Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Game theory example puzzling to me Game theory example puzzling to me

04-15-2011 , 12:16 PM
In the below example, it seems to say B has a +ev call if A has a bluffs frequency of 5% or greater.

I don't really understand how they can extrapolate optimal call frequencies using this formula. I mean I know I'm probably messing this up somewhere but if A is only bluffing 5% of the time, then the other 95% of the time A has air A is not betting. B has no decision to make but to check back when A checks (which they specify B only has a decision when A bets.)

Intuitively speaking, if A only bluffs 1 out of 20 times, shouldn't the pot be laying 20:1 for B's call to be break even? How could B ever have a profitable call getting 5:1?

Game theory example puzzling to me Quote
04-15-2011 , 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteTilt
In the below example, it seems to say B has a +ev call if A has a bluffs frequency of 5% or greater.

I don't really understand how they can extrapolate optimal call frequencies using this formula. I mean I know I'm probably messing this up somewhere but if A is only bluffing 5% of the time, then the other 95% of the time A has air A is not betting.
No, he bluffs 5% of his total hands.
Game theory example puzzling to me Quote
04-15-2011 , 01:32 PM
oh hm let me just make sure I understand properly, so if A bluffs 5% and value bets 20% of his total hands on the river, his betting range on the river will have a frequency of 20% bluff, and 80% value. So as long as he's getting greater than 4:1 B should call the river?
Game theory example puzzling to me Quote
04-15-2011 , 02:22 PM
Yes.
Game theory example puzzling to me Quote
04-15-2011 , 03:16 PM
sorry but wich book?


MOP?

yup i remember nvm
Game theory example puzzling to me Quote

      
m