Mindblowing Poker

Originally posted by MyFloXyBabY
And his book will surely have a solution to that right

Step 1 is spreading awareness of the problem. I have a few neat characterisations in the book to try and open people's eyes.

Step 2 as I say, the solutions are very much a work in progress, but if you try to set up the right conditions, poker ecosystem, and give players the tools to understand how they might be able to play a different style and what the key parts to look out for, then that is the best way to stand a chance of doing something. There's no doubt that some small minded 'solver' type pros will shoot down strategies once they have time to look into them. But the concept is that they wont be able to shoot them down in the moment - and then you can repeatedly come up with new ones - effectively dodging the 'solved' game.

Yeah you'll surely manage to convince people to play a suboptimal and everchanging nutjob strategy instead of relying on a sound and simple unexploitable baseline. The game is saved.
People cheating with real time assistance will get crushed so hard, the poor guys. They had it coming though.

Originally posted by MyFloXyBabY
Yeah you'll surely manage to convince people to play a suboptimal and everchanging nutjob strategy instead of relying on a sound and simple unexploitable baseline. The game is saved.
People cheating with real time assistance will get crushed so hard, the poor guys. They had it coming though.

If they want to get rich from poker, they should probably at least try...

Yeah at chess too the solution to computer assisted cheating is to play moves the computer doesn't advice. Works great. Opponents are surprised. That's how pro players earn money, by making the worst moves. Makes sense.

Originally posted by MyFloXyBabY
Yeah at chess too the solution to computer assisted cheating is to play moves the computer doesn't advice. Works great. Opponents are surprised. That's how pro players earn money, by making the worst moves. Makes sense.

I don't know much about beating solved chess but assume this is sarcasm? Nonetheless there is one big difference between poker and chess - being that in chess a position can build up over time, whereas in poker you only have a few streets for this to happen in a hand, and once a hand is over it has no relevance to the next hand (ignoring human factors).

Most likely not, the solution is how sites add elements to game that solver strategies haven't solved.

Originally posted by theprofessorpoker
I don't know much about beating solved chess but assume this is sarcasm? Nonetheless there is one big difference between poker and chess - being that in chess a position can build up over time, whereas in poker you only have a few streets for this to happen in a hand, and once a hand is over it has no relevance to the next hand (ignoring human factors).

That doesn't change anything for my argument. Cheating is cheating. You either have a better strategy than the optimal computer solution to suggest or you don't. I bet you don't. Hence the nonsense of your book.
Of course you can prove me wrong by beating GTO Trainer for instance. Then you'll get my deepest apologies and I'll buy and recommend your book.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Most likely not, the solution is how sites add elements to game that solver strategies haven't solved.

Exactly, so why talking about this (real) problem and say that Yadi has a point ? He doesn't, he just think he can do better than RTA and convince people to do like him instead of going for the easy cheat.

Too bad the delivery is slow. Will post honest opinions to here once I get the book.

Originally posted by MyFloXyBabY

Originally posted by theprofessorpoker
I don't know much about beating solved chess but assume this is sarcasm? Nonetheless there is one big difference between poker and chess - being that in chess a position can build up over time, whereas in poker you only have a few streets for this to happen in a hand, and once a hand is over it has no relevance to the next hand (ignoring human factors).

That doesn't change anything for my argument. Cheating is cheating. You either have a better strategy than the optimal computer solution to suggest or you don't. I bet you don't. Hence the nonsense of your book.
Of course you can prove me wrong by beating GTO Trainer for instance. Then you'll get my deepest apologies and I'll buy and recommend your book.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Most likely not, the solution is how sites add elements to game that solver strategies haven't solved.

Exactly, so why talking about this (real) problem and say that Yadi has a point ? He doesn't, he just think he can do better than RTA and convince people to do like him instead of going for the easy cheat.

Not sure why cheating is relevant. You haven't read the book, or been open minded enough to even attempt to understand what the book is looking to do. This in itself proves the book's underlying point - keyboard warriors in the poker community are too stubborn, set in their ways, and often too arrogant regarding strategy. As such poker will eventually die - and its the people with these viewpoints that will be affected first. Remember when Tom Dwan started playing different and Hellmuth refused to believe that was actually a better way to play poker? See how out-dated Hellmuth appeared? Maybe that's how you feel in a few years if you don't open your mind.

