Feel vs Math
people think. Learning the math is a start, and
it's not even necessary. That's the funny part.
Gee, what ever gave you that clue??Quote: Lemieux66I have a suspicion that the nature of this forum sides with math
Somehow I doubt that you could do all the math that the Wizard has done on the WoO.Quote: Lemieux66Math you can learn in an hour
Quote: tringlomaneYou can learn poker math in an hour? Maybe the basic of basics. The explosion of mathematical analysis in no-limit hold'em is ridiculous. It would be best to be strong in both, but the guy that's strong with the math will rarely suck while many who depend on feel because they are just clueless with math are the table targets since most players' feel isn't really that good. And I think tells are the most overrated thing in the world for the games I play (low limit omaha8 or mix games). Maybe they'll help in bigger games, I really dunno.
I've seen good players say that tells rarely help and one estimated they made up something like 2% of profits. I'm sure there are exceptions, but for the most part, good players just don't have tells, and good players take up most of the space in higher limit games.
I also like the thought that most people depend on feel and most people are bad.
Lets not confuse TELLS with READS. Not that you did but others might.Quote: socksI've seen good players say that tells rarely help and one estimated they made up something like 2% of profits. I'm sure there are exceptions, but for the most part, good players just don't have tells, and good players take up most of the space in higher limit games.
I also like the thought that most people depend on feel and most people are bad.
Reading people will make up a very large percentage.
Math is the least important in poker LOGIC is the most important.
Unfortunately, most of the time you have a "feeling", it's only there because you want it to be there. And the only times you remember that feeling is when you were right.
I will have to disagree with that. Some of the best math guys suck at poker.Quote: tringlomane, but the guy that's strong with the math will rarely suck
I'm not saying the Wizard sucks at poker because I don't know, but I seem to remember him saying he was not that good at poker.
I have a strong feeling a fair amount of the most well known poker players could not tell you the exact odds of drawing hands when calculating how many outs they have.
Example exact percent you would have with 9 outs 1 card left to make your hand, or the exact odds one would need to call.
You will have to explain what you mean by science. If you mean math(and poker only) I will disagree. You need logic to tell what a person may have, you need art and creativity to get them to do what you want them to do. Math can be tossed out the window.Quote: RSIt's both a science and an art. Without science, you have no chance. Without art....at least you have a chance.
Unfortunately, most of the time you have a "feeling", it's only there because you want it to be there. And the only times you remember that feeling is when you were right.
The best example of this would be Heads up no limit poker ZERO MATH NEEDED. helpful yes, good yes
If you are talking about any game other then poker I will agree.
Quote: Beethoven9thGee, what ever gave you that clue??
Somehow I doubt that you could do all the math that the Wizard has done on the WoO.
http://mathproblems.info/ is for the math guys, but I'm not complaining, members on here know their stuff and save/make me a ton of cash.
Quote: AxelWolfYou will have to explain what you mean by science. If you mean math(and poker only) I will disagree. You need logic to tell what a person may have, you need art and creativity to get them to do what you want them to do. Math can be tossed out the window.
The best example of this would be Heads up no limit poker ZERO MATH NEEDED. helpful yes, good yes
If you are talking about any game other then poker I will agree.
Originally was thinking blackjack. You need science (math) to beat the game. You need art (creativity) to fool the pit boss, surveillance, etc. I'm going to have a way better chance of winning if I know how to play properly (math) and not know how to fool the bosses (art), than if I don't know proper strategy but I can fool the bosses all day.
I believe the same can be said about poker. You need science (math, strategy, discipline, skillz) to know what you're doing. I'm not super into poker, but I'm pretty sure you need to be able to calculate your chance of winning vs how much you're wagering and how much you'll win (ie: 50% chance to win 1x your bet is break-even, a 20% chance to win 5x your bet is +EV, a 25% chance to win 2x your bet is -EV).
I'm somewhat confused on how you can say "zero math needed" and THEN say "helpful yes, good yes".
When you play heads up NLH you don't need to use math. It will help, but its not needed. There are lots of situations when you have to put a guy on a hand and know if you should call because the math dictates you should do so. Someone can simply memorize or estimate when its proper to do this. So no math needed. If you want to call estimating math, Then I fine, but you cant just estimate in other games like you can in poker. I have seen very good poker players that cant tell you the odds of drawing hands or even starting hands. They have an idea from experience, but often times they are off.Quote: RSOriginally was thinking blackjack. You need science (math) to beat the game. You need art (creativity) to fool the pit boss, surveillance, etc. I'm going to have a way better chance of winning if I know how to play properly (math) and not know how to fool the bosses (art), than if I don't know proper strategy but I can fool the bosses all day.
