one question in "Modern Poker Theory"
in "Modern Poker Theory", part2, 04 " The Theory of Preflop Play", author write "Given the card removal effects in Hold’em you can expect to see more hands having mixed strategies."
I don't understand why "card removal effects" will lead "more hands having mixed strategies"?
4 Replies
The purpose of a mixed strategy is to reduce exploitability. Many pure strategies are ruled out of GTO because they create exploitable blocker weaknesses.
For example, if you bluff-catch one type of hand but not another type of hand then the clairvoyant opponent knows exactly how to exploit you when choosing bluffs.
Explored this more today. Turns out there's a "blocker-less" solver out there, so we can compare how strategies look with and without blocker effects.
While it's true that blockers introduce combo-level complexity (different suits of the same hand doing different things), blockers also tend to reduce range-level complexity!
Explored this more today. Turns out there's a "blocker-less" solver out there, so we can compare how strategies look with and without blocker effects.While it's true that blockers introduce combo-level complexity (different suits of the same hand doing different things), blockers also tend to reduce range-level complexity!
Not understanding, it sounds like you’re saying blockers make it easier to construct ranges, sounds counter-intuitive. I would think you could find more pure strategies without blockers. Do we not prefer pure strategies as in easier to implement?
What do you predict the difference will be without considering the combos? Will this remove the basic strength of the solver in the first place?
Without considering the combos? Not sure I understand your question. If you read the rest of that tweet thread I explain further.
These tools are free by the way. You can run sims and compare yourself, if so inclined.
