Should I just start using my own judgment?

imported_anacardo · #1 05-28-2005, 02:34 PM

Three times today I've been holding an overpair to a moderately coordinated board. Three times I've either checked on the end and faced a push or they've just open-pushed. Each time I've decided the fold/call game-theory style: assessing their pot odds (1:1 twice, 2:1 once), rolling a die, and acting accordingly. Each time I've rolled "call," and each time I've stacked them on their bluff.

Should I seriously consider calling this sort of bet every time, under similar conditions of action and texture? It seems as though I'd show a large profit, but I'm obviously being pretty results-oriented here. Thoughts?

wtfsvi · #2 05-28-2005, 02:43 PM

Are you really rolling dices while you play? That's crazy.

Would be fun if you did it in a live game though [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

imported_anacardo · #3 05-28-2005, 03:00 PM

Sure. What better way when you really have no idea?
"Hrm. All-in for $15, there's $16 in the pot. River makes an.... unlikely straight completion... could've been slowplaying a set or some stupid two pair... I don't know this guy from Adam. Odds I call, evens I fold." Is this not straightforward Sklanskified TOP? But, given my above described results, I wonder if it's even worth guessing / randomizing.

splashpot · #4 05-28-2005, 04:03 PM

The game theory section in TOP is not relating to calling bluffs. It is about optimizing when to bluff yourself. It is stupid if you just call you opponent randomly just hoping to catch a bluff by chance.

What bluffing game theory does suggest is that you should yourself bluff in a randomized manner.

elcap · #5 05-28-2005, 04:06 PM

In my experience at NL 100 and 200 this is rarely a bluff. I first started playing NL last year and this was one of my worst leaks. It has taken me a long time to get the discipline to lay these hands down but it has changed my game for the better. Don't get me wrong, I don't always fold but it is highly situation and player dependant. Most times I let it go. I think most of the more experienced posters on this forum would agree b/c it is through their advice that I realized that laying it down really is the correct play most times.

imported_anacardo · #6 05-28-2005, 04:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The game theory section in TOP is not relating to calling bluffs. It is about optimizing when to bluff yourself. It is stupid if you just call you opponent randomly just hoping to catch a bluff by chance.

What bluffing game theory does suggest is that you should yourself bluff in a randomized manner.

[/ QUOTE ]

I refer you to p. 188, "Using Game Theory To Call Possible Bluffs."

That title says it all, I guess, but the method I'm employing is, as long as I'm not retarded, described here:

"...it behooves you to have an opponent think you might sometimes fold, but you should call sufficiently often to catch his bluffs.

When you use game theory to decide whether to call a possible bluff, you make calculations similar to those you make when deciding whether to employ a bluff yourself - and you randomize your calls just as you randomize your bluffs. You figure out what odds your opponent is getting on your possible buff, and you make the ratio of your calls to your folds exactly the same as the ratio of your calls to your opponent's bet."

Is this not precisely the method employed above?

imported_anacardo · #7 05-28-2005, 04:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In my experience at NL 100 and 200 this is rarely a bluff. I first started playing NL last year and this was one of my worst leaks. It has taken me a long time to get the discipline to lay these hands down but it has changed my game for the better. Don't get me wrong, I don't always fold but it is highly situation and player dependant. Most times I let it go. I think most of the more experienced posters on this forum would agree b/c it is through their advice that I realized that laying it down really is the correct play most times.

[/ QUOTE ]

My mistake; I should have specified. This = NL $25, and some of these guys couldn't be handing their money away faster if they'd just give the table their ATM PIN. How does that change your assessment?

elcap · #8 05-28-2005, 04:25 PM

I suppose if that's the situation, then I like the random call method. But you may be right it may just be profitable to call this most times if players are really willing to push these hands with TPTK. This is something you need to evaluate through your own experience with these players.

splashpot · #9 05-28-2005, 04:52 PM

I stand corrected. I, however, have never used game theory like this.

Atropos · #10 05-28-2005, 05:21 PM

If your opponents were really tricky and sometimes bluffing at random too, your game theory strategy would be the optimum. However at these low limits most equity lies at learning to make good reads and going with them, because that way you can catch of more bluffs and fold against better hands more often.

If you want safe profit your method is best. If you want the most possible +EV and improve your game, you should stick with your own reads. You can still use math like bayesian stuff for reads, you seem like a math guy [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]