04-30-2016 06:44 AM
#1
| |
| |
04-30-2016 07:10 AM
#2
| |
|
For the sake of clarification i'm not talking about pot odds. I want to know what my calling frequency should be in order to become indifferent to whether he is bluffing or value betting. Actually that isn't exactly right as being indifferent would mean it doesn't matter how often he is betting/bluffing. so i want to know how often i need to call to his strategy of value betting 60 percent and bluffing 40 percent 0ev or as close to 0 ev as possible. |
Last edited by grumpy64; 04-30-2016 at 07:18 AM. | |
05-01-2016 12:12 PM
#3
| |
Note: You can't answer this question without using pot odds. | |
05-01-2016 10:18 PM
#4
| |
| |
05-01-2016 10:31 PM
#5
| |
|
I think the formula is c=1-alpha i just have no idea what alpha is |
05-01-2016 11:27 PM
#6
| |
alpha is {total risk}/{total reward} | |
05-01-2016 11:35 PM
#7
| |
I hope I have disabused you of the notion that pot odds is somehow outside of the discussion. | |
05-02-2016 12:14 AM
#8
| |
|
MDF = minimum defense frequencies |
05-02-2016 12:19 AM
#9
| |
| |
05-02-2016 12:23 AM
#10
| |
|
GTO is rarely the highest EV choice but it will never be worse then 0 ev |
05-02-2016 12:23 AM
#11
| |
| |
05-02-2016 03:09 AM
#12
| |
|
well i thought the 2 were closely related. Does nash not exist if both players are playing a perfect GTO strat? As far as taking it slowly it isn't easy to find a lot of info on GTO. Sure you can find all types of links explaining what is thing is they don't always For example one link might give the DEF that GTO is playing perfect poker. By perfect i mean playing in a way that can not be exploited. Then i'll read another link that says you shouldn't even use GTO versus bad players |
05-02-2016 08:32 AM
#13
| |
We know what Game Theory is. We know what GTO is. We know what Nash equilibrium is. Links wouldn't hurt, but they're probably not as necessary as you imagine. | |
05-02-2016 11:32 PM
#14
| |
05-05-2016 02:41 PM
#15
| |
|
ok well i would post a HH but i play at a web based site. U can C&P your HH to a text file if you remember but it's difficult to read. I just spent a good while looking through the text file where i keep my hands. A lot of the Vs have a fold to cbet % of 70 or higher yet their fold to DB is less then 15%. I usually bet 2/3 pot on the flop whether bluff of value bet. I think we find the proper bluff frequency by bet/bet+bet+pot so if u bet 2/3 the proper frequency is 43 percent for them to make my bluffs indifferent they need to call 60 percent. So they're folding 10 percent to much. So wouldn't it be a good idea to cbet our air atleast 50 percent of the time and if they call only DB with made hands and big draws. Don't we exploit Vs who fold more then what is proper by raising more then what is proper? |
05-06-2016 02:09 PM
#16
| |
|
i'm really just asking once we know our opponent is folding to much what is a good min exploitative strat. |
05-06-2016 10:19 PM
#17
| |
| |
05-08-2016 02:16 PM
#18
| |
| |
05-08-2016 02:17 PM
#19
| |
Also I have a lot of game theory posts in my old FTR column at http://www.flopturnriver.com/author/spoonitnow/ | |
| |
05-11-2016 04:00 AM
#20
| |
|
I'll check it out |
05-11-2016 04:08 AM
#21
| |
| |
05-11-2016 07:56 AM
#22
| |
So up until then, exploit the crap out of them. Furthermore, they frequently adjust to an even more exploitable strategy. | |
05-11-2016 08:26 AM
#23
| |
|
well i currently cbet air 70 percent in HU pots would be higher but it's difficult to fire 10 high on a str8ing monotone board or 1 that contains multiple broadway cards. I play at a unique site that has an average fold to cbet of around 80 percent. |
Last edited by grumpy64; 05-11-2016 at 08:29 AM. | |
05-11-2016 11:00 AM
#24
| |
This stat reflects your many different adjustments to many different villains. It is an average over all of your strategies, and not your strategy, if you follow. | |
Last edited by MadMojoMonkey; 05-11-2016 at 11:05 AM. | |