I'm a bit confused by the section titled "What's This Game Worth?" on page 60.

The scenario is for the AKQ game where we are asked what to bet if we can bet anywhere from $1 to $1000.

He sets the scenario back to the original game for analysis, but under the original game it was established the frequency to bet the Q, after K checked, was 1/4. But now I'm looking at 1/3 Q betting frequency in the section analysis which is applicable for a pot sized bet of $2, which isn't allowed in the original game.

Can anyone tell me why the AQ player is betting 1/3 of the time as a bluff in the analysis? It's important since the analysis continues and is based on this frequency.

Cheers

Brokos calls the out of position player Opal, and the in position player Ivan. I'll also use those names. Ivan's goal is to bet his Q as a bluff at such a frequency that Opal is indifferent to calling with her K. In the Clairvoyance Game, after Opal checks, Ivan has the opportunity to bet $1 in the $2 pot. Opal is thus being laid 3 to 1 pot odds. When Ivan bets his Q 1/3rd of the time, if Opal calls she's going to win $3 1/4th of the time and lose $1 3/4th of the time. He will thus win $0 on average and is therefore indifferent between calling or folding.

Hi, i may guess that you didn't read this book.
I am sure you will find the answer there because it's really essential. And in my opinion it's the best book to learn optimal poker game strategies.

I´m surprised the author himself hasn´t answered. It´s not as if he´s tied up with something else at the moment.

It could be that he doesn't even know that this thread exists.

I really enjoyed Brokos work in his Thinking Poker Diaries series so am planning to pick this up.

That's probably it. Not like being 2nd in chips in the Main would have anything to do with it .........

he is currently in the most important tourney of the year with a big stack, im sure he will get around to it but geeze just settle down

lol this

The problem with irony is that it often goes over people´s heads.

Hi, this is Andrew Brokos, author of Play Optimal Poker. As thecantonkid predicted (don't worry, brother, the sarcasm wasn't lost on me!), I've been busy with WSOP. I kept an eye on this forum for the first few weeks after the book came out but haven't been monitoring as closely since.

If I'm understanding your question correctly, Jagger, I think there are two misunderstandings:

1. The "What's This Game Worth?" section starting on page 60 solves for the EV of a game where Ivan bets $1 into a $2 pot. There's no change to the bet size.

2. The fractions 1/4 and 1/3 are both relevant, it just depends what you're describing. When Ivan bets, 1/4 of his bets are bluffs and 3/4 of them are value bets. Another way of expressing that is that he has a 3:1 ratio of value bets to bluffs. In order to achieve that ratio, he bluffs 1/3 of the time that he has a Q. So, he bluffs 1/3 of the time that he has a Q so that 1/4 of his total betting range consists of bluffs.

Hope that helped! Happy to answer other questions if anyone has them.

Hi Andrew, Congrats on yet another deep run in the Main. How much has your approach to the game changed since your 3 mega deep runs?

Tremendously. I barely thought about game theory in 2011. Barely knew what it was in 2008.

Thanks!

That answer is enough to make me buy the book, even though at the small stakes turbo tourneys I play online, I doubt if I will be changing my play much.
Acquiring new knowledge is never a bad thing.

Quick Review:
Brokos does a great job using toy games to introduce us to Game Theory
strategy as it relates to poker. When we talk about books that teach us
how to think about poker, this one truly does.
I honestly think that this will be the new “go to” book for new players as well as
Most of us rec players trying to get to a higher level.
I did find myself wanting a few more examples regarding Blockers, but other than that ,excellent job of communicating the concepts.
It’s really an amazing time to learn with the advent of the solvers out there, and
after seeing what Pio Solver can do , it seems that anyone wanting to get deep with this absolutely can.
Nice job Mr Brokos