Theory of Poker: Chapters 11-12 Discussion

[MEbenhoe]

Sorry guys, my trip to Canterbury last night caused me to be late with this, but lets get posting on these topics.

[MEbenhoe]

Section for Chapter 11 discussion

[MEbenhoe]

Section for Chapter 12 discussion

[uw_madtown]

Going to read these tomorrow and catch up with comments on Chapters 4-12, probably post some of my own comments late tomorrow (Tuesday) or Wednesday. Keep this project going, it's a great thing! What book might be next? SSH? (hint hint)

- UW

[AKQJ10]

Sorry i've been less involved than i intended, but this is the real "meat" of discussion.

I'll start with a question and answer, going from memory, and a little bit of discussion.

Q: What key assumption are necessary for a semi-bluff to make any sense?

A: That there's a significant chance that your can win the pot immediately.

Maybe this is obvious and very simplistic fare for a knowledgeable audience, but to me it's very fundamental. For example, i get the impression that people read HEPFAP and conclude it doesn't "work" because the games it describes are so different from the typical low-limit game. Maybe i'm just imagining that, because the 2+2 crowd certainly doesn't think that, but i get the impression that many people do.

Here's another Q that i'll refer back to the book for the A:

Q: Why is it often a bad idea to semi-bluff when you're last to act?

A: See p. 102 (4th ed.), "When Not to Semi-bluff"

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]


Q: What key assumption are necessary for a semi-bluff to make any sense?

A: That there's a significant chance that your can win the pot immediately.


[/ QUOTE ]

I totally disagree with Slansky's examples #33, 34, and especially 35 in TPFAP, which all deal with semi-bluffing. I've posted about it before, but not gotten huge responses. Perhaps a little disagreement with Slansky will get this discussion rolling. Thoughts?

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Q: What key assumption are necessary for a semi-bluff to make any sense?

A: That there's a significant chance that your can win the pot immediately.


[/ QUOTE ]

I totally disagree with Slansky's examples #33, 34, and especially 35 in TPFAP, which all deal with semi-bluffing. I've posted about it before, but not gotten huge responses. Perhaps a little disagreement with Slansky will get this discussion rolling. Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you post the examples please? I don't own TPFAP

[AKQJ10]

Wow, i figured our discussion would eventually die out but i thought it'd take a little longer. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

When i get a chance i'll try to post the HEPFAP examples.

Anyone reading through TOP still?

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]


When i get a chance i'll try to post the HEPFAP examples.



[/ QUOTE ]

He was talking about hand examples from TPFAP not HEPFAP

[Boylermaker]

I'm still in, but haven't yet had a chance to read the last 'assignment'. Canada plays for the gold tonight, so I definitely won't get to it tonight (will be severely beer-impaired). Will try to post some discussion comments on Wed or Thurs.