>>12889091>you shouldn't really be bluffing if you're asking other people for advice, you are too new.I know for a fact playing too tight is a mistake, other players begin insta folding whenever you value bet too often (unless they have the nuts). I've heard a strong heuristic is the number of times you should bluff needs to coincide with making your opponent indifferent to calling or folding, that way you mathematically max profits in the LR. I'm looking for a more mathematical understanding of this aspect of the game.
>>12889594>The most important decisions BY FAR are the ones earlier in the handFair enough, I see your point. I think what I meant to say was when I should be bluffing (limping or raising) with weaker hands pre-flop. I am convinced knowing when and how to overrepresent the strength of your hand can give you a sizeable statistical edge (if you find the right ratio). That "right ratio" is what I am looking to derive mathematically but nobody seems to have written much about this.
>>12889629>If it's a function of anything, it's a function of both players' probability ranges (the range of possible hands both players could have reached x position with). But since solving game theory states can be complicated, some advice that gets thrown around is to approximate the nash equilibrium by having the correct valuebet/bluff ratio that breaks even, in an effort to simplify the equation.This is it, this is exactly what I am looking for! I am an Econ and Math double undergrad so I don't mind deep-diving into the technical stuff, is there any material you'd recommend for learning how to approximate the nash equilibrium and derive the correct value-bet / bluff ratio?
