GTO is essentially about taking lines that are the most unexploitable but they won't always be the most +EV
For instance, you're playing against someone who is literally just looking at their own hand and nothing else and is really loose/passive, what's the point in balancing our range? We don't need to, we just take them to value town when we have it, and dont' when we dont. It wouldn't be GTO to just check/fold a ton of missed flops then full pot it everytime we make top pair, but if it works against that player then exploitative play will win far more than GTO against that villian.
In Response to Re: skill v natural ability : Suppose we are facing a player who is a huge calling station. We hold a really strong hand OTR... how much do we bet? Now an overbet AI may well be the correct play here, but how is a computer going to mathematically calculate that - without knowing any info about the player? Posted by F_Ivanovic
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, it doesn't matter! You're talking about exploitative poker, GTO doesn't care about that, it's about being unexploitable.
But unexploitable doesn't mean MOST +EV and obv that's what we want.
The thread has went a bit off topic, so fwiw, I think it's almost all skills that can be learnt, even more so online. Certain people will have a head start in certain aspects but it can be learned.... I hope so anyway or I'm fooked lol
But unexploitable doesn't mean MOST +EV and obv that's what we want. The thread has went a bit off topic, so fwiw, I think it's almost all skills that can be learnt, even more so online. Certain people will have a head start in certain aspects but it can be learned.... I hope so anyway or I'm fooked lol Posted by Lambert180
It may be the most +EV in some spots, what I meant is GTO doesn't necessarily mean that it is automatically the most +EV.
Tbf, I think it depends on the oppo. Take 4NL for instance, do we want to worry about being unexploitable and maybe giving up EV when most people aren't gonna exploit us anyway. Like do we really need to worry about the fact that against certain players when we overbet jam it's ALWAYS value?
In Response to Re: skill v natural ability : I agree that poker is maths, but human response to any given situation cannot be solved. If you put all your chips in the middle, I either call or fold. No computer in the world can know what I am going to do. Posted by Slipwater
Heads up games that are shove / fold and games where the decision trees are:the sb can raise / fold, bb shove / fold, sb call / fold already have been solved for all stack depths.furthermore, at the shorter stacks this closely approximates real play. Similar three-handed games have also been cracked.as rancid said the gto computer wouldn't care about your action, it would already have an optimal response that would guarantee you cant profit over time.
Checkers is a game that has been recently solved, for every move there is a perfect response. Poker is a game that can be reduced to ranges abd decision trees. Given enough computer power you could formulate appropriate ranges and decision s for every possible betsize, stack depth and opponent action such that no strategy could profit over time against you
Well yeh on a more basic level it's been known that HU SnGs (at least at certain stack depths) are 'solved'. This is why MTTs are generally classed as easier/more straight forward/more formulaic in the latter stages. Cash poker is far more complex and so obv harder to 'solve'.
For instance with 10xBB HU there is a range of hands you can shove where there is absolutely nothing your opponent can do to exploit it. If they go one way and tighten up then they lose cos we steal blinds more than they should allow, go the other way and loosen up with their calling range and they're getting it in bad too often. The only thing they can do is call with an equally unexploitable range and then no1 wins except the rake.
Well yeh on a more basic level it's been known that HU SnGs (at least at certain stack depths) are 'solved'. This is why MTTs are generally classed as easier/more straight forward/more formulaic in the latter stages. Cash poker is far more complex and so obv harder to 'solve'. For instance with 10xBB HU there is a range of hands you can shove where there is absolutely nothing your opponent can do to exploit it. If they go one way and tighten up then they lose cos we steal blinds more than they should allow, go the other way and loosen up with their calling range and they're getting it in bad too often. The only thing they can do is call with an equally unexploitable range and then no1 wins except the rake. Posted by Lambert180
This is a misconception I'm afraid, lambert. Playing shove or fold at 10 bbs is a losing propostion for the sb no matter how perfectly he plays. The bb has position and will profit with an appropriate calling range. Optimal play for the sb means shoving a range such that no strategy can exploit him and he is guranteed to lose the minimum. Around 6 bbs it becomes a winning proposition for the sb, as the bb has to commit so much more of his stack. Two opponents can play shove or fold perfectly but one will profit over the other due to stack depths and positional advantage
I agree, this has gone slightly off topic, the point of mentioning optimal strategy was merely to highlight the fact that as poker players we all deviate from this and because of this fact, we are all exploitable.
This allows for the skill element of the game to outweigh the theory and in response to the OP highlights that the real SKILL of the game is in working out how your opponents play and how you can best exploit them.
Deep Blue had an optimal response too, but still couldn't beat Garry Kasparov all the time. Posted by Slipwater
And a perfect GTO system wouldn't beat Phil Ivey all the time, in fact it wouldn't even beat me all the time, but over time I'm pretty sure I couldn't beat it!
