|
Alastair
|
01-31-2010, 06:01 PM
Post subject: The Fundamental Theorem of Poker
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1
|
|
Quote:
|
Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.
|
David Slansky, The Theory of Poker
I don't want to be too cute here, given that Slansky knew more about poker than I will ever know, before I even started playing the game ...
... BUT ...
isn't so much of the challenge of the game about making plays that exploit others' lack of knowledge of your cards, or hedge against such bids by opponents against you? Indeed, Slansky himself goes on to explain the importance of disguising one's hand.
Example 1: I bluff, you fold. Indeed, you play differently to how you would have played, had you seen my cards; and you lose. But I win, despite having played differently to how I would play if knowledge of your cards alone were enough to determine my optimal action.
It was not my knowledge that you had a hand good enough to call my bluff that led to me winning, rather it was my playing the situation or the person that provided the win. I hedged against a high risk (or a certainty had I known it) of losing, by presenting believable strength or an expensive stake.
Example 2: Late in a sit-and-go, chip-leader raises high enough to put chip-trailer all-in (or close) to close him out of the hand or force a desparation bet to be on terms more probable to be favourable to the leader.
Situation, stacks, stakes and selection of hands, not just unseen card values, weigh very heavily in determining optimal action. of course, the theorem does not deny this, it's assumed: all other things being equal. But all other things are rarely equal in poker.
I guess I'm interested to hear from thoughtful players more experienced than myself as to whether they think it likely that there's not truly one stand-alone fundamental theorem of poker, but rather several overlapping fundamental principles.
Perhaps my understanding of the game is distorted by playing very casual players, willing to go all-in on a last card gutshot. I must read Slansky. He probably answers my questions. Perhaps someone could give me a preview.
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Carroters
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Da Amberlamps
Posts: 2,216
|
|
There are fuckloads of overlapping fundemental principles and theorems in poker. Sometimes they will contradict each other and cannot be applied correctly without skill. Reading Sklansky may help you get a beginner's grip on things, but it wont show you how to correctly apply many of the things you read about.
Only practice, studying, hard work and thousands upon thousands of hands will do that.
|
|
|
|
OhioRounder
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 171
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Carroters
There are fuckloads of overlapping fundemental principles and theorems in poker.
|
this
|
|
|
|
XTR1000
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Location: surfing in a room
Posts: 2,188
|
|
Re: Example 1: If villian makes an incorrect fold, he plays differently to what he would have done had he known your cards, so far so good. In other words: If you make a bluff with positive expectation (or a "correct bluff"), you were playing closer to what you would have done had you known his cards.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigred
xtr stand for exotic tranny retards
|
yo
|
|
Outlaw
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,033
|
|
Most worthless quote ever
|
|
|
|
BooG690
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,439
|
|
Carroters, I've missed you. Where the fuck have you been?
|

That's how winners play; we convince the other guy he's making all the right moves.
|
|
spoonitnow
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: IRC Chat Room
Posts: 5,406
|
|
@OP, it's not only knowledge of your opponent's hand that matters, but knowledge of how you expect him to play it.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.
Rule # 1: don't ask questions
Rule # 2: don't ask questions
I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.
|
|
|
Carroters
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Da Amberlamps
Posts: 2,216
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BooG690
Carroters, I've missed you. Where the fuck have you been?
|
Stopped playing for a month because I wasn't enjoying it anymore running like shit at 50NL, lame I know. Also got discouraged by having to cash out some of my roll in order to live.
So....I'm back now rebuilding at 25NLs and enjoying poker again. Should be moving back up in the next week to fortnight so hopefully things will go better this time round and I wont break even for 50k hands.
I haz missed FTR
|
|
|
|
BooG690
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,439
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Carroters
Stopped playing for a month because I wasn't enjoying it anymore running like shit at 50NL, lame I know. Also got discouraged by having to cash out some of my roll in order to live.
So....I'm back now rebuilding at 25NLs and enjoying poker again. Should be moving back up in the next week to fortnight so hopefully things will go better this time round and I wont break even for 50k hands.
I haz missed FTR 
|
No worries...this is basically my story word for word. And get your ass back to IRC!
|

That's how winners play; we convince the other guy he's making all the right moves.
|