I believe the same can be said about poker. You need science (math, strategy, discipline, skillz) to know what you're doing. I'm not super into poker, but I'm pretty sure you need to be able to calculate your chance of winning vs how much you're wagering and how much you'll win (ie: 50% chance to win 1x your bet is break-even, a 20% chance to win 5x your bet is +EV, a 25% chance to win 2x your bet is -EV).
I'm somewhat confused on how you can say "zero math needed" and THEN say "helpful yes, good yes".
In Blackjack of course you need math. Anyone who thinks they can beat BJ in the long run without math. Well they are_______'S
The OP said that "feel is way more important than the math" (not verbatim)....which leads me to think he's saying something like, "it doesn't matter what cards you have or what is on the board....it is more important to feel him out and figure if he's bluffing or if he has a good hand". The cards are the math, the player is the feel (or art).
I agree with the OP statement if he is talking about poker.Quote: RSI don't ACTUALLY mean math like what you're saying....I'm saying you need to know when your hand is advantageous (or not advantageous) to play. THAT is one part of the game. The other part is reading your opponent.
The OP said that "feel is way more important than the math" (not verbatim)....which leads me to think he's saying something like, "it doesn't matter what cards you have or what is on the board....it is more important to feel him out and figure if he's bluffing or if he has a good hand". The cards are the math, the player is the feel (or art).
Quote: tringlomaneYou can learn poker math in an hour? Maybe the basic of basics. The explosion of mathematical analysis in no-limit hold'em is ridiculous. It would be best to be strong in both, but the guy that's strong with the math will rarely suck while many who depend on feel because they are just clueless with math are the table targets since most players' feel isn't really that good. And I think tells are the most overrated thing in the world for the games I play (low limit omaha8 or mix games). Maybe they'll help in bigger games, I really dunno.
Oh, in those kinds of games math trumps feel by a million miles.
Quote: socksI've seen good players say that tells rarely help and one estimated they made up something like 2% of profits. I'm sure there are exceptions, but for the most part, good players just don't have tells, and good players take up most of the space in higher limit games.
I also like the thought that most people depend on feel and most people are bad.
There is a huge difference between actual feel and looking for physical tells. Feel is about knowing what a person is capable of. Knowing the bet patterns and getting a sense of what others have because of it.
In a game like Omaha or 7-Stud, where more information is part of the game, knowing the odds is relatively more important. Especially in Stud if you're perfect at tracking folded cards and your opponents aren't (this is important for Rummy games too). Back when I was playing low-limit games, I was a passable Stud player. I was never very good at Hold'em. I was too timid. For some reason I'd have trouble raising appropriately in a 3/6 game but no problem making $10 pass bets in craps with 3/4/5x odds.
Quote: AxelWolfI agree with the OP statement if he is talking about poker.
I mean poker. Specifically, non fixed limit poker. In fixed its mainly math.
As Axel said, you can throw math out heads up. Bluffs can and should happen so you need to call people down with marginal stuff.
There is even spots you can throw out math when it comes to a full ring game. Mainly the spot where a guy just bombs the pot with a massive over bet. You may not be getting the right price, but you need to give this hand some thought because he might be bluffing.
Quote: Lemieux66I have a suspicion that the nature of this forum sides with math, but it absolutely should be feel. Math you can learn in an hour, but it takes tons of experience to get the feel for the game and how people think and react. It's best to know both, but feel crushes it.
Most of the players I see interviewed on the WSOP or WPT seem to mention the math when discussing a hand and why a decision was made. I have to defer to them since they are more successful than me,
However calculating percentages based on "outs" is generally a game of theoretical problem solving. You can need to get a king and think you have 3 outs"...but the reality is that 3 people threw away a king with a weak kicker...so you really have zero outs. You are always calculating your "outs" using the maimum or more favorable odds for you. In a game of 9-10 players.....the reality of outs vs the theoretical outs can be quite different.
