was doing well. The last month Tyrone started beating me. I dont take being beaten at PC games well.
Originally posted by mineriva
Does your 6yr old play mario cart online?I played quite a bit of it, online and offline, and was doing well. The last month Tyrone started beating me. I dont take being beaten at PC games well.
Lol @ Mario Kart being the stand out part of my post.
Number two son has a Wii and passed his old Gamecube on to my daughter. He doesn't play it much, but she loves it, but ofc it's not online.
I'm uniformly rubbish at every PC game ever invented, without exception.
The thoughts of a pilchard...
The title is very poor, it is the title after all. They obviously didn't give it to me to proofread. 
I couldn't read a whole book through if there were 'lots' of typos, I would tilt.
If it's a technical read why not just put; '..the result is trivial.' That's the usual getout for 'can't be arsed.' ♦
Turgid, good word but sleep inducing.
I've tried all sorts of bet sizing to get the money in; it doesn't matter a lot at what size I use v most villains I meet, but then I don't play nosebleeds like nl100. 
All I can say is good on you for being able to enjoy such a read.
GTO, micros, na. I have no doubt it wasn't written for nl4, 3bet situations v four 55/25 $1.20 stacks and as we know, balance at these limits is having a beer in both hands.
I think I asked pleno1 if I play GTO and villain plays GTO surely the rake wins? Most likely playing perfect GTO isn't possible though, but it must surely be a bit pointless v another good player?
Is GTO possible multiway, or is it specific to HU situations? This GTO is interesting stuff, but not much use to me as yet I think.
Anyway, just my random walk of a thought process but to be fair, not a Mario Kart in sight.
Originally posted by gadget51
I think I asked pleno1 if I play GTO and villain plays GTO surely the rake wins? Most likely playing perfect GTO isn't possible though, but it must surely be a bit pointless v another good player?
Is GTO possible multiway, or is it specific to HU situations?
GTO v GTO the rake does indeed win, but nobody really knows how to play GTO, so that's just a fantasy.
The idea that I like is starting from your best guess at GTO and adjusting to exploit. Ofc at the micros nobody folds enough to make it worth bluffing as much as is likely GTO, and nobody bluffs enough to make it worth bluffcatching as often as is likely GTO, and the adjustment from GTO to optimally exploitative will likely be so large that you might as well just start with the exploitative strategy (value, value, value and don't pay off). However, if you really are playing GTO, even playing that way at the micros will make you money, at least HU. Multiway, game theory suggests that the GTO strategy can still lose you money because one player can spew both your and his equity to a third player (this is really obvious in SnGs).
Janda doesn't claim to know how to play GTO. It's just his best guess, which is fair enough, and makes for very interesting reading.
Sounds about right to me, that third player was who I was thinking about given the multiway nature of the games I sit in, but I hadn't considered SnGs(blinkers); thanks for the explanation. ♠_cool:
Originally posted by jbpatzer
Originally posted by mineriva
Does your 6yr old play mario cart online?I played quite a bit of it, online and offline, and was doing well. The last month Tyrone started beating me. I dont take being beaten at PC games well.
Lol @ Mario Kart being the stand out part of my post.
Number two son has a Wii and passed his old Gamecube on to my daughter. He doesn't play it much, but she loves it, but ofc it's not online.
I'm uniformly rubbish at every PC game ever invented, without exception.
poker = work (unless i am taking money from some math prof) :-)
mario = fun
Originally posted by mineriva
poker = work (unless i am taking money from some math prof)
mario = fun
Completely the opposite for me, although I've never taken money off some math prof playing mario. 
Mario Kart ftw Totally sticking out from all the random strategy talk. I'd sidebet with you all day btw, just in case you feel like losing a few $$$ 
"Value, value, value and don't pay off" >>> GTO attempts on Micros and Lolstakes. Academically valuable to try playing GTO on NL10 ofc.
Janda's book sounds like an interesting read, I will ask Manu to share his opinion on it (put it on the Thursday-list !!). I have to say though that I really enjoyed reading our book once we finished and I am not sure if any other book poker can come close to this experience for a while, if ever (biased ofc, but I really like it).
It will take me a while to read it. ♦
Regarding sizings: he probably chose those bigger sizings to simplify the ranges. Think how much complexity is added once you bet add the possibility of having a bet/calling and bet/folding range not just a shoving range. The more options our opponent and we have, the more complex. It's harder to figure out what range to check/call, check/raise, bet/fold and bet/call than what to shove and what to check/fold.