Sound Rob! U are getting this stuff real fast man! Anything to do with our bluffing is Level Three, anything to do with the opponents bluffs is Level Four. Level Five is all about the villain playing back against our bluffs.

I really want u to get this last bit yourselves Rob/everyone... A true master would never play back against the opponents bluffs. Playing back against the opponents bluffs is not the one answer that rules them all!... So what would a master do instead??

Bladesman, I only scanned that triple range merge but I am pretty certain it is a Level Five manoeuvre.

Three_high I actually tried to get sklansky to write this book but he didn't seem to understand the Levels properly. All I wanted to do was write an exploitative playbook but without the theory being laid out first it wouldn't have worked... For a long time now I have been posting with the aim of teaching and I have received less than nothing from the majority of you guys. Most of you hound me with abuse because you don't understand what I say. You send me messages like the one you just did. I mean, nobody else has ever taught this stuff, n your not happy with me??? If I had been playing instead of posting I'd have made hundreds of thousands with my winrate. Is it really so bad that I might make a few sales from these forums?? Give me a break man. All I am doing is promoting exploitative Poker which makes more money for all us.

This thread has been about exploit. I made this thread to show you that Sklanskys understanding of exploitative theory is fundamentally wrong. That this entire generation of poker players have got exploitative theory wrong! It is not only the masters that play at Level Four. Everyone can play back against the opponents bluffs. Every single one of you is capable of Level Four!!

This is a big deal. It changes everything in regards to exploitative Poker. It changes everything about Poker. It means that a beginner is capable of beating what is currently recognised as an 'unworldly' level of exploitative skill. I also showed that experienced players who are genuinely skilled, like 'Lego', struggle to recognise high level exploitative theory which shows the massive advantage that beginners have over the Regs!! I also thought this thread would be quite fun lol. And Rob didn't let me down. "Drop the mic" haha. Dude cracks me up.

These Levels do emerge as Level Infinity which is GTO. But the profit in poker lies in the gap between Level Infinity and Level One. If everyone understood the information in this one thread the profit margin in Poker would be huge. But unfortunately, most regs violently reject this information. They violently reject it because they already know it! This information is already in their heads!! These exploitative Levels make up the natural strategic thought process used by all humans. We all know how to exploit. It's just that many of us don't realise it.

I mostly play live, so exploitative play is very much the norm. I don't see what the mystery is to your question though. A level 3 player cannot out "xxxxx" a level 4 player over the long haul. On any given hand, a level 0 could win against the very best player in the world. If you are focused on bluffs for the discussion, then a level 3 player is not going to out bluff or call a level 4's bluff. They cannot bluff outside of a perceived range that the level 4 player has narrowed them down on.

It is either a very generic answer or one of many correct answers. Not saying it in a sarcastic or negative way, I just don't see the mystery to it. Each level is a perceived step ahead in the thought process, so you cannot expect to out think a higher level player.

If you can sell books, great. I don't see what the issue is with trying to market yourself as a writer or coach unless it is against site rules.

Asking us a question with undefined terms is not "information".

I still don't think you understand the triple range merge.

I think you might have missed my point... What I'm saying is that these Levels are more than simply one step down the thought process. If you are not capable of Level Three you would not be able to bluff. If you were not capable of Level Four you would not be able to play back against the opponents bluffs. That is all that there is at those Levels. I'm not forcing this convo towards the villains bluffs. That is all there is at Level Four! Level Four is all about the villains bluffs!! (Or his deception, if you want to be more accurate).

So the mystery comes from the fact that this really simple information was not even known by the best theorists of yesterday... Is it not mysterious that Sklansky hadn't realised the answer to a question which even a beginner would be able to work out? Is it not mysterious that the person who wrote the article I linked seemed to think that only a God could play back against the opponents deception? Does it not seem profound that players with years of experience like Lego were not able to answer??

I think it is more than a little profound. I think it will change everything. And, to be fair, with all arrogance aside, I have spent years pushing through this logic and have recieved nothing but contempt in return, almost everyone at this site has vehemently opposed everything I say, and so I do think I deserve at least some respect. And hopefully an income too! I didn't start this to make money. I started teaching on these forums all those years ago because I genuinely felt bad for beginners and I wanted to help them. And even I am surprised by how efficiently I am able to do that now.

I don't think you understand much mate.

It was a pretty straight forward question... The only kind of move we can make at Level Four is one that 'plays back' against the opponents bluffs. Kinda... There is a better answer??

This is why you need to define your terms and tell us what you're talking about instead of hiding behind vague questions as though its sharing knowledge.

Of course I can play back against an opponent's bluffs without thinking on whatever "level four" is. Call/fold/raise.

No you can't mate... if the opponent was unaware of what you think he's doing, he wouldn't be able to deceive you. If you were not aware of that, you would not be able to see how he is deceiving you... The reason it seems possible is because this strategic ability is already built into your subconscious.

