A few years ago, Tom Edsall wrote a great Diarist for TNR arguing, based on his years of playing poker in Washington, that Republicans are better players than Democrats:
Republicans are much less risk-averse than Democrats, and taking risks is crucial to poker.
snip
But their latest tactic is so obvious I wonder how it could possibly work. Republicans are warning Democrats that passing health care reform will make them less popular. They are alerting the House that Senators will betray any deal they make. And they are insisting that reconciliation will be a bloody, protracted fight, even signing a letter promising to invoke the "Byrd Rule" to strike out any non-budgetary measures from a reconciliation bill.
Clearly, this is mostly a bluff.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/health-care-reform-poker
True story.
Expected/predicted raise bluffs happen all the time.
Three players are in the pot.
Player A is a solid rational Player. Player C is a very loose player who raises frequently.
Player B has a hand that he would like to draw to but the pot odds are marginal.
Let’s review the previous action.
Player A has a medium pair that he doesn’t think can beat TWO players but very well can beat one.
Player A bets. Player B called in turn. Player C raised. Players A and B called.
The next card is dealt. It doesn’t help A. But it does marginally improve B’s draw.
Player A suspects that Player C has a draw with one big card but no pair. Player A bets to bluff Player B out.
Player B must now decide if the card helped Player A and/or C. That’s a 2 to 1 negative. He folds, having been bluffed by the expectation that Player C will raise.
What will player C do? Who knows? Remember. The object of A's bluff was to get Player B out of the gamne.
On Twitter I am Lesabre1
No comments:
Post a Comment