Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmaretilt
-Awarding our actual combos slightly more importance, instead of hyper-focusing on range dynamics
Not sure what you mean by actual combos. Do you mean our current hand? How is playing our current hand without the context of the rest of our range or villain's range better than considering those things?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmaretilt
-the opportunity cost of taking marginal chip-ev spots in great cash games that occur infrequently, like ICM for cash
I am not an economist but my understandimg of opportunity cost is simply comparing two options and if you choose option 1 the cost is whatever option 2 was worth (or perhaps the difference between option 1 and option 2 if they are comparable).
So if we look at a spot and it is +EV what are we comparing as our option 2? What opportunity are we missing out on by taking the +EV spot?
As an aside ICM only exists for tournaments because chips in play don't convert directly to money won. In cash games that is not so - chips = $$.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmaretilt
-using all kinds of apps and gadgets to randomize instead of awarding the secondary characteristics of a situation enough value to sway our decision one way or another
This I can actually agree with especially in live play or where we have history.
But humans also tend to over estimate their ability to correctly identify and apply information. It could very well be your secondary characteristics shouldn't be trusted enough to over rule a more logical decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightmaretilt
-the removal effects that our actual combo's have on our/villains 'GTO' distributions, especially when two condensed ranges are facing off and removal effects are more pronounced
I don't know any serious poker player who hasn't at least tangentially heard of or considered card removal.