3 ms·
>Bluffing still matters, but the best players now depend on math theory This is a silly byline. If anything, the best and most mathematical players bluff more
by tedsanders 13y ago
>Bluffing still matters, but the best players now depend on math theory
This is a silly byline. If anything, the best and most mathematical players bluff more than the older generation of typically more conservative players. Bluffing and math are NOT opposed principles.
- TomGullen 13y agoBluffing is one facet (often romantasised and therefore sometimes over emphasised) of a good mathematical strategy. Like you say they are not mutually exclusive of one a other.
- tsotha 13y agoIndeed. There are many situations in which it's mathematically correct to bluff in hold 'em and omaha. Or at least semi-bluff. I remember playing at the toughest game in my area about ten years ago. Two of the best players (both professionals) were heads up. It was kind of a dull hand after the flop - bet, call; bet, call; check, bet, fold. As the cards were being collected the winner said "Let's try something different next time. How about the guy with the hand bets and the guy who's on the draw calls."
- dubfan 13y agoThat's not what byline means. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byline
- foobarbazqux 13y agoThat just makes it an even sillier byline.
- tedsanders 13y agoThanks, I'll correct it. Edit: Oops, too late to edit. Anyway, I should have said subtitle. I think.