Re: Optimal Play
 

Didn't we have a fairly substantial argument a few months ago about how 2/4 plays totally differently than higher stakes? There isn't really an optimal strategy that can be applied to all stakes; it's more a function of your opponents, and the basic style of most opponents is different at different stakes.

Re: Optimal Play
 

imo you left off one of the best posters.. yourself (should be in <font color="red">red </font> )

Re: Optimal Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi TWP,

[ QUOTE ]
You think you can just do whatever you do to beat .10/.25 on Party and jump into the UB 50/100 games?


[/ QUOTE ]

I would answer yes to this question.


[/ QUOTE ]
I wasn't really trying to 'jump down his throat' but I really don't see how the answer can be 'yes' to this question. Unless you mean 'assign hand ranges to your opponent based on his action, evaluate likely responses to various possible actions from yourself, and then determine the optimal action based on your assessment of his hand range and his likely response given each portion of that range'. Then I agree that you can do that at any level. But I meant things like "fold one pair hands to a raise". If you ALWAYS do that at NL25 on Party you can still make money. I doubt that is the case at shorthanded UB 50/100.

[/ QUOTE ]
Game theorists are a little smarter than "always fold one pair hands to a raise." It sounds like the OP should google around for things like "game theory" "poker" "optimal strategy" "exploitative strategy" "mixed strategy" etc. Matt Matros wrote a couple of basic intro articles in CardPlayer a month or two ago. The folks in the Poker Theory forum can also help.