@Kyyberi I'm glad you're going to read the book. It's stocked on prime on most amazon sites so not sure why yours is delayed. I hope you can read with an open mind in order to fully understand the picture I build up. The other reviews from people who have actually read it have been positive so far, and have some poker youtubers currently reading it too.

Okay, the fact that no one, not even Kyyberi, does not address this, tilts me so much... By "poker" do you mean 6-max No Limit Holdem or any Holdem game (even Heads Up) or any game of poker or just the Big Bet games? Tournament or cash?

Poker cannot ever die. Holdem can. Omaha Hi... ehhh, it's solvable but it's soooo gambly and even drunk pros can play bad (or good!). Whatever... There are endless possibilities of creating new poker games. That is the only redeemable quality of Pokerstars - they try new games that are hard or near impossible to solve. And once they are solved... booom! New game! And the other rooms are not too far behind.

Originally posted by nsavov
Okay, the fact that no one, not even Kyyberi, does not address this, tilts me so much... By "poker" do you mean 6-max No Limit Holdem or any Holdem game (even Heads Up) or any game of poker or just the Big Bet games? Tournament or cash?

Poker cannot ever die. Holdem can. Omaha Hi... ehhh, it's solvable but it's soooo gambly and even drunk pros can play bad (or good!). Whatever... There are endless possibilities of creating new poker games. That is the only redeemable quality of Pokerstars - they try new games that are hard or near impossible to solve. And once they are solved... booom! New game! And the other rooms are not too far behind.

Exactly - but where are [insert correct % maybe 90] of players focussing their games and efforts? Where is the majority of literature based on? Maybe these players need advice. The principles of the book absolutely suggest players should play more varied and mixed up formats. I don't understand your argument: don't read book, then shoot down what you suppose it must be about. It's called strawmanism

Yeah, I am kinky like that! Strawmanism all the way! IDK what it is, but it sounds nasty as hell, so it's my cup of tea!

Originally posted by nsavov
Yeah, I am kinky like that! Strawmanism all the way! IDK what it is, but it sounds nasty as hell, so it's my cup of tea!

In case you're actually not familiar, a strawman argument is a fallacious argument in which you misrepresent your opponent's view and then refute the misrepresentation, but not your opponent's actual view.

Which didn't occur here at all, by the way, because your post was at no point referring to the book. It seemed to be referring to the discussion in this thread instead. If anything, the assertion that you're trying to "shoot down" a book you haven't read was a strawman.

Originally posted by Harrier88

Originally posted by nsavov

Which didn't occur here at all, by the way, because your post was at no point referring to the book. It seemed to be referring to the discussion in this thread instead. If anything, the assertion that you're trying to "shoot down" a book you haven't read was a strawman.

The thread is about the book and my responses almost entirely.

Originally posted by Harrier88

Originally posted by nsavov
Yeah, I am kinky like that! Strawmanism all the way! IDK what it is, but it sounds nasty as hell, so it's my cup of tea!

In case you're actually not familiar, a strawman argument is a fallacious argument in which you misrepresent your opponent's view and then refute the misrepresentation, but not your opponent's actual view.

Which didn't occur here at all, by the way, because your post was at no point referring to the book. It seemed to be referring to the discussion in this thread instead. If anything, the assertion that you're trying to "shoot down" a book you haven't read was a strawman.

Oh... I thought it had something to do with triple fisting and was about to buy that naughty book. Thanks for stopping me!

Originally posted by theprofessorpoker
Not sure why cheating is relevant. You haven't read the book, or been open minded enough to even attempt to understand what the book is looking to do. This in itself proves the book's underlying point - keyboard warriors in the poker community are too stubborn, set in their ways, and often too arrogant regarding strategy. As such poker will eventually die - and its the people with these viewpoints that will be affected first. Remember when Tom Dwan started playing different and Hellmuth refused to believe that was actually a better way to play poker? See how out-dated Hellmuth appeared? Maybe that's how you feel in a few years if you don't open your mind.

