The birth of a strategy

Adam WheelerAdam Wheeler Red Chipper Posts: 2,647 ✭✭✭✭
edited January 2017 in General Concepts
The more and more we see players speaking about strategy. We can clearly understand now that you got to be prepared when entering the ring these days. But prepared in a structural way. I would be very interested to be directed toward strategy content. How to develop a strategy. It could be outside the poker realm as long as it could be applied later into it. Anything, video, books, podcast etc.
Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • YoshYosh Red Chipper Posts: 579 ✭✭✭
    Interesting. You might be best served by explicitly creating your own.
  • LukaLuka Red Chipper Posts: 216 ✭✭✭
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,979 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Strategy comes out of having a philosophy of the game, because now you can envision an End, and so the Means to get there.
  • Adam WheelerAdam Wheeler Red Chipper Posts: 2,647 ✭✭✭✭
    @persuadeo

    So your saying that before even contemplating to build a strategy we should set a goal we want to optain that will be the spin of our strategy.
  • LukaLuka Red Chipper Posts: 216 ✭✭✭
    @persuadeo will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong :) It seems as though having a deep understanding of the game, the interplay, etc... and out of that formulating how you want to approach the game is your starting point. Once you have that, the nuts and bolts of things will fall into place because you'll have a clear vision of what you are trying to accomplish and it's now just a matter of implementing the mechanics to accomplish your approach. Many seem to gravitate to the nuts and bolts first, and call that a strategy when it's just bare mechanics, without delving down the rabbit hole.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,979 ✭✭✭✭✭
    yes, that is what I am saying Luka. There are a lot of auto mechanics around these parts but few are building cars.

    I am not entirely sure what you are saying, Adam, ton choix de mots est confus.
  • YoshYosh Red Chipper Posts: 579 ✭✭✭
    The rabbit hole doesn't have many maps.
  • thepokermonkthepokermonk Red Chipper Posts: 320 ✭✭✭


    persuadeo wrote: »
    yes, that is what I am saying Luka. There are a lot of auto mechanics around these parts but few are building cars.

    Oh my god. I love this line so much.
  • NinjahNinjah Red Chipper Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭✭
    Adam I started building my own but I don't have a lot of free time so I'm not far in....but I can tell you that it is a lot of work to build your own. However, it'll also allow you to find areas of your game where you may lack enough understanding to have a true strategy.
  • The MuleThe Mule Red Chipper Posts: 779 ✭✭✭
    There was another thread a while back on the topic of What is a Strategy. Pretty sure @imperator was heavily involved, along with all the usual suspects...

    I'll ask the same question to @Ninjah and @Adam Wheeler that I did there -
    What exactly does a strategy look like ? What are the elements of the strategy you are developing ?

  • Adam WheelerAdam Wheeler Red Chipper Posts: 2,647 ✭✭✭✭
    @colldav

    In fact none because I feel I don't fully grasp what it take to develop a solide strategy and it is why i started the thread.
  • NinjahNinjah Red Chipper Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭✭
    colldav wrote: »
    There was another thread a while back on the topic of What is a Strategy. Pretty sure @imperator was heavily involved, along with all the usual suspects...

    I'll ask the same question to @Ninjah and @Adam Wheeler that I did there -
    What exactly does a strategy look like ? What are the elements of the strategy you are developing ?

    To me it's determining how you proceed against different player types on different board textures with or without position and with or without initiative on each street. Identifying player types leads to discovering how you can exploit them in different ways by developing a plan based on board runouts. It also includes developing a strategy that can destroy the most common players in your pool.
  • Renato_LRenato_L Red Chipper Posts: 190
    persuadeo wrote: »
    There are a lot of auto mechanics around these parts but few are building cars.

    There are a lot of drawers and painters but few artists?...
  • YoshYosh Red Chipper Posts: 579 ✭✭✭
    More like a lot of tracers. I really like @persuadeo's distinction. Philosophy comes first. Strategy is the implementation of philosophy. If you think about it, you can discern many common player type's core philosophies. They are generalized with acronyms all over the forums. So, you have the choice of selecting from a preconceived strategy, or you can choose the path less traveled and roll your own.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    While agreeing with the posts above, I point to this article, for me, as the definitive starting point in creating and understanding a strategy:

    http://redchippoker.com/where-does-poker-money-come-from/

    Thank you, @Ed Miller!
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    As it were, I literally JUST began reading Seidman's "Easy Game, Volume 1". His first chapter lays this idea out very clearly, as well.
  • JoskroketJoskroket Red Chipper Posts: 34 ✭✭
    If you think about it, there is actually only one strategy possible and that is playing GTO. A strategy in the meaning of having a clear view of what to do in a certain spot when it arises. English is not my native language so i hope i'm making any sense here. GTO lays down perfectly for you what to do, when to do it and how to do it. It doesn't matter what cards your opponent has. That's a strategy.
    On the other hand, having an arsenal of weapons at your disposal when dealing with the average opponents is from a exploitative perspective way better for your winrate, but that means that you can't have a fixed strategy. You may want to use a different weapon for sometimes the exact same spot depending on your opponent.
    So imho it's more important to know what weapons we can use then trying to figure out how to react in standard situations.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    I completely disagree.

