Multiple Level Thinking

Alright so I was browsing 2+2 yesterday and I was reading some threads in the High Stakes NL section and one thread really got me thinking about multiple level thinking. It was a hand someone posted that they played against CTS, one of the top online NL players, at 25$-50$. Basically the perceived fish at the table raised it in the CO and Hero (hand poster) 3Bet the fish with K4s from the button. CTS was on the BB and then 4Bet. The poster's question was wondering about whether 5Bet bluffing would be profitable as CTS knows that he's 3Betting light to isolate the fish and will be 4Betting light most likely. It ended up that Hero did 5Bet shove all in. The thing that really struck me though was that CTS snap called him with AJo!

Hero basically got outlevelled by CTS (CTS was thinking on the level above Hero) CTS knew that Hero would think that that CTS would perceive hero's 3Bet as isolating the fish and therefore 4Bet a much wider range. CTS then knew that hero would likely respond to this by 5Bet bluffing a wide range and therefore snap-called with AJo (which I still can't beleive)

Now obviously at the levels most of us our playing, low-micro stakes, this kind of levelling will only get you into trouble. The reason is that it is only possible to think on a level one above your opponent. If your opponent is thinking on level n then you can only think on the level n+1.

For example, say your playing 2NL against a complete donk. He's probably only thinking about what he has. (The zeroth level) Therefore the only think you can think about is what does he have. (The first level) You can't think about what does he think you have because he's not thinking about what you have. (This would be the second level) It is very rare that at micro stakes you would ever think above the second level as most players are not thinking above the first level.

Multiple level thinking is extremely powerful tool and outlevelling your opponent is basically what the nosebleed games are all about. At lower stakes it can still be extremely useful as long as your not thinking on a level that is too high for a particular opponent as this will get you into loads of trouble.

I'd love to hear what other posters think on this subject.

Can you link me this in a PM! This just looks sickening! I tell theeee! This is why I love poker

This should be called the 1st level, thinking what you have. Obviously Sklansky, who intrduced this as 1st level, has never played freerolls and low limits. What is the level of thinking for someone re-raising all-in with 23 or similar plays? According to Sklansky, we should use negative numbers since they don't even think about what they have.

AAAAAAAAAAAAARG whole post gone, stupid internet not working for no reason.
Multi-level thinking is fun, but is less used in the mircro-stakes, it's true. However, when players start to play you enough even at the .10/.25 level some leveling gets involved, particularly when you encounter another regular you've seen around. Even at the micros there are a few people that I get into 4th level thinking or so against just on experience. It's a nice little chess match to break up all the poker. But it sure can get you in trouble if you use it against the wrong players, put you on the exact opposite of what you should be doing. You can't bluff a guy who barely knows anyone else is in the hand.

Live games are great for it though, especially limit play, because it's cheap to experiment with a player and try to find out what level they're on in comparison to the money you'll take for knowing.