If I was to define the type of play we can make at Level Four, I would have answered the question myself...

Nope, the only options in poker are: check, bet, fold, call, raise. You don't need to be consciously aware to make these options. That's why I've asked you to define what you mean by a "move" because it's clear that you mean something more than just legal actions.

BTW, the triple range merge is a long standing joke in that the term is nonsense. That's why it amused me so much that you were taking it seriously and pretending to have valid reasons for rejecting it.

Nice... You didn't feel like answering the question properly? Thought it was better to redicule me with some complicated nonsense??... It did look like Level Five at first glance. It was not the correct answer. To anyone who is smart, all you have done is re-affirm what I have been saying here.

For the record. I have also come to realise that we would not know whether to call or fold if we we're unaware of Level Two. And we would not be able to bet or raise if we were incapable of Level Three... The human strategic ability which enables us to play games is an advanced skill that evolution spent millions of years championing. I have realised that the way we naturally strategise in games is by using the exploitative Levels. That is important. Especially when you start thinking about why it is that everyone didn't know it already, or better still, why it is that so many people put so much effort into discrediting this logic.

So as to Level 3 there's no difference wether the opponent puts me exactly on AK, flush draw or balanced range of hands?

i remember there was the thread about triple range merge. Some guy said it and then a little hype happened

I enjoyed the thread. I got to use words like "obtuse" and drop a mic. 10/10



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Awesome cheers mate! But you haven't finished it yet lol. You have done exceedingly well, however, the answer that is missing is the real answer that I was after. The perfect answer. The masters answer. If you can crack that I will truely be impressed! N you are nearly there!! I'd feel bad if someone else got it first.

A master would never play back against the opponents bluffs. He would do something else at Level Four. Something else which is almost exactly the same, but is superior in every way. What is it?

A master would always be holding the proper mix of value and air, and have played the entire hand the exact same way with all his holdings. A master would simply win every time he held air and the opponent did not bluff. A master has already finished the hand once he sees the flop. A master knows that cards that are not turned over do not exist. A master is free from the cage that is level three.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Haha, but what would he use Level Four to do!!? He would still use Level Three, he wouldn't transcend it. He would still bluff. The higher Levels do not negate the lower levels for us, they enhance them.

And, as u mentioned it, he would never balance! Not unless he faced either a God or a GTO player.

Well... If you were not capable of Four you wouldn't be able to comprehend the opponents bluffs. If you were not capable of Level Five you wouldn't be able to comprehend the opponent taking into consideration your bluffs. And so without Level Five, which is the last of the relevant Levels, you would not be able to comprehend the villain putting you on a balanced range. However...

Since GTO came along the definition of a bluff has changed slightly and this creates an insane amount of confusion... In all other games a bluff is defined as an attempt to deceive the opponent into thinking that you are doing something which you are not. This is the definition that I work from. And so if you are finding this stuff difficult it will probably be beneficial to replace my word 'bluff', with 'deception'.

At Level Three we learn how to deceive our opponent. Etc etc.

Yeah, ya got me. I played the gto card, hoping to slip that by ya.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, level four is "tell the truth" whenever opponent should think you are lying. That is pretty simple, and requires level 4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And this is why so many highly skilled players bust out to reasonable amateurs, especially in a tournament. If your opponent is soundly based in lvl 3 (vast majority of players) then you have no reason to go lvl 4 unless you have a non-actionable lvl 3 decision.

Yeah, until players learn to "lie" at lvl three, then no one can actually tell the truth. Lvls 0-2 all communication is neutral, no one knows how to lie, they just try to hold the best hand at showdown.
Lvl 3 brings deception, and the response is to exploit failed deception. But once deception is in the rules, so to speak, you do not know how to tell the real truth. Lvl 3 players can only guess what a true statement should be, since they learned to lie before they learned to tell the truth.

Thus, the answer is value bet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Woah what you said then about Level Two is perfect! Gave me as little shiver lol!! Level Two is all about holding the best hand at showdown.

At that Level all our hands are played purely for value, Level Three is when we make the first split in our actual range and start adding bluffs. Or, cards that the opponent won't expect.

That example you gave was Level Five though... If our opponent is thinking about our lies then he is Level Four. If we are taking this into consideration when making a play, perhaps by actually playing strength when he thinks we're bluffing, then we are making a Level Five play.

But knowing the true value of your hand versus range is lvl 4. What am I missing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, GTO would be to allow a lvl 3 opponent to deceive themselves, while we don't even need to know the truth. But to exploit level 3, we must know the truth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahhh. Level four is to know the real truth versus opponents perception of truth, and exploit this.

IE, yes i have it, again, but you must call all in to find out.

Sigh, i skipped lvl 4 again...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk