No, it's not. Even when people are calling too much we should still be bluffing, just less. I'm sure there do exist points when you shouldn't be bluffing at all because our opponent does call so much, but you have no idea how much villain should be calling in a certain spot so gl with that because ranges aren't important.
What you're all probably doing is over adjusting based on reads that probably aren't as strong as you think they are which is why it's always nice to have a rough idea what your range should look like in certain spots. Apparently over adjusting isn't a problem though because we can just ignore obvious holes in our logic.
I think my least favourite part about OP is that it kind of implies that you should go about learning poker in a way that just tries to exploit population reads when in reality this just leaves you not really knowing what you're doing and your only real way of gauging the situation is through experience. When trying to approach the game from a more mathematical perspective gives us a much better idea not only how we should be playing in a certain spot, but how our opponent should which means we can see his leaks better and exploit him better.
Reply With Quote