Quote:
Originally Posted by lagdonk
Callisto,
Not to dwell too long on the topic of range balancing given more entertaining questions, but when you say it's a ridiculous concept, do you mean that ranges should be continually customized to precisely suit individual villains and current 'game states' -- and not to any degree be constructed in pursuit of some hypothetical game theory optimum? Or am I somewhat missing the gist of your point on this?
I'm also unsure how you're intending the phrase "you will never be in that spot again." Surely there are standard types of spots that recur pretty often in a short span against the same villain. Are you just emphasizing the fact that gameflow and match-context will necessarily be ever-altering and non-identical from one moment to the next? Like if I raise pf and cbet range A on flop texture type B with effective stack C on hand 5 and on hand 9, where A, B, and C remain identical in both instances, you'd still consider that hand 5 and 9 are two uniquely different spots, because their exact match circumstances and historical position are (slightly) different?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emus
I like the way you entered this thread and dusted alot of meh-comments and 'serious questions' of you.
Do you want to expand thoughts a little more on this one? Maybe with an example. I am not sure I completely understand you.
Lagdonk, you got the gist.
The standard type of spots, imo, simply cannot be looked at mathematically like that. Like there are SO many situational factors that go into "repetitive situations." Take, for example, something as elementary as the situation you described occurirng for the second time. The fact that it is the second time is actually a huge part of what you should be doing. I would consider that hand 5 and 9 are two uniquely different spots for that and other reasons. For example, proximity to blind increases should shift things, opponent's awareness of how much you have been bluffing/ what they have seen of your showdowns/what level of comfortability they have vs you in the match is going to change their perception of your repeated play. The minutia of the "ever-altering game context" is huge and your awareness of the situational factors and momentum will for sure dictate that no two spots will ever be the same. In fact, for me personally, it is these situational factors that allowed me to make and inhabit nonstandard plays that i consider a huge part of my edge. Now, obviously the recognition of "spots" is what allows experience to advance capability. My point is not that utilizing awareness of how to play in similar recurring situations is not important, rather that allowing the situational factors to come into play rather than simply saying "this is spot a i should play it in way b" is a crucial decision-making factor as far as evaluating optimal play.
As far as range balance goes, basically I think what I said i think. The concept is there in order to create the idea to your opponent that you could have a value hand as easily as air in a specific situation. What people fail to realize is the important part about this is that your opponent THINKS this, not that you do this to adhere to some idea of achieving game-theory equilibrium in a game. Sacrificing optimal play in order to do this may very well "balance" you but cost you equity in the long run.
Last edited by Callisto 5; 08-14-2010 at 04:33 AM.