levels of thinking

[asofel]

In a recent tournament on TV Daniel N talked about levels of thinking...he mentioned that it goes up to 7 or 8 levels sometimes....I can easily see 3-4, but at 6 or 7 isn't it difficult to make accurate deductions? Do pros/posters here really think on that many levels? If someone does, I'd love a description of it...

[bernie]

Much of it depends on the level of thinking of your opponent(s).

In normal games, you rarely get past the 4th or 5th stage.

b

[tek]

It's What does my opponent have? What does he think I have? What does he think I think he has? etc etc

[Bill C]

It's like the game of "Odds and Evens," or like "Rock, Paper, Scissors." But really a player who knows the psychological game(s) can foul up his opponent by refusing to change at one level, so when the opponent thinks it will be one way, he's wrong.

For that reason, I doubt that it really goes beyond about 3-4 levels, tops.

Just my $.02 worth...
bill

[Reef]

Going past the 5th level boggles my mind.

[ismisus]

don't worry, he's just talking out of his ass. There's 3 levels, all other 'levels' are just variations of those 3 levels

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
don't worry, he's just talking out of his ass. There's 3 levels, all other 'levels' are just variations of those 3 levels

[/ QUOTE ]

that's what I thought .. it almost seems counterproductive to go to , say, the 20th level.

[mike3076]

7 OR 8 LEVELS IS NONSENSE.
EVEN IF THEY DID THIMK THAT MUCH -THEYD BE BACK TO LEVEL ONE TWO AND 3 AND 4 .
RUNNING IN CIRCLES,AND MOST LIKELY OUT GUESSING THEM SELVES.
IVE PLAYED DANIEL MANY TIMES,THIS IS UNREALISTIC,I MEAN YOUR THINKING ABOUT WHAT TWO PROPLE ARE THINKING ABOUT EACHOTHERS HANDS/ACTIONS. THERE ARENT EVEN THOUGHT PROCESSES THAT GO BEYOND HE THINKS THAT I THINK THAT HE THINKS I HAVE....
IM GONNA HAVE TO BUST HIM ON THIS ONE! LOL

[NiceCatch]

Typing in all caps... the surest sign of misunderstood genius. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TStoneMBD]

whenever i play against daniel in cash games i tend to think on level 8, because i know that he is only capable of thinking on level 7.

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
whenever i play against daniel in cash games i tend to think on level 8, because i know that he is only capable of thinking on level 7.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I have to go to level 9 against you.. but isn't this stuff circular, causing me to actually only be on the same level 7 as Daniel in a way?

levels past 3>>> overrated

[TStoneMBD]

one time when daniel shovelled in his chips, i could tell that he was thinking on level 22 by the way he blinked. i countered with level 23 to say the least.

[MtDon]

You left out level one: What cards do I have?

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
one time when daniel shovelled in his chips, i could tell that he was thinking on level 22 by the way he blinked. i countered with level 23 to say the least.

[/ QUOTE ]

n1. I might've gotten suckered into only going to 21.

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
You left out level one: What cards do I have?

[/ QUOTE ]

when you're thinking into the level 40's, only sissies need to know this level 1.

[MagikKid]

In TOP, Sklansky talks about "reverting to game theory" in situations that would require a person to consider thinking on these levels, as it would get too confusing to be of much value. My personal belief is that where some people rely on game theory, others go by their intuition in the situation. Just recently Daniel said he made a laydown in a tournament that would have neccesitated a call if he were a "math guy", but because of his read he was 100% sure he was beaten. I have a sneaking suspicion that Daniel was "goofing" for the camera on this topic.

Magik

[Bodhi]

I agree that whoever you heard say that was talking out of his ass. Anyway, I don't like the metaphor "levels of thinking" because it presents a misleading image of human cognition. Thinking about what he thinks you think, etc., is the same as distinguishing other people's beliefs from your own, and how they distinguish your beliefs from their own. Worse yet, "levels of thinking" implies an infinite regress (but this might only bother the philosophically minded).

[DeadWallet]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a sneaking suspicion that Daniel was "goofing" for the camera on this topic.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or maybe, Daniel thought you would think this.....

[underaged]

As mentioned before, it's pointless and actuall -EV to think at level four or five when your moronic opponents only consider what they have and MAYBE consider what you might be holding.

[Snoogins47]

[ QUOTE ]
As mentioned before, it's pointless and actuall -EV to think at level four or five when your moronic opponents only consider what they have and MAYBE consider what you might be holding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I was playing in a low stakes NL game with somebody that I know pretty well. He has this little sort of quirky trick that he often uses, that works against the monkeys, but long story short, I knew what he held. I was 100% certain it was AA or KK.

I called, with J9s, because I like to mess with people's heads.

See, here's the deal. I know what he has. He knows that I know what he has, and I know that he knows this. He leads on a 2 7 Q flop, and I raise. Since he knows that I know what he has, he can only assume that I was trying to outflop him. He'll now think that I outflopped him, but hopefully he won't go past this level and realize that I'm thinking on this high of a level. He re-raises me, I fold, and we later had a 20 minute discussion that ended with a consensus to never fight a land war in Asia.

[pokerswami]

[ QUOTE ]
we later had a 20 minute discussion that ended with a consensus to never fight a land war in Asia.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to have something against land wars in Asia. It's better than a land war in North America. But then I'm USA-centric. I must only be thinking on the first level. Land war where I live = BAD.

[Yads]

Well he also calls Poker a sport so I think a lot of the time he's just pandering for the camera.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
we later had a 20 minute discussion that ended with a consensus to never fight a land war in Asia.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to have something against land wars in Asia. It's better than a land war in North America. But then I'm USA-centric. I must only be thinking on the first level. Land war where I live = BAD.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Vizzini: You only think I guessed wrong - that's what's so funny. I switched glasses when your back was turned. Ha-ha, you fool. You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia", but only slightly less well known is this: "Never go in against a Sicilian, when *death* is on the line.". Hahahahahah.
[Vizzini falls over dead]

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to see "The Princess Bride" ASAP.

Paul

[BruceWayne]

[ QUOTE ]
You left out level one: What cards do I have?

[/ QUOTE ]

The cards that I hold are irrelevant. You're almost in, "The Man Who Knew Too Much" territory at the point DN was describing, and I believe he was spouting off for effect. He's playing poker all the time, even without cards, and I believe he was doing this to get a psychological advantage....

[antifish225]

trying to think past the 4th level is counter productive as you will end up out thinking yourself to no end......DN talks allot and tries to make some of his horrendous plays looks like acts of genious (not saying he is not a GREAT card player because he clearly is (and a fellow CND so I like him) - however I have seen him make some horrific calls when the odds were WAY against him.....saying he was thinking at the 7th level is just a cover) Jmho

[MtDon]

I posted "You left out level one: What cards do I have? " partly to clear up what what level is meant by level 3, level 4, etc.

And partly because if you don't consider what cards you have you'll never know when you have the nuts, nothing, etc.. Many times it does matter what cards you have.