Quote: LarrySMost of the players I see interviewed on the WSOP or WPT seem to mention the math when discussing a hand and why a decision was made. I have to defer to them since they are more successful than me,
However calculating percentages based on "outs" is generally a game of theoretical problem solving. You can need to get a king and think you have 3 outs"...but the reality is that 3 people threw away a king with a weak kicker...so you really have zero outs. You are always calculating your "outs" using the maimum or more favorable odds for you. In a game of 9-10 players.....the reality of outs vs the theoretical outs can be quite different.
You can't take this into account when calculating your outs because you don't know what people folded. This would be amazing information though especially in an AK vs QQ war.
Quote: socksI've seen good players say that tells rarely help and one estimated they made up something like 2% of profits. I'm sure there are exceptions, but for the most part, good players just don't have tells, and good players take up most of the space in higher limit games.
I also like the thought that most people depend on feel and most people are bad.
You have to observe a tell and see if it's reliable. You can't act on it the first time you see it. After you've watched enough times to feel comfortable with your opinion, he shoves, you see the tell and call, and you find out it was a fake tell. Next tell.
Quote: LarrySthe reality of outs vs the theoretical outs can be quite different.
The "reality" of the outs is information that is not usually available to anyone. The number of theoretical outs is always the correct number to use.
Either you get an out face up, or you don't, and if you don't, it does not make any difference if your out is still in the deck, in the muck, or in somebody else's hand.
If you can somehow detect reality and know your outs are in the muck, then by all means you should adjust your strategy accordingly.
Quote: Lemieux66You can't take this into account when calculating your outs because you don't know what people folded. This would be amazing information though especially in an AK vs QQ war.
I ask this for infor purposes to get comment...not saying that its prudent.
But couldnt you try to take reality into account and not delude yourself that you have the maximum outs.
For example...you have the choice to call an all in after the river(before the turn)......you calculate maximum 9 outs to get your spade flush. You need 1 spade.
But 8 other hands were dealt. 16 cards in the muck plus burn card Can we assume that in the long run approx 4 spades would be in the muck? Can I over the long run when in this position calculate a more realistic percent of winning based on 5 or 6 outs rather than 9 outs?
Figuring the 9 outs is the maximum outs you have in the remaining cards ...dont we know that the chance of having 9 real outs is minimal.
Just because in a previous post the obvious was proclaimed...that we can never know the true outs......which is true...but can we sometimes mitagate a chance of a false calculation by using common sense or mathematical probability to realstically reduce the outs in our mind so we can make a more reasoned decision.
You have 5 outs and a 25% chance of hitting it.
Now lump together all of the cards you can not see - 16 in the muck plus 20 in the deck.
Of those 36 cards, 9 are spades, or 25%
So yes, you can assume that 4 out of 16 cards in the muck are spades, and you only really have 5 outs, but it does not chat it does not change your chance of getting a spade.
5 out of twenty is the same as 9 out of 36.
You can not assume that in 16 cards, 4 are spades. You already see 4 of the spades, so the proportion of spades to any numbr of cards is no longer 25%
I should be using the exact number of cards remaining in the deck, but I don't have a pencil and I keep forgetting numbers when doing math in my head.
Quote: Dalex64If the muck has 4 spades out of 16 cards, and the rest of the deck has 5 spades out of 20 cards...
You have 5 outs and a 25% chance of hitting it.
Now lump together all of the cards you can not see - 16 in the muck plus 20 in the deck.
Of those 36 cards, 9 are spades, or 25%
So yes, you can assume that 4 out of 16 cards in the muck are spades, and you only really have 5 outs, but it does not chat it does not change your chance of getting a spade.
5 out of twenty is the same as 9 out of 36.
If this were Facebook, I would "like" this.
or 3 out of 16 or 6 out of 28 ( if as you say the amount of spades is lessened and not equally distrubuted)
Quote: LarryS4 spades out of 16 or 5 spades out of 28 is more like it
or 3 out of 16 or 6 out of 28 ( if as you say the amount of spades is lessened and not equally distrubuted)
Ok, 44 cards then.
9/44 x 16 is how many spades should be in the muck, and 9/44 x 28 is how many there should be in the rest of the deck.
I am not saying the cards are unevenly distributed, i am saying it is an error to assume 4 cards out of 16 are spades, because the percentage of cards left that are spades are 9/44 , not 11/44 or 25%
Really, at the end of the day, "feel" is just bad approximation of math we can't hope to comprehend. When we can comprehend the math, as in table games, it just gets in the way.
