Quote:
Originally Posted by Rei Ayanami
durrrr and jungleman have made strategy posts using those concepts and similar ones.
Jungleman did a strategy video (free i believe) on the topic of game theory and it's about 25% correct, 50% kind of correct but missing the point, and 25% factually incorrect. I also remember a very highly regarded DC coach also put out a video that covered game theory which largely was incorrect (this was a couple of years back though). I remember a long comments thread where i was pretty much ignored when i pointed out the mistakes until some of the fixed limit coaches came in and backed me up.
Of course they are both excellent players, much better than me theoretically and in practice. Just GT seems less important to their games, even at the high level. I think the majority of mid-stakes+ fixed limit players are fairly well-versed in game theory, have tackled MoP, and a lot of strategy discussion focuses around trying to balance ones range etc. From what i've seen from some at least public discussions, big bet guys are less well versed and/or get by just fine without it.
Of course these are broad generalizations and I think a lot of the top NL guys do a lot of range theory work too.
Software i wrote (shout out to Combonator) is used a lot for study of your own ranges to come up with balanced strategies; I think at least 50% of its pro users are LHE players, which given the 90/10 split in game popularity, is heavily limit-weighted. But I know for sure of some high-stakes NL guys who use it too; mostly HU i think.
As another example, I think if you said "optimal" to a fixed limit player many would assume you meant "game theoretically optimal". Whereas i've heard many NL coaches in vids say "optimal" to mean "most profitable."