Introduction

As we continue throguh this book, you'll start to notice a few general trends when approaching problems from a theoretical perspective.

우리가 이책을 계속 읽는동안, 당신은 이론적인 관점으로부터 문제들을 접근할 때 몇 가지 일반적인 트렌드를 발견하기 시작할 것 입니다.

First, we'll not always be able to approach a solution using math and theory alone, and such problems require a trial and error approach.

먼저, (포커의) 해답이 수학적 계산과 이론이 분리되어 접근 할 수 없다는 것을 알게 될 것이고, 이러한 문제들은 시행착오적 접근이 요구 된다.

Specifically, a powerful computer could theoretically solve the game of poker and develop an optimal strategy through such an approach, but such a solution would require nearly a countless amount of simulations.

다시 말해, 고성능 컴퓨터로 포커 게임을 이론적으로 풀 수 있고, 이로부터 최상의 접근법을 개발해내겠지만, 이러한 해답들은 무수히 많은 양의 시뮬레이션을 요구한다.

On the other hand, the game of checkers was solved in 2007 using this method, and the solution would require a player to memorize 5*(10^20) possible positions to ensure he always plays perfectly.

반면에 체스 게임은 2007년에 이런 방법을 통하여, 플레이어가 5*(10^20)의 경우의 수를 기억하고 있다면, 항상 플레이어가 이길 수 있게 되었다.

But poker is much more complex because not all the information is available to both players.

하지만 포커는 양 플레이어에게 모든 정보가 제공 되어 있지 않기 때문에, 더 복잡하다.

So while it's possible for the game of poker to eventually be solved, it's unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Second, we should note that the best way to approach a problem may often seem backwards or cause us to pause for a while and come back later when we have more information.

두번째로,

For instance, suppose on the flop we want to figure out what our bluffing to value raising ratio should be.

예를들어

To accomplish this, we must first know how often we're going to bet the river with a balanced range, what bet sizing should be used on the turn and river, and how position effects our range.

이를 위해, 우리가 얼마나 자주 밸런싱된 레인지로 리버에 벳해야 하는지 알아야 하며, 턴과 리버에서

Notice that this is a large amount of information, and obviously it would be quite difficult to know where to start if a new player asked us "Can you explain how to balance a value to bluff raising ratio on the flop and where the numbers come from?"

We will approach many problems like this, and it's important to remember to remain patient and know these questions will eventually be answered as we discuss more concepts.

우리는 다양한 문제들을 이와같은 방법으로 접근할 것이고,

Your confusion will come to an end as we cover more topics and have more "ah-hah" moments when multiple concepts come together and the math and logic behind theoretically sound poker begins to make more sense.

Last, and perhaps most important, notice that while we usually can't solve for the exact solution, theory can be used to tell us when something is not optimal.

This is especially important for this current section of the book.

When we know something must be wrong with our ragnes or bet sizing, we can focus our attention to that specific area of our game and try to find a strategy which has no glaring theoretical errors.

For instance, we'll quickly see that it likely doesn't make sense for every position to 3-bet QQ+/AK against a pot-sized under-the-gun (UTG) open. If every player 3-bets these hands for value and balances the range with the proper amount of bluffs, then the UTG player will be 3-bet too much and will stop opening with those hands he plans on folding to a 3-bet.

So while this doesn't tell us exactly what the optimal ranges are for defending against an UTG open, it still provides a useful starting point for designing ranges.

Our general approach to preflop play will be to start with analyzing the basic ranges most winning players currently use and then modify them as we see how they can be exploited.

Once we're using ranges and bet sizings that give our opponents no clear way to exploit us, our strategy will probably be closer to game theoretical optimal than it originally was.

This will make approaching preflop play much easier than starting out completely from scratch which would at best be difficult and at worst close to impossible.