Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" - Page 56 - Poker News

Two Plus Two Forums Poker News & Discussion News, Views, and Gossip

Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc"

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 56 of 63

First

6 36 46 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Last

Page 56 of 63

First

6 36 46 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Last

01-14-2013 , 12:56 PM

#1376

AlanBostick

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 11,903

Quote:

Originally Posted by idonot

guys you won't look intelligent talking about concepts you don't understand and who have nothing to do with game theory so please stop derailing the only intelligent thread in NVG

Mods: please move this thread to the Theory forum where it belongs.

Quote

01-14-2013 , 01:04 PM

#1377

Cangurino

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 13,476

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanBostick

Mods: please move this thread to the Theory forum where it belongs.

I'd agree, but I think the thread has pretty much run its course.

Quote

01-14-2013 , 05:51 PM

#1378

avoidthe9to5

[x] 9to5 avoided

Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,662

agree, seems dead content wise

Quote

01-14-2013 , 06:08 PM

#1379

roxyhype

banned

Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 37

When shoving pot oop the player calling in position needs to call 33% of the time not 50%

Quote

01-14-2013 , 09:45 PM

#1380

FrankShank

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 679

Your thinking about pot odds.

The calling 50% is to make villain indifferent to bluffing.

Quote

01-19-2013 , 09:02 PM

#1381

NMcNasty

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,990

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatwonder

this might be a dumb question but:

Hypothetically, let's say we get to the river OOP vs. a GTO bot. The pot is 500bbs, and stacks are 2000bbs behind. Should the GTO's folding/calling/raising ranges change AT ALL when facing a 498bb bet vs. a 499bb bet? And if not, then isn't betting 498 with bluffs and 499 with value hands exploiting that strategy? (And if so, can someone please provide a specific example of how the GTO's range would change?)

I dunno about your particular example, but in some cases there will be plays that a GTO bot will never make. For example with 100000 BB stack sizes the bot won't ever open shove preflop. However, presumably it would still be programmed to encounter non-GTO strategies, in which case there may be thresholds over which strategies don't change according to bet sizes. A GTO strategy will be the same against a 100000 BB shove as it is to a 100001 BB shove preflop (it always folds anything but AA).

Quote

01-21-2013 , 11:32 AM

#1382

Extreme Ways

adept

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 883

What happened with the Durrrr bet ?

Quote

01-21-2013 , 11:59 AM

#1383

Daft as a brush

journeyman

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 309

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extreme Ways

What happened with the Durrrr bet ?

He didn't

Quote

01-21-2013 , 01:25 PM

#1384

epcfast

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 2,535

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daft as a brush

He didn't

He's lined it up for after the Jungleman match finishes.

Quote

01-21-2013 , 01:30 PM

#1385

BitchiBee

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 24,622

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clever Nickname

The point of this completely ridiculous derail is that the outcome of one flip of a fair coin has no effect on any future flips. You don't need to have "infinite coinflips" or whatever nonsense for this to hold true.

hes just spouting a logical fallcy you can't run out of heads obviously just like you can't run out of words. I can say aquaman 1 trillion times and I'll never run out

Quote

01-21-2013 , 02:46 PM

#1386

BluffingX

grinder

Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 695

Quote:

Originally Posted by BitchiBee

hes just spouting a logical fallcy you can't run out of heads obviously just like you can't run out of words. I can say aquaman 1 trillion times and I'll never run out

Start saying "aquaman" now. I bet any $ amount you will stop at some point.

There is a finite amount of times you can say "aquaman" and the probability of you not saying it tomorrow increases every day.

Quote

01-21-2013 , 04:15 PM

#1387

PairDice

banned

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 334

GTOLOL

Quote

01-21-2013 , 06:23 PM

#1388

Clever Nickname

veteran

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,517

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluffingX

I have a coin that I will flip exactly two times and then destroy. The first flip is heads. Is the next flip now more likely to be tails because this coin will never be flipped again?