Quote: 24BingoIn poker, feel is extremely useful, because many of the variables you're feeding into the math can be determined only by feel. Unless you've got incredible intuition, though, math's up there, especially in fixed-limit play, which is about the closest thing I've found to applied game theory. In almost any kind of book, I'd imagine feel is much stronger, since the math is much simpler. At the tables, math is all there is, and feel is just an excuse - but it can be fun.
Really, at the end of the day, "feel" is just bad approximation of math we can't hope to comprehend. When we can comprehend the math, as in table games, it just gets in the way.
poker is the only game in the casino that I know of where you can win with the worst hand.
the math can say that you have zero chance of winning the hand.....but you can still win....despite the math
So if you have a "feel" for an apponent that u can get them to fold....you could win with the worst hand. Thats what bluffing or semi bluffing is al about.
If you have no "feel: for opponents....then bluffing is out of the question.
There's a simple phrase in math that encapsulates most "feelies'" objections: GIGO. They purposefully put garbage in, wave the garbage that comes out, and proclaim "math can't do everything!" But they put the garbage in. In poker, other players' strategies are as important as anything else. In all games, the simple luck of the draw is as important as everything else. Add it all up, and the math still wins over "feelings," provided it's being used properly.
While i don't know if I agree with you on some of the stuff you said.Quote: LarrySI ask this for infor purposes to get comment...not saying that its prudent.
But couldnt you try to take reality into account and not delude yourself that you have the maximum outs.
For example...you have the choice to call an all in after the river(before the turn)......you calculate maximum 9 outs to get your spade flush. You need 1 spade.
But 8 other hands were dealt. 16 cards in the muck plus burn card Can we assume that in the long run approx 4 spades would be in the muck? Can I over the long run when in this position calculate a more realistic percent of winning based on 5 or 6 outs rather than 9 outs?
Figuring the 9 outs is the maximum outs you have in the remaining cards ...dont we know that the chance of having 9 real outs is minimal.
Just because in a previous post the obvious was proclaimed...that we can never know the true outs......which is true...but can we sometimes mitagate a chance of a false calculation by using common sense or mathematical probability to realstically reduce the outs in our mind so we can make a more reasoned decision.
I can say there are situations you can get a better gauge on what is left in the deck. But, most of the time not when it comes to suites. Unless you think someone may also be in the hand with some of your outs. Lets take a 3 way pot, you're drawing a flush, but you now put a 2nd guy drawing on a lesser flush, giving you less outs vs a 3rd player with top pair or something. I think this happens quite a a bit
Their may be games where everyone has folded to the the guy in the cutoff who makes a small raise. You are now on the button with some big over cards you might be able to reasonably assume there are far more high cards left in the deck since most ploppies will limp in with big cards. I not advicating people play this way, but im saying it can add extra information.
Also there are times when you may have a better chance to hit your outs. an none of your outs have been eliminated with less cards in the deck now.
True. That is why if you are playing Basic Strategy but suddenly grossly deviate from it... and win... a player will turn to you and say "Congratulations". They know you probably just had a hunch but sure are indeed happy it worked out for you. They know you understand the math or atleast understand what Basic Strategy is. You've demonstrated that for several hands, but you suddenly deviated and won... and understand winning beats everything else.Quote: EvenBobMath is the beginning, not the end.
Quote: FleaStiffTrue. That is why if you are playing Basic Strategy but suddenly grossly deviate from it... and win... a player will turn to you and say "Congratulations". They know you probably just had a hunch but sure are indeed happy it worked out for you. They know you understand the math or atleast understand what Basic Strategy is. You've demonstrated that for several hands, but you suddenly deviated and won... and understand winning beats everything else.
Most have no idea of basic strategy. Congratulations is only said because of hindsight. If I play properly and lose, that player may very well be thinking "he should'a hit that 12v6 since no one else was hitting" or "he should have hit 12v6...if everyone else is hitting, he should be too". Playing on a hunch (which deviates from proper strategy) is ALWAYS -EV.
Quote: AxelWolfWhile i don't know if I agree with you on some of the stuff you said.
