GTO (game theory optimal) Poker

[Rob Hobson]

Tel me about your thoughts about such a GTO (game theory optimal) Poker or if it's applicable to your game strategies somehow.

It's just to play strictly by the math, not adjusting the game strategy accordingly to the opponents actions.

It's true in a game, the poker math may not be the king of taking decisions, for there are uncountable variations involved to take the right actions, and a player with a reasonable understanding of the math of the poker probabilities takes advantage over the opponents that doesn't have this skill.

But seems to me that GTO is just a fancy name invented to describe a kind of strategy already applied before, even before the golden era of poker.
Anyway I don't see any advantage playing GTO poker. A bluf, for example, makes this strategy useless.

 

[Tero]

Tel me about your thoughts about such a GTO (game theory optimal) Poker or if it's applicable to your game strategies somehow.

I try to give it the proper respect it deserves but not more than that.

I find it funny that players on Twitch (no matter how low levels they play) sometimes stream analyzes were they run their (usually lost) hands through solvers to study, or perhaps to comfort themselves.

Of course, reliving a hand can be a valuable learning experience, and knowing if their decision was +EV one in the long run (at least in the mathematical sense) can be comforting. But do these people stop to think if their approach was the right one to begin with?

 

[Mimo..Mach]

Playing GTO Poker is like playing with a different kind of luck but in the end it will depend on 'luck'. It is better to know about 'the position of the player at the table', or 'the categories of the cards in hand' and lastly 'the odds'

 

[DS3]

Tel me about your thoughts about such a GTO (game theory optimal) Poker or if it's applicable to your game strategies somehow.

It's just to play strictly by the math, not adjusting the game strategy accordingly to the opponents actions.

It's true in a game, the poker math may not be the king of taking decisions, for there are uncountable variations involved to take the right actions, and a player with a reasonable understanding of the math of the poker probabilities takes advantage over the opponents that doesn't have this skill.

But seems to me that GTO is just a fancy name invented to describe a kind of strategy already applied before, even before the golden era of poker.
Anyway I don't see any advantage playing GTO poker. A bluf, for example, makes this strategy useless.

Poker is a strange hobby to get into as we are challenged from the outset with stretching yourself mentally in order to play well.

In essence the poker ecosystem depends on feeding everyone a (new) line – if you study and apply yourself your game will definitely improve. This is true to a degree. We all need to learn the foundations of the game and constantly reviewing your own play and that of others brings long term benefits.

Until it doesn’t.

Because at some point we all have to face the reality of variance, basic luck, playing a greater role in our success and failure than any of us care to admit. So, whenever anyone raises the subject of GTO play, I involuntarily cringe.

Not long ago when I first picked up the game, poker media bludgeoned everyone with the idea GTO would completely take over the game. Now I can look back and laugh at the idea (and poker media) but at the time it almost put me off the game altogether. As a newbie, I did not have enough experience to conclude poker media was talking nonsense - it was little more than ‘the newest thing’ for various parties to pretend that they were taking a superior approach to poker.

I assume some at the highest stakes study at a very deep level. But, I am a realist. This week, though I have cashed several times, I have also been beaten in numerous hands by more experienced players with a weaker starting hand than mine. I got it in good and got my ass handed to me by someone objectively playing in a stupider manner. That is poker - variance - and something we all have to learn to live with.

I believe in studying and applying oneself to the game but also believe the ‘promotion’ of GTO proved ridiculous. I remember Remko Rinkema, during ‘peak GTO’ conducting a long series of interviews with many of the worlds best players. The interviews were great, but for a section in each where Rinkema would breathlessly quiz his guest with how they were adapting to GTO play. However, the impression I got was Rinkema did not have a clue what he was talking about and as most of his guests could not clearly explain GTO, then neither did they.

My estimate would be, in 2022, the amount of players seriously using GTO in their play would be small to the point of not being measurable.

