A Better Thought

[ QUOTE ]
You can clear away a lot of the clutter of analysis once you take the important step of understanding what information to ignore.


[/ QUOTE ]

On the one hand... Duh. On the other hand, it clearly is the sort of thing that needs to be said. Too often a player gets so lost in the possibilities that he loses sight of the important thing.

Uhh, I think this went over my head. Is this like when Gigabet said in "Play a hand with the Masters"

"When I think I have the best hand, it doesn't matter what the other guy has"

^or something along those lines?

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
Think about it.

Why are you doing an analysis? To come to a decision.

So, what if your decision doesn't matter.

Why even consider the option that he has something that wont matter?

-Jason

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good concept, but susceptible to misunderstanding and abuse. It works great in the above example, but let's say you're trying to decide whether to bluff at a pot with ace high, and the pot is the size of your stack. Let's say your opponent will always push with kings no matter what you do. You can't tell me that the percentage chance he has kings is irrelevant.

You might say it's not applicable, because if you check and he pushes, you're not calling. And you'd be right. But you might want to spell this out more clearly.

That's not what he's saying at all, there. Obviously if you only have ace high and he's holding pocket kings - that's a concern. If you know he has KK, you will check/fold. Jason is more referencing a situation where he has KK and you have AA - the chips are going to get in the middle whether you bet or whether you check.

if you are mot going to use the analysis, then dont waste time.

[Pat Southern]

I cant tell if I'm overanalyzing an incredibly simple statement, or underestimating a statement over my head. Are you essentially talking about the opportunity cost of making a move? Like you said, you dont gain or lose any chips in your quads vs top FH hand, and the real decision lies in how you get the most out of AQ, JJ, etc? If so, can you give an example of how this is applicable to bluffs (if it is)?

[johnnybeef]

My reading comprehension is shot to [censored] after doing a bunch of brainwork. I'll try to comprehend tomorrow.

[ZeeJustin]

This should be obvious, and I'm surprised at the confusion.

This mostly applies to scenarios where you have the nuts or an unfoldable hand. If your opponent has a great hand too, all the money is going in.

You should be thinking about how you get the most money out of your opponent when he doesn't have a great hand, because when he does, the money is going in no matter how you play it.

That's the simplest I think I can make this concept. Let me know if this clarifies what he's saying or not. If not, I'll try again tomorrow.

[KneeCo]

[ QUOTE ]

I guess this sounds kinda basic

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it does, but that doesn't mean it's not a fantastic post.

Odd thing about great poker books/discussions in my experience, there always seems to be a 'DUH' factor to the really insightful stuff.

You read through something like TOP and think, "yea, well obviously", but of course the achievement is not reinventing the game, just illuminating the intricacies we're all just barely aware of.

I'm rambling. In any case, I enjoyed the post.

The key concept at work here is that if there is a situation in which a line you take against specific hands villain may have will have the same result as all other lines you may take, there is no point in analyzing it (which is what you said), -however- you do want to take the line that provides the most EV against the range of hands you CAN control, for example, you have the 2nd or 3rd nuts on the board, if you are beat your chips are likely getting in the middle no matter what line you take, however you try to take the line that extracts the most chips out of possible holdings that do not have you beat, where the result will change as your line changes (once again, you may have 2nd nuts and villain has 3rd nuts, and money goes in no matter what, so you can disregard, but lets say you have top two vs top/bottom, or vs top pair with a villain that overplays). You wan't to dictate your thought process towards situations you CAN control.

When gigabet states that when he has a hand strong enough to where he is willing to play for all his chips, it doesn't matter what his opponent has, he means that if he is in that type of situation, he can ignore the possibility that villain has him beat as his chips will be going in the middle either way, he takes the line that will get the most chips out of villain if villain is behind. In his masters hand, his flop bet was "designed" to get raised (the 300 flop bet that I too advocated, for similar reasons), and he could disregard that he could well be behind, as he cannot control that situation and is trying to get the most chips in the middle.