    1) GTO is indefinite and we are no where near solving the game. Human Poker Players cannot possibly compute all the mixes in frequency the solvers are suggesting. And a computer playing has not solved the game either.

    2) Deep Stack No Limit Cash Games are no where near being solved. Because once you increase the Big Blind Depth the game tree once again becomes too large.

    So in other words, it would be understable to have a basis in GTO, however it is impossible to have it as a strategy because GTO as it stands today is incomplete. And even if at one point a super computer solved the game, humans cannot compute all the frequencies.
  • JoskroketJoskroket Red Chipper Posts: 34 ✭✭
    never said that GTO was easy ;)
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    Right but it's impossible is my rebuttal.

    In other words, by picking GTO as a strategy we are picking a strategy that we cannot humanly implement, and one that is also not complete even by super computers.

    So we you say there is a clear cut answer for every decision that is not true. Even within the solvers there is always a mix of frequencies with different hands.
  • JoskroketJoskroket Red Chipper Posts: 34 ✭✭
    Yes, but you agree that in theory, there is a perfect equilibrium answer to any situation? That is what I would call a strategy. My point that i wanted to make was more that there can not be a strategy for playing poker. You always need to adapt depending on who you are facing. There are a a lot of nice sounding marketing slogans making us believe there is some mistery magical hidden strategy to beat everyone at poker, but there is not. Adaption and having an arsenal of moves at your disposal is imo the only way to go.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    Adjustments is the only way to win.

    I completely agree with that.
  • The MuleThe Mule Red Chipper Posts: 779 ✭✭✭
    This is why I was asking @Ninjah and @Adam Wheeler what were the actual elements of their strategies. It's not clear to me what people are talking about when they talk about having a strategy. For me, I have a framework for making decisions. This includes exploitative adjustments. I consider this to be my strategy, rightly or wrongly.

    I suspect the concept of "GTO" is poorly understood by a large proportion of poker players. Furthermore I think it's pretty irrelevant. To say:

    "GTO is indefinite and we are no where near solving the game. Human Poker Players cannot possibly compute all the mixes in frequency the solvers are suggesting. And a computer playing has not solved the game either."

    really misses the point in my opinion.

    It's irrelevant whether humans or even computers can implement a perfectly optimal strategy. The much more important point is that even in the microstakes players are using Game Theory concepts, such as balance (and I'm sure this idea was around long before GTO became flavour of the month in poker) and making your opponent indifferent to certain actions. Even if the implementation is not perfect (or "optimal"), a player can still have a strategy based around Game Theory ideas.
  • YoshYosh Red Chipper Posts: 579 ✭✭✭
    ...and another promising thread is eaten by "GTO".
  • Adam WheelerAdam Wheeler Red Chipper Posts: 2,647 ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2017
    Joskroket wrote: »
    My point that i wanted to make was more that there can not be a strategy for playing poker.

    I really disagree with thats statement.

    When you sit at a poker table you have aspirations and goals. Than realizing them help you measure the implementation progress of that particular strategy.

    As soon as you decide to sit at 1/2 or 2/5 or 5/10 etc. You are making a strategy based decision since a sound strategy should include a chosen field where we will play.

    Once we are sit, we now have to chose how we will win vs. the field.

    And now chose what capabilities are necessary to build and maintain to win in our chosen manner?

    All this is already a strategy.

    Recognizing if the field is exploitable or not is a skill not a strategy. Deciding to play exploitatively is now a decision that is part of a strategy.
  • JoskroketJoskroket Red Chipper Posts: 34 ✭✭
    Hard for me to get into a linguistic discussion about what strategy exactly is. Unless we do it in Dutch ;). Don't see the usefullness neither to be honest. Only point I wanted to make is that adjusting to opponents is the bread and butter of winning in poker as far as i'm concerned. But then again, you could also call that a strategy.
  • SullySully Red Chipper Posts: 772 ✭✭✭
    IMO nobody has actually talked about strategy yet. These are all tactics, including GTO

    Tactics are chosen to implement strategies.

    Winning money is a goal, not a strategy. TAG, LAG, ranges, bet sizing are all examples of tactics, not strategies.

    What then is a your poker strategy? Interesting question and of ultimate importance
  • Adam WheelerAdam Wheeler Red Chipper Posts: 2,647 ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2017
    sullyooo wrote: »
    Winning money is a goal, not a strategy. TAG, LAG, ranges, bet sizing are all examples of tactics, not strategies.

    Which is the very, really foundation of a strategy. If you dont have goal you dont have a strategy.
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Joskroket wrote: »
    GTO lays down perfectly for you what to do, when to do it and how to do it.

    I think that's a little like saying quantum physics explains everything at the subatomic level. That's great. Unfortunately no one actually understands it all or filled in all the holes yet.

    Also, just because table dynamics change in terms of exploits I don't think it means that you can't have other strategies.

  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭✭✭
    So in other words, it would be understable to have a basis in GTO, however it is impossible to have it as a strategy because GTO as it stands today is incomplete. And even if at one point a super computer solved the game, humans cannot compute all the frequencies.

    Sounds a lot like chess discussions, too.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file