 

[Maikychan]

An exploratory game is still the best, exploiting the weaknesses of the players (especially the fishs). However, if you want to become a better player, it's imperative that you UNDERSTAND (and not click buttons like a robot) the theory and the whys.

 

[jonaselloco]

Hello brother.
I respect very much all the theories, but really in practice this is the question of poker for me.
An optimal game for me would be like playing robotized. This at the time of the new poker players back in 2010 onwards, young players who gave you a bad face and bet from the preflop to the river all in and you retired, today it is not practiced as much.
I think a lot of players are going back to the "champagne poker" of many years ago. That poker that really made us have fun, with bold plays, with semi-bluffs or bluffs very well applied, with bluff payments without even having an overpair or even pair. At least that is the poker that I like.
Statistics, strategies, mathematics and possibilities, everything is accepted. But in an MTT things change. There comes a time when you did not have a good hand in the entire MTT and having 5 BB you find yourself with the dream pair of Aces in hand in UTG and you go all in with all the hope of winning. And in SB or BB you have one of the chip leaders who, with his 34s in hand, didn't care about your raise, but he cared that if he beat you it was one more that he took out of the tournament, which of course he also wants to win like you .
And at showdown he hit a straight or a flush or a 34 two pair, and your hope of AA went to hell.
Then comes the great Phil Hellmuth......How is he going to call with 34s??? how can it be??? and well, it is and I win you.
That's where all poker rules end, ranks end, equity ends, everything ends.
Be careful, I'm not saying that any teaching of the game of poker serves to improve your game. On the contrary, I believe a lot in learning about strategies, about ranges and equity, about mathematical possibilities, etc. But in the end I think that luck also exists and you have to take it as part of the game itself.
I could tell you as a final that for me this variant of Holdem is very complicated and many times even harmful for one. Many times even if you have the best possible chance of winning, the all ins and showdowns become a lottery.
I was born playing first 5 cards draw and then Omaha. In these two variables, the strategy and the readings of opponents in 5 cards, the mathematics and possibilities in Omaha have a great influence. In 5 cards if you don't bluff it is impossible to survive in a tournament.
I don't know, it's quite an issue that you raised dear friend, that's why I congratulate you for the post.
Let me understand that I'm still from the "champagne poker" era hahahahaha
Greetings Rob.....Carlos

 

[ATL2000]

GTO strategies seem more suited for middle to high stakes, and not the micro stuff that I play.

I have read stuff that claims anyone can win with the system, but surely it is geared toward people that at least play some type of predictable range of cards in a given situation.

 

[Rob Hobson]

Hello brother.
I respect very much all the theories, but really in practice this is the question of poker for me.
An optimal game for me would be like playing robotized. This at the time of the new poker players back in 2010 onwards, young players who gave you a bad face and bet from the preflop to the river all in and you retired, today it is not practiced as much.
I think a lot of players are going back to the "champagne poker" of many years ago. That poker that really made us have fun, with bold plays, with semi-bluffs or bluffs very well applied, with bluff payments without even having an overpair or even pair. At least that is the poker that I like.
Statistics, strategies, mathematics and possibilities, everything is accepted. But in an MTT things change. There comes a time when you did not have a good hand in the entire MTT and having 5 BB you find yourself with the dream pair of Aces in hand in UTG and you go all in with all the hope of winning. And in SB or BB you have one of the chip leaders who, with his 34s in hand, didn't care about your raise, but he cared that if he beat you it was one more that he took out of the tournament, which of course he also wants to win like you .
And at showdown he hit a straight or a flush or a 34 two pair, and your hope of AA went to hell.
Then comes the great Phil Hellmuth......How is he going to call with 34s??? how can it be??? and well, it is and I win you.
That's where all poker rules end, ranks end, equity ends, everything ends.
Be careful, I'm not saying that any teaching of the game of poker serves to improve your game. On the contrary, I believe a lot in learning about strategies, about ranges and equity, about mathematical possibilities, etc. But in the end I think that luck also exists and you have to take it as part of the game itself.
I could tell you as a final that for me this variant of Holdem is very complicated and many times even harmful for one. Many times even if you have the best possible chance of winning, the all ins and showdowns become a lottery.
I was born playing first 5 cards draw and then Omaha. In these two variables, the strategy and the readings of opponents in 5 cards, the mathematics and possibilities in Omaha have a great influence. In 5 cards if you don't bluff it is impossible to survive in a tournament.
I don't know, it's quite an issue that you raised dear friend, that's why I congratulate you for the post.
Let me understand that I'm still from the "champagne poker" era hahahahaha
Greetings Rob.....Carlos

Perfect! Consider this comment with my first lines. Thanks!
Brgds Carl,
Rob

 

[heguli82]

Problem with theories is that they are often in contradiction to practice.

You can study perfectly every theories and play every spot optimal, without any huge success in tournaments, because you also can win several tournaments, without actually understanding how that happened.

 

[Rob Hobson]

I believe that, even tending to one style or another, it is useful to have a theoretical basis, even if some hands differ from what was expected.

So the named (and trendy) GTO has this basic theoretical function, which has long been found in basic poker theories, especially for beginners.

Above all, it doesn't hurt to keep our subconscious minds fed this kind of information. This is how I see it.

 

[jonaselloco]

¡Perfecto! Considere este comentario con mis primeras líneas. ¡Gracias!
Brgds Carl,
Robar

Perfect! Consider this comment with my first lines. Thanks!
Brgds Carl,
Rob

thanks brother
a big hug
Carlos

 

[Rob Hobson]

thanks brother
a big hug
Carlos

🤙😊✌️

 

[dreamer13]

Given that the EV in poker (expected value) of this strategy is not maximum in every situation, the use of the strategy involves exploiting the weaknesses and mistakes of the opponent. That is, despite all the complicated definitions, using the GTO strategy in poker means playing with a balanced range. The GTO strategy in poker is the right balance between these actions, that is, you need to find a combination of the nuts in poker and bluffs that will bring maximum equity. However, GTO in poker is not only following one line of play, as this can lead to to the fact that the strategy will be too passive or aggressive with a particular hand. The strategy allows you to exploit the mistakes of your opponents to maximize EV. And there is no need to be afraid that by adapting to the enemy, we give him the opportunity to exploit our mistakes. If we play with a weaker opponent - and this is the main line of a successful player, then we will always be ahead.

 

[MrHachiman]

Tel me about your thoughts about such a GTO (game theory optimal) Poker or if it's applicable to your game strategies somehow.

It's just to play strictly by the math, not adjusting the game strategy accordingly to the opponents actions.

It's true in a game, the poker math may not be the king of taking decisions, for there are uncountable variations involved to take the right actions, and a player with a reasonable understanding of the math of the poker probabilities takes advantage over the opponents that doesn't have this skill.

But seems to me that GTO is just a fancy name invented to describe a kind of strategy already applied before, even before the golden era of poker.
Anyway I don't see any advantage playing GTO poker. A bluf, for example, makes this strategy useless.

Well, there are really several aspects of the GTO game that are worth studying at a theoretical level if one considers dedicating professionally to playing poker. Nobody plays 100% GTO, the first thing to understand is this fact. But as you play higher stakes, players will try to emulate strategies where they have the right balance of bluffs and value across different textures, bet sizes, and streets of the game. Therefore, it is important to know it.
But, this is mainly a style of play that works against other professional players. One will not play GTO vs an recreational because the recreational is not playing GTO. So, you are simply losing value by not exploiting it. For this reason it is also important to know when to deviate from GTO and go for an exploitive line, since your rival simply does not know what is happening.

All this from a professional player perspective, but as a recreational or semi-pro I would tell you that the most profitable style of play is exploitative. even pros play exploitative a lot of them, because no one really plays GTO.
I think going too deep into GTO only makes sense when you play high stakes and 4 out of 6 players at your table are pros just like you.