You pretend that you possess a strategy better than RTA/GTO/computer cheating and whatnot that is the future of poker. Wow. I'm asking you to prove it but I'm the "close-minded" Fish Hellmutish one in that debate. Sure.
I'm still waiting for any argument/proof/explanation of anything. I bet I'll be waiting for a long time again.
Meanwhile you'll just keep trying to sell your shit pretending false claims. Maybe your book can make its reader younger and fitter too in addition to rich and successsful at post-GTO poker ? That way they will attract all the ladies.

Originally posted by MyFloXyBabY
You pretend that you possess a strategy better than RTA/GTO/computer cheating and whatnot that is the future of poker.

Maybe we should focus less on those past escapades with OP's older account (those who are familiar have surely figured it out by now), as fun as they were at times, and more on the book itself. Otherwise, I predict that this thread will soon meet the same fate as all his others before it.

Originally posted by theprofessorpoker

Originally posted by MyFloXyBabY
Yeah you'll surely manage to convince people to play a suboptimal and everchanging nutjob strategy instead of relying on a sound and simple unexploitable baseline. The game is saved.
People cheating with real time assistance will get crushed so hard, the poor guys. They had it coming though.

If they want to get rich from poker, they should probably at least try...

I'm not arguing against past Yadi and his infinite level. But if he doesn't pretend his book is a good anti-GTO way to get rich fast then I don't know to interpret this sentence for instance. And many others in this very thread.
But then again, nothing is yet clear about what this amazing book is supposed to contain. Except things that look a little too much like the very same past Yadi's bullshit about an infinite level of exploitative counter-GTO or whatever you call his delirium.

Ok. Let me address a few points

1. Harrier88 you're now 2/2 for wide-of-the-mark posts - I am absolutely in no way related to anyone who has ever posted in your forums. In fact, I have almost exclusively been a user of 2+2 forum, where I was a well respected poster historically (and have now also gone anonymous for purposes of this book). I'm more than happy for any moderators to look at my IP address and compare to that of any other posters on your forum.

2. My book is in no way purporting to get you rich quickly (just that you WILL NOT get rich if you are playing a solved game), or that I possess a strategy that is "better than GTO". We all know that if a GTO strategy is executed perfectly, then it cannot be beaten - that is the problem. My book is full of praise for GTO poker and encourages its use in the vast majority of scenarios where a better result cannot be achieved by exploitative play. The book helps you identify these spots.

3. What I have then done is sought to build a new approach to poker, which encourages players to avoid scenarios where they are forced to play a GTO player and where they cannot win. To do this - firstly you've got to optimise conditions you are playing, and seeking to play against as many non GTO players as you can. Again, the book helps you do this.

4. When you are playing a higher level, these spots are much much harder to find. In these scenarios, the book builds strategies to push GTO players out of their comfort zone. While a GTO player may have a perfectly crafted strategy for the spots they see on a day-to-day basis, the premise of the book is that actually even then, that strategy is the "tip of the GTO iceberg". To illustrate - even the finest GTO player of today does not know the optimal response to 90% of the POTENTIAL spots they could be in, they just know 99% of the LIKELY spots they will observe. For example, they know how to respond to a rational villain who has the betting lead and cbets 1/3 pot on a board of KQ5 rainbow. But do they know how to respond to an irrational villain who limps pre-flop, donk bets 2x pot on every flop, check every turn, and donk shoves 60% of rivers? (sorry for crude example). In order words, if you can put them in awkward positions, and present them with spots they do not see regularly, they will not be able to execute a GTO response. So while there IS a GTO response to these strategies, they wont be executed very often. This isn't about one specific strategy, which they can then solve an answer to and learn eventually. It's about continually producing new spots so that their game is disrupted, without killing yourself with these ludicrous plays in the process. That's the skill and what I've been able to do, and what I want to share with poker community. If you don't want to listen, then I have no objections.

Sorry if the above was not clear enough before. As I've said I'm happy to take specific questions on how this works.

Originally posted by theprofessorpoker
I am absolutely in no way related to anyone who has ever posted in your forums. In fact, I have almost exclusively been a user of 2+2 forum, where I was a well respected poster historically (and have now also gone anonymous for purposes of this book).

Sure you were...