I can say there are situations you can get a better gauge on what is left in the deck. But, most of the time not when it comes to suites. Unless you think someone may also be in the hand with some of your outs. Lets take a 3 way pot, you're drawing a flush, but you now put a 2nd guy drawing on a lesser flush, giving you less outs vs a 3rd player with top pair or something. I think this happens quite a a bit
Their may be games where everyone has folded to the the guy in the cutoff who makes a small raise. You are now on the button with some big over cards you might be able to reasonably assume there are far more high cards left in the deck since most ploppies will limp in with big cards. I not advicating people play this way, but im saying it can add extra information.
Also there are times when you may have a better chance to hit your outs. an none of your outs have been eliminated with less cards in the deck now.
I love these spots. You do lose two outs, but now your implied odds are way better. People always overestimate the implied, but in this spot they are more legit.
Quote: 24Bingo"The math" says no such thing.
There's a simple phrase in math that encapsulates most "feelies'" objections: GIGO. They purposefully put garbage in, wave the garbage that comes out, and proclaim "math can't do everything!" But they put the garbage in. In poker, other players' strategies are as important as anything else. In all games, the simple luck of the draw is as important as everything else. Add it all up, and the math still wins over "feelings," provided it's being used properly.
I mean playing garbage is always a bad idea. You also lose credibility for your bluffs when you play any 2.
That's not always true, every game is different and everybody is different. Some guys you can bluff over and over again, then show him each time. He will still fold unless he has a a nice hand. This can work to your advantage if he start playing strong hands only vs you. This will often make him show the strength of his hand early on. Its nice when you know what few hands they have then you actually hit a monster and he thinks your bluffing while he just picked up top pair top kicker.Quote: Lemieux66Quote: 24Bingo"The math" says no such thing.
There's a simple phrase in math that encapsulates most "feelies'" objections: GIGO. They purposefully put garbage in, wave the garbage that comes out, and proclaim "math can't do everything!" But they put the garbage in. In poker, other players' strategies are as important as anything else. In all games, the simple luck of the draw is as important as everything else. Add it all up, and the math still wins over "feelings," provided it's being used properly.
I mean playing garbage is always a bad idea. You also lose credibility for your bluffs when you play any 2.
The more hands you play the more confused your opponents will be, that's what you want. Once you show a few trap hands and some big bluffs, you can then start manipulating them. I'm not saying you should play more hands and lose value. I think some descent players can be to tight in 1-2 and 2-5 no limit games. Most of the competition knows enough to be dangerous to themselves.
David Sklansky
Administrator
David Sklansky's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,440
Phil Ivey Unaware of EV Definition
Since there has been discussion here about the subject, I went up to Phil while he was playing in Bobby's Room and asked him if he knew what EV meant. He asked me what it stood for, I answered, "expected value" and he said he never heard of it. I said if you get 70-50 on a coin flip your EV is ten. He instantly said "I got it". He wondered why I asked and I said it was for the two plus twoers. He gave me permission to write this.
David Sklansky is offline Reply With Quote
Quote: AxelWolfThat's not always true, every game is different and everybody is different. Some guys you can bluff over and over again, then show him each time. He will still fold unless he has a a nice hand. This can work to your advantage if he start playing strong hands only vs you. This will often make him show the strength of his hand early on. Its nice when you know what few hands they have then you actually hit a monster and he thinks your bluffing while he just picked up top pair top kicker.Quote: Lemieux66Quote: 24Bingo"The math" says no such thing.
There's a simple phrase in math that encapsulates most "feelies'" objections: GIGO. They purposefully put garbage in, wave the garbage that comes out, and proclaim "math can't do everything!" But they put the garbage in. In poker, other players' strategies are as important as anything else. In all games, the simple luck of the draw is as important as everything else. Add it all up, and the math still wins over "feelings," provided it's being used properly.
I mean playing garbage is always a bad idea. You also lose credibility for your bluffs when you play any 2.
The more hands you play the more confused your opponents will be, that's what you want. Once you show a few trap hands and some big bluffs, you can then start manipulating them. I'm not saying you should play more hands and lose value. I think some descent players can be to tight in 1-2 and 2-5 no limit games. Most of the competition knows enough to be dangerous to themselves.
I have two philosophies in poker, one bigger than the other. The small one is to not show a bluff. I wouldn't want the table thinking I'm a bluffer, because it's not easy to get a hand. I usually sincerely lie to those who ask me what I had. I make it sound good.
