Jean-Guy
Rock Star
Silver Level
The Fundamental theorem of poker is a concept by David Sklansky introduced in his book, The Theory of Poker (1978.) It is the cornerstone of poker and reads as follows:
Every time you play a hand differently than you would have played it if you could see your opponent’s cards, they gain.
And every time your opponents play their hands differently than how they would have played if they could see your cards, you gain.
So how does this theorem apply to poker in 2024? Here, I will just mention a four simple ramifications:
1. At any given time you should play your hand in the way you suspect your opponent likes the least. If he prefers zig play him zag.
2. At any given table you should adjust your style to what is most effective NOW at THIS table. At a Nit table you charge hard. Amongst a table ruled by a maniac, you play a broader range. Until you 3- and 4-bet him to hell.
3. Unlike Sklansky’s theorem you should not put your foe on a specific hand but on a range.
4. Ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus famously said: No man steps in the same river twice for it is not the same river, and you are not the same man.
This statement reflects the idea that life is in a constant state of flux, and nothing remains static. The same goes for poker and it demands that you are constantly navigating and negotiating which move is the best given the ever-changing context (mostly it would be a fold for even a LAG.)
These Four impacts is just what came into my mind. You may disagree, which I for the sake of progressive arguments prefer. You may have other ramifications. Or you may just don’t care (my hero, the late Lou Reed didn’t care for
sure.)
Every time you play a hand differently than you would have played it if you could see your opponent’s cards, they gain.
And every time your opponents play their hands differently than how they would have played if they could see your cards, you gain.
So how does this theorem apply to poker in 2024? Here, I will just mention a four simple ramifications:
1. At any given time you should play your hand in the way you suspect your opponent likes the least. If he prefers zig play him zag.
2. At any given table you should adjust your style to what is most effective NOW at THIS table. At a Nit table you charge hard. Amongst a table ruled by a maniac, you play a broader range. Until you 3- and 4-bet him to hell.
3. Unlike Sklansky’s theorem you should not put your foe on a specific hand but on a range.
4. Ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus famously said: No man steps in the same river twice for it is not the same river, and you are not the same man.
This statement reflects the idea that life is in a constant state of flux, and nothing remains static. The same goes for poker and it demands that you are constantly navigating and negotiating which move is the best given the ever-changing context (mostly it would be a fold for even a LAG.)
These Four impacts is just what came into my mind. You may disagree, which I for the sake of progressive arguments prefer. You may have other ramifications. Or you may just don’t care (my hero, the late Lou Reed didn’t care for
sure.)
Last edited: