BUT WHAT'S YOUR RANGE

Originally Posted by ImSavy

Don't be afraid to read it just because Carroters said GTO is pointless for new people. He's got a wrong, outdated view on poker.

GTO is not pointless. Once again...IMO, for the new player, GTO is secondary to learning the basics of exploitative poker like how to put your opponent on a rough range, understanding equity, EV, player types, c-betting, 3-betting. I don't think the most useful way to first understand these concepts is through anything that resembles learning what GTO is.

Please stop making shit up and claiming people have said it. I'td be at least interesting if you cared about engaging with the actual arguments people are making in this thread, rather than your strawman imitations of them.

Originally Posted by Carroters

GTO is not pointless. Once again...IMO, for the new player, GTO is secondary to learning the basics of exploitative poker like how to put your opponent on a rough range, understanding equity, EV, player types, c-betting, 3-betting. I don't think the most useful way to first understand these concepts is through anything that resembles learning what GTO is.

GTO teaches us exploitative poker. Do you not understand this?

Why do you think so many top class poker players are completely revamping their game from a GTO perspective? They aren't doing it to try and miss out on all the value on the table by not exploiting villains, that's for sure.

I also don't understand how you can not see how learning those concepts you listen through a GTO perspective is useful. It basically tells us the answer to all the questions we have like how much should we be 3betting against this player, how much should he be 4betting? How much should we be stealing OTB against these two blinds, etc etc.

And ye, spitting image of my avatar. Just in the process of growing my hair out a little bit so it's that length.

Originally Posted by ImSavy

GTO teaches us exploitative poker. Do you not understand this?

Why do you think so many top class poker players are completely revamping their game from a GTO perspective? They aren't doing it to try and miss out on all the value on the table by not exploiting villains, that's for sure.

I also don't understand how you can not see how learning those concepts you listen through a GTO perspective is useful. It basically tells us the answer to all the questions we have like how much should we be 3betting against this player, how much should he be 4betting? How much should we be stealing OTB against these two blinds, etc etc.

And ye, spitting image of my avatar. Just in the process of growing my hair out a little bit so it's that length.

Teach us how to learn GTO.

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Teach us how to learn GTO.

... and define "balance" for us, as you mean it in this thread.

I'm now fairly convinced that we're all in agreement in this thread, but we're using terminology differently.
We've gotten all worked up, but we never bothered to determine if we all understand GTO in the same way.
The fact that Savy says, "GTO teaches us exploitative poker. Do you not understand this?" is clear evidence to me.

So how about we stop the finger pointing (of which I am guilty, and I apologize for any 'tardedness in my attitude) and iron out these terms?

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

I'm now fairly convinced that we're all in agreement in this thread, but we're using terminology differently.
We've gotten all worked up, but we never bothered to determine if we all understand GTO in the same way.
The fact that Savy says, "GTO teaches us exploitative poker. Do you not understand this?" is clear evidence to me.

GTO means we are attempting to finds ways to play almost perfectly. Poker isn't solved so obviously we don't have GTO but by attempting to learn it and seeing how we create really solid almost nash strategies (of which that donkr article I've linked to a few times does @sevenduece) we come across many ways of which don't work that may seem like they work. So we end up coming up with loads of really tight lines, knowing how people might try to exploit us whilst taking these lines and as we've seen why they don't work we have our adjustments already to exploit them, because we know how and why our opponents lines don't work.

When we are looking for all of these ways though our aim isn't to try and play GTO 100% of the time, in reality we'd be doing something wrong to be sat at a table where this would even be remotely needed.

I'm also not saying that hand reading and all those other skills aren't needed. They get developed over time. But trying to make them the main parts of our game when we know that this isn't how we go about "solving" poker just seems like a suboptimal way of going about poker.

Originally Posted by ImSavy

GTO means we are attempting to finds ways to play almost perfectly. Poker isn't solved so obviously we don't have GTO but by attempting to learn it and seeing how we create really solid almost nash strategies (of which that donkr article I've linked to a few times does @sevenduece) we come across many ways of which don't work that may seem like they work. So we end up coming up with loads of really tight lines, knowing how people might try to exploit us whilst taking these lines and as we've seen why they don't work we have our adjustments already to exploit them, because we know how and why our opponents lines don't work.

When we are looking for all of these ways though our aim isn't to try and play GTO 100% of the time, in reality we'd be doing something wrong to be sat at a table where this would even be remotely needed.

I'm also not saying that hand reading and all those other skills aren't needed. They get developed over time. But trying to make them the main parts of our game when we know that this isn't how we go about "solving" poker just seems like a suboptimal way of going about poker.

And now you're saying almost the exact same as my first post in this thread

Originally Posted by ImSavy

GTO means we are attempting to finds ways to play almost perfectly. Poker isn't solved so obviously we don't have GTO but by attempting to learn it and seeing how we create really solid almost nash strategies (of which that donkr article I've linked to a few times does @sevenduece) we come across many ways of which don't work that may seem like they work. So we end up coming up with loads of really tight lines, knowing how people might try to exploit us whilst taking these lines and as we've seen why they don't work we have our adjustments already to exploit them, because we know how and why our opponents lines don't work.