The biggest one is to NEVER EVER EVER show a big fold. Never. If you do this, you have now leveled yourself. Next time someone bets you big on the river you are asking yourself "do they have it, or do they just know I can make big folds?" It's a terrible place to be in.
Quote: Lemieux66I usually sincerely lie to those who ask me what I had. I make it sound good.
I tell them "This is Pay Per View." Got that from a stripper.
What limits do you play and what crowd do you play?Quote: Lemieux66Quote: AxelWolfThat's not always true, every game is different and everybody is different. Some guys you can bluff over and over again, then show him each time. He will still fold unless he has a a nice hand. This can work to your advantage if he start playing strong hands only vs you. This will often make him show the strength of his hand early on. Its nice when you know what few hands they have then you actually hit a monster and he thinks your bluffing while he just picked up top pair top kicker.Quote: Lemieux66Quote: 24Bingo"The math" says no such thing.
There's a simple phrase in math that encapsulates most "feelies'" objections: GIGO. They purposefully put garbage in, wave the garbage that comes out, and proclaim "math can't do everything!" But they put the garbage in. In poker, other players' strategies are as important as anything else. In all games, the simple luck of the draw is as important as everything else. Add it all up, and the math still wins over "feelings," provided it's being used properly.
I mean playing garbage is always a bad idea. You also lose credibility for your bluffs when you play any 2.
The more hands you play the more confused your opponents will be, that's what you want. Once you show a few trap hands and some big bluffs, you can then start manipulating them. I'm not saying you should play more hands and lose value. I think some descent players can be to tight in 1-2 and 2-5 no limit games. Most of the competition knows enough to be dangerous to themselves.
I have two philosophies in poker, one bigger than the other. The small one is to not show a bluff. I wouldn't want the table thinking I'm a bluffer, because it's not easy to get a hand. I usually sincerely lie to those who ask me what I had. I make it sound good.
The biggest one is to NEVER EVER EVER show a big fold. Never. If you do this, you have now leveled yourself. Next time someone bets you big on the river you are asking yourself "do they have it, or do they just know I can make big folds?" It's a terrible place to be in.
Quote: AxelWolfWhat limits do you play and what crowd do you play?Quote: Lemieux66Quote: AxelWolfThat's not always true, every game is different and everybody is different. Some guys you can bluff over and over again, then show him each time. He will still fold unless he has a a nice hand. This can work to your advantage if he start playing strong hands only vs you. This will often make him show the strength of his hand early on. Its nice when you know what few hands they have then you actually hit a monster and he thinks your bluffing while he just picked up top pair top kicker.Quote: Lemieux66Quote: 24Bingo"The math" says no such thing.
There's a simple phrase in math that encapsulates most "feelies'" objections: GIGO. They purposefully put garbage in, wave the garbage that comes out, and proclaim "math can't do everything!" But they put the garbage in. In poker, other players' strategies are as important as anything else. In all games, the simple luck of the draw is as important as everything else. Add it all up, and the math still wins over "feelings," provided it's being used properly.
I mean playing garbage is always a bad idea. You also lose credibility for your bluffs when you play any 2.
The more hands you play the more confused your opponents will be, that's what you want. Once you show a few trap hands and some big bluffs, you can then start manipulating them. I'm not saying you should play more hands and lose value. I think some descent players can be to tight in 1-2 and 2-5 no limit games. Most of the competition knows enough to be dangerous to themselves.
I have two philosophies in poker, one bigger than the other. The small one is to not show a bluff. I wouldn't want the table thinking I'm a bluffer, because it's not easy to get a hand. I usually sincerely lie to those who ask me what I had. I make it sound good.
The biggest one is to NEVER EVER EVER show a big fold. Never. If you do this, you have now leveled yourself. Next time someone bets you big on the river you are asking yourself "do they have it, or do they just know I can make big folds?" It's a terrible place to be in.
1/2 mainly with some 2/5 if the game looks juicy.
They also seem to have this idea that if you have great feel you don't need math or at least that its not very important. This idea is based on the misconception that if you can accurately asses your opponent's range in a given situation that your play is almost always intuitive.
Its not. Its just that simple. Feel defines your opponents range. Math tells you what to do with that information.
I played mostly SNGs and I became very adept at figuring out what ranges people would shove in particular situations. Without math I can't determine a calling range so that information would be mostly useless.
