Does sizes really matter ??
Hi guys, I have a question, how much does the size used really matter? We've gone from solvers that proposed simulations with 20 sizes to solvers that propose dynamic mososizes. in the end, how much does it matter in reality, on a practical level? My question is to what extent can a human squeeze the ev of a solver? Isn't it better to construct a simpler but more effective strategy in reality that can be replied when we are playng so many tables ??
5 Replies
Depends on your opponents. If they are ready to pay 150% pot bet let them. Exploitative strategy will always be the way to go because in general money is being made from poker players human mistakes. The only reason players use solvers is not be exploitable and keep their bets in balance vs other good player that might catch on. But you play against someone who's not really paying attention it doesn't really matter. So i would just adjust
The only reason players use solvers is not be exploitable and keep their bets in balance vs other good player that might catch on.
Half right. The other side of the coin is that a fully locked solver is designed to MAX exploit opponent's tendencies. Even '**** GTO' players are doing this unconsciously.
OP, the answer is yes and no. Poker is all about EV and the answer will always boil down to how much EV am I giving up by simplifying to 1 or 2 bet sizes. Very often that answer is 'negligible', (e.g. most small cbets), happy days, but it is very spot/tree/opponent dependent. (not solving for overbets on turn and rivers is known to dramatically affect EV for example)
Cant't argue with that, it depends very much on your opponents/stakes/stage in tourney.
You can express and consider so many factors with bet sizing that when you for example play in MTT, you don't need anything else, just the perfect bet sizing.
NO MISTAKES + PERFECT BET SIZING = MTT SUCCESS
Now back to studying the graphic posted by rickroll.