It may be the most +EV in some spots, what I meant is GTO doesn't necessarily mean that it is automatically the most +EV. Tbf, I think it depends on the oppo. Take 4NL for instance, do we want to worry about being unexploitable and maybe giving up EV when most people aren't gonna exploit us anyway. Like do we really need to worry about the fact that against certain players when we overbet jam it's ALWAYS value? Posted by Lambert180
Playing GTO ensures that the more villian moves away from GTO the money you will win
It's a game theory strategy, it's your whole strategy that will be +EV Therefore if villian moves further away from GTO then your EV will greaten and therefore there's will lessen
We are not worried about being exploited because our overall srategy can not be expolited
Take your nl4 example, your not expoliting nl4 players- even though you probably think you are Phil Ivey By playing optimaly your benefiting from there mistakes. The more mistakes they make, the more money you will win by adopting a certain straegy regardless of short term results. ie. the more they veer away from the GTO strategy the more money they will lose, which means they are making more and more mistakes.
We are talking about an overall game theory strategy, for example what is GTO for noughts and crosses
I agree, this has gone slightly off topic, the point of mentioning optimal strategy was merely to highlight the fact that as poker players we all deviate from this and because of this fact, we are all exploitable. This allows for the skill element of the game to outweigh the theory and in response to the OP highlights that the real SKILL of the game is in working out how your opponents play and how you can best exploit them. That is all! Posted by Slykllist
The more you try and expolit your opponent, the more you leave yourself open to be expolited
also the only reason a poker player would deviate from GTO would be because in that instance the exploitaive play would yield a greater EV - ie. GTO + explo poker player is da booooooooooooooom
If you are interested in this question I would thoroughly recommend the book Bounce by Matthew Syed
Interesting views on this very topic applied to a variety of situations from Tennis to Chess to Music (and much more).
As most of us will not play millions of hands - then luck will play a part.
I truly believe that anyone can learn to play winning poker - and for the original poster I would say that getting feedback is the most important step to develop your game.
Comments
For instance, you're playing against someone who is literally just looking at their own hand and nothing else and is really loose/passive, what's the point in balancing our range? We don't need to, we just take them to value town when we have it, and dont' when we dont. It wouldn't be GTO to just check/fold a ton of missed flops then full pot it everytime we make top pair, but if it works against that player then exploitative play will win far more than GTO against that villian.
The more you veer away from GTO the more money you will lose
You can not exploit GTO
I don't think it's proven that GTO yields greater EV than exploitative poker
But likewise it is not proven exploitative poker yields greater EV than GTO
Think it's well proven that GTO woulld beat an exploitative player
rock paper scissors anyone
Cmon the best you can do is break even!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKm8LXwKnbs
The thread has went a bit off topic, so fwiw, I think it's almost all skills that can be learnt, even more so online. Certain people will have a head start in certain aspects but it can be learned.... I hope so anyway or I'm fooked lol
How do you know GTO is not more profitable
Tbf, I think it depends on the oppo. Take 4NL for instance, do we want to worry about being unexploitable and maybe giving up EV when most people aren't gonna exploit us anyway. Like do we really need to worry about the fact that against certain players when we overbet jam it's ALWAYS value?
For instance with 10xBB HU there is a range of hands you can shove where there is absolutely nothing your opponent can do to exploit it. If they go one way and tighten up then they lose cos we steal blinds more than they should allow, go the other way and loosen up with their calling range and they're getting it in bad too often. The only thing they can do is call with an equally unexploitable range and then no1 wins except the rake.
This allows for the skill element of the game to outweigh the theory and in response to the OP highlights that the real SKILL of the game is in working out how your opponents play and how you can best exploit them.
That is all!
Playing GTO ensures that the more villian moves away from GTO the money you will win
It's a game theory strategy, it's your whole strategy that will be +EV
Therefore if villian moves further away from GTO then your EV will greaten and therefore there's will lessen
We are not worried about being exploited because our overall srategy can not be expolited
Take your nl4 example, your not expoliting nl4 players- even though you probably think you are Phil Ivey
By playing optimaly your benefiting from there mistakes.
The more mistakes they make, the more money you will win by adopting a certain straegy regardless of short term results.
ie. the more they veer away from the GTO strategy the more money they will lose, which means they are making more and more mistakes.
We are talking about an overall game theory strategy, for example what is GTO for noughts and crosses
The more you try and expolit your opponent, the more you leave yourself open to be expolited
also the only reason a poker player would deviate from GTO would be because in that instance the exploitaive play would yield a greater EV - ie. GTO + explo poker player is da booooooooooooooom
Mostly skill, with a smattering of natural ability thrown in for good measure. Sorted.
So no matter what oppo does they can not win, best they can do is draw.
if they deviate further from the optimum response they will lose more - hopefully money but I guess no one is dumb enough to play this for money
If you are interested in this question I would thoroughly recommend the book Bounce by Matthew Syed
Interesting views on this very topic applied to a variety of situations from Tennis to Chess to Music (and much more).
As most of us will not play millions of hands - then luck will play a part.
I truly believe that anyone can learn to play winning poker - and for the original poster I would say that getting feedback is the most important step to develop your game.