When we are looking for all of these ways though our aim isn't to try and play GTO 100% of the time, in reality we'd be doing something wrong to be sat at a table where this would even be remotely needed.

I'm also not saying that hand reading and all those other skills aren't needed. They get developed over time. But trying to make them the main parts of our game when we know that this isn't how we go about "solving" poker just seems like a suboptimal way of going about poker.

I didn't see a link ITT. Post the link, I'm interested in reading it.

Originally Posted by ImSavy

Why do you think so many top class poker players are completely revamping their game from a GTO perspective?

It might have something to do with them not playing 5NL.

Originally Posted by Pelion

It might have something to do with them not playing 5NL.

I lol'd.

Originally Posted by Pelion

It might have something to do with them not playing 5NL.

But it doesn't. It has to do with going about learning how to play poker in the correct way.

If you were learning any solved game would you not want to know the solution. If we were playing Rock Paper Scissors you'd start off by learning that taking each option 1/3 of the time is unexploitable and you're never going to lose playing this.

We'd also learn from this that anyone not playing 1/3 of everything is making a mistake (funnily enough in RPS we don't profit from the mistake but in poker we do) but this gives us information on how to adjust to them. If they are playing rock too much, something we don't actually know if they are until we know what Nash is for the game, then we know we adjust by playing more paper and less scissors.

Originally Posted by ImSavy

It has to do with going about learning how to play poker in the correct way.

I think the issue is that you can't tell a new player to learn poker by pointing them at the most advanced topics in the game. That would be like telling someone to start learning physics and handing them a graduate-level quantum theory book. You're setting them up for failure.

If a player can't beat 5NL, they should focus on the basics -- developing reads, hand reading, exploitative play, etc. Just by focusing on those things, they will end up internalizing things like "what equity does my hand have against his range" or "how does my bet affect his range", which are critical skills needed before incorporating any game theory concepts. Obviously there is no problem trying to learn about GTO from the beginning, but there just isn't any good way for a losing/break-even 5NL player to apply it -- they obviously aren't good enough yet.

Originally Posted by NightGizmo

I think the issue is that you can't tell a new player to learn poker by pointing them at the most advanced topics in the game. That would be like telling someone to start learning physics and handing them a graduate-level quantum theory book. You're setting them up for failure.

Kind of, and I have said that I don't think it's the first thing you should learn. I just think I'm advocating learning it before most people in this thread are. But I'd say it's more like handing someone a Graduate level book on QM when they are fully capable of doing all the maths involved. As given your level of maths is ok non of the work that I've seen done is mind blowing or anything.

@72 http://en.donkr.com/articles/page/2 should be able to find them all here.

Originally Posted by Carroters

GTO is not pointless. Once again...IMO, for the new player, GTO is secondary to learning the basics of exploitative poker like how to put your opponent on a rough range, understanding equity, EV, player types, c-betting, 3-betting. I don't think the most useful way to first understand these concepts is through anything that resembles learning what GTO is.

I totally agree with this, that there is a progression people have to follow if they want to get really good at anything.

Originally Posted by ImSavy

Why do you think so many top class poker players are completely revamping their game from a GTO perspective? They aren't doing it to try and miss out on all the value on the table by not exploiting villains, that's for sure.

This too. When the best players are really into it there's something there. And I like all that stuff because I'm a math geek too.

However first I need to get a thought process that includes some semblance of hand reading. I'm thinking I just have to thoroughly analyze hands-with-ranges enough until it gets to be somewhat natural. But I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on getting to that level.

Right now I deal out flops and just run down all the hands from the nuts through all the one pair hands and count the combos for each hand. Kinda boring but I think it's useful. For example if flop is Txy there are 120 combos of top pair not set but only 24 combos of overpair. And of course when possible there's always a ton of straight draws because you get 16 combos for each draw. That kind of thing.

Originally Posted by jackvance

Is it "Preflop 3-Betting, 4-Betting, and 5-Betting Frequencies"?

It actually looks pretty good. The chapter titles are:
1. The Basics
2. Preflop Play
3. Post-flop Bet Sizing
4. Facing a Flop Bet in Position
5. Whether to Bet or Check in Position
6. Out of Position Flop Play
7. 3-Bet Pots on the Flop
8. Playing the Turn in Position
9. Playing the Turn Out of Position
10. 3-Bet Pots on the Turn
11. River Play
12. Multi-way Pots
13. Shallow and Deep Stack Play
14. Advanced Bet Sizing
15. Applying Theory to Analyze Hands
16. Sample Hands

The title is Applications of NLHE for those who haven't heard of it. It's a hefty 494 pages, typical 2p2 looking print job. I haven't started it yet. I expect it's all about balance. Probably I'll read it later. And sorry if off topic but it seemed kinda relevant. I do agree with people that GTO is a baseline to adjust from when playing better players like at higher stakes. It is all very interesting.

While Janda's book has a horribly butchered title, it is very good and I would recommend it for a non-beginner trying to move into the more mathy parts of game theory and defensive play (i.e. moving past the games where you can just value bet the hell out of TPTK and win).

Having said that, his first page after the acknowledgements is a disclaimer that pretty much states that if you try to play in this way against "non-experts" you will be doing it wrong.