 

[Gritz18]

Tel me about your thoughts about such a GTO

Well I really like to play GTA, ahhh......it's not GTA it's GTO, what is GTO again?

 

[EmptyHouse]

The GTO strategy only applies to very high stakes. It is not profitable to play with low and medium stakes and against recreational players. Here, an exploitation game works best.

 

[D0nk3y Hunt3r]

Everyone playing exploitative strategy can be exploited.
GTO teaches you how to play to not be exploited, as a consequence you can be exploited if someone knows that you play GTO.
Math works, though math works with large volume.

 

[Recreationalplayer]

GTO does help with understanding fundamentals and making quick decisions for most situations (80%).

It also helps conceal the hand strength by having a balanced strategy.

 

[Tigroslav]

Knowledge is power. The more strategies you know and can apply trough a mind filter to see which one is best suited for each individual situation, the better.

 

[Jantorres888]

The problem with theories is that they often contradict practice.

You can learn all the theories perfectly and play every place optimally without much success in tournaments, because you can also win multiple tournaments without really understanding how it happened.

I don't think so. The better your game is, the better the result will be. Playing poorly, there is no chance of winning the tournament. I mean MTT, where there are more than 30 players) You can win randomly by playing against only one or two players)

 

[RoviP]

Tel me about your thoughts about such a GTO (game theory optimal) Poker or if it's applicable to your game strategies somehow.

It's just to play strictly by the math, not adjusting the game strategy accordingly to the opponents actions.

It's true in a game, the poker math may not be the king of taking decisions, for there are uncountable variations involved to take the right actions, and a player with a reasonable understanding of the math of the poker probabilities takes advantage over the opponents that doesn't have this skill.

But seems to me that GTO is just a fancy name invented to describe a kind of strategy already applied before, even before the golden era of poker.
Anyway I don't see any advantage playing GTO poker. A bluf, for example, makes this strategy useless.

I believe that due to the huge size of the variation, the range of options is more in the field of decision making.

A well-defined strategy of security and speed for making important decisions.

The timer clock is sometimes the player's enemy.

In a few seconds we have to analyze many points, but the ideal game is the one that in fact always leaves you in the money. (ITM)

 

[heguli82]

I don't think so. The better your game is, the better the result will be. Playing poorly, there is no chance of winning the tournament. I mean MTT, where there are more than 30 players) You can win randomly by playing against only one or two players)

Well, i have to desagree My tournaments winnings, lets say top-3 finishes, maybe 25-30 times that has happened, and mayby 4-5 of those happened on last 5 years or so and rest i won my first years at 2010-2012. I was playing a lot more back then(cash) yes, but with much more poor knwoledge then now. So yes, playing poorly, or little bit out of stantard, dosnt mean that you lose and vise versus.

Just other day friend reg on his first tournament ever and of course he reg accidently pot limit omaha tournament and ends up winning it. Funny stuff, variance makes game fun for me anyway.

 

[Jantorres888]

Well, I have to disagree with my tournament wins, say, in the top 3 maybe 25-30 times, and maybe 4-5 of them happened in the past 5 years or so, and the rest I won in my early years in 2010- 2012. Then I played a lot more (cash), yes, but with much worse knowledge than I do now. So yeah, playing poorly or slightly off the standard doesn't mean you're losing and losing.

Just the other day, a friend signed up for his first tournament, and of course he accidentally signed up for a pot limit Omaha tournament and ended up winning it. Fun stuff, variance makes the game interesting for me anyway.

I meant poker today. Ten years ago, there were a lot of weak players. If you were playing like you did 10 years ago, you would have done much better)

 

[vinnie]

Anyway I don't see any advantage playing GTO poker. A bluf, for example, makes this strategy useless.

Could you explain how a bluff makes GTO useless? Because, this statement makes me pretty sure that you don't understand what GTO is.

 

[Rob Hobson]

Could you explain how a bluff makes GTO useless? Because, this statement makes me pretty sure that you don't understand what GTO is.

Ur right