The answer is no, because

Spoiler:

Quote

01-21-2013 , 08:58 PM

#1389

joeschmoe

veteran

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 3,130

If I flip a coin, many various factors affect the flip.
Is the coin heads or tails-up at the beginning? Air humidity, the exact height it reaches, how fast it spins in the air, the path through the air, the surface it lands on, etc.

If a coin is flipped exactly the same way every time, it seems very likely to repeat the same outcome.
So, to assume randomness in the outcome of a coin flip, we must first introduce randomness. WE have to change something about how it is flipped. The coin itself has no randomness.

Quote

01-21-2013 , 09:15 PM

#1390

Clever Nickname

veteran

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,517

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeschmoe

I think we're getting really sidetracked from game theory here. When people say "flip a fair coin" what they mean is that, given the imprecision with which a human flips a coin, coupled with variations in the environment, the coin has an equal chance of coming up heads or tails when flipped, regardless of whether heads or tails was facing up when it was flipped. Randomness is derived from the fact that humans are not perfectly tuned coin-flipping robots operating in controlled environments.

Quote

01-21-2013 , 09:33 PM

#1391

joeschmoe

veteran

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 3,130

When people say "flip a fair coin" what they mean is they assume some randomness is introduced into the flips.

Humans are imprecise. Imprecision can work both ways. There's a chance no randomness will be introduced, and the results of our flips are not as random as we believe.

An exact amount of randomness must be introduced into the coin flips to force the outcome to be 50/50. If we introduce less randomness by, for instance, accidentally repeating the environment of a previous flip, the outcome will not be random.

Question.. Is human influence a completely random thing?

Quote

01-21-2013 , 10:23 PM

#1392

Clever Nickname

veteran

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,517

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeschmoe

Before we go further down this line, I have to ask, does it have any bearing on game theory as it applies to poker? Because if not you probably want to repost your question into SMP.

Quote

01-21-2013 , 10:44 PM

#1393

AlanBostick

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 11,903

Frequentists in this thread. How big a derail would it be for a bunch of Bayesians to mock them?

Quote

01-21-2013 , 11:01 PM

#1394

Rei Ayanami

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 11,685

Quote

01-21-2013 , 11:54 PM

#1395

joeschmoe

veteran

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 3,130

I conclude that at some time in the life of the universe, there is a good chance the environment of at least one coin flip will be identical to a previous flip, an "extra" head or tail will turn up, and therefore the expected outcome of all coin flips is not necessarily 50/50.

We now return to the GTO strategy stuff..

Quote

01-22-2013 , 12:06 AM

#1396

themarielpounds

newbie

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 15

yup

Quote

01-22-2013 , 04:16 AM

#1397

ike

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 5,635

Quote

01-22-2013 , 05:03 AM

#1398

Clever Nickname

veteran

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,517

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeschmoe

This "duplicate" environment could be for either a head or a tail though, and so the expectation of heads or tails is still 50/50. This is a pointless tangent anyway, because if we're talking about a metaphorical coin as mathematicians do, then it's 50/50 by assumption, and if we're talking about a physical coin, no coin is always going to be exactly 50/50 simply due to quantum fluctuations in its atomic structure every so slightly changing the weight distribution.

Quote

01-22-2013 , 05:39 AM

#1399

BluffingX

grinder

Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 695

Quote

01-22-2013 , 06:44 AM

#1400

FearToxin90

grinder

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 577

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clever Nickname

Lol this tilts me hard.

1. You could just say that the fact that there is a heads and a tails marked on a coin means it is asymetric and not 50 50.

2. A coin is a gigantic object so quantum fluctuations are never going to effect the outcome of a coin flip.

3. Even if it did, this would make the coin truly random and not just random b3cause we dont know enough about initial conditions.

Quote

Page 56 of 63

First

6 36 46 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 56 of 63

First

6 36 46 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Last