Hello everyone, forgive me for my bad English!!!

Using GTO (or approximations) you prefer to be the defender or the original raiser(aggressor)?

Aggressor: River on pot XX we bet pot and we can bluff 33% OK

But defender? It's pretty sick the situations because... If my hand is a bluffcatcher that i ''must call'' if villain on a similar Aggressor example don't bluff 33% but 20% we lose money a lot!!!
Defender GOAL: Villain should not make a profit with bluff... OK, but if he bluff 32,9% for LOL example he is a GOOD BLUFFER! because when we bluffcatching for example he lost 0.1 with bluff but he win 0.15 with value

Then correct me if I'm wrong
Trying to apply GTO would be good and appropriate to the scenarios as possible of distorting them moving from defender to aggressor with x / r in order to reverse the situation?


I ask this because I'm tired to muck

I'd always prefer to be the in position player with the stronger range going into the flop, turn, and river.

There are some facts in your post, but it's not all correct. Checking back the river will be profitable for the in position player even with his bad hands. This forces the out of position player to allow an immediate profit on bluffs. The only reason for the in position player not to bluff is that checking will be more profitable than bluffing with hands with enough showdown value to offset the potential bluffing profit.

How profitable the threshold check/bet hand will be is dependent on the strength of the ranges in question. The stronger the in position bettor's range is compared to his opponent's range, the more profitable checking back will be, the more immediate profit the out of position player must offer.

The weaker the in position bettor's range is compared with his opponent's range, the less profitable checking back will be with that range, the less immediate profit the out of position player must offer.

I dont know if with my bad english you understand my problem...
Also, if u are original raiser and preflop arent 3bettor u can modeling pot using different sizing and bluff% in ration with sizing ok.

But for example it a casual texture my hand is a bluffcatcher and u bet pot, u can bluff 33% ok? if u bluff for example 25% i have 0% equity vs your value range and 100% equity vs your bluffing range...then

win... 25% x 200 .... +50
lost...75% x 100 ... -75
understand? considering this if u bluff correct its nosense bluffcatching...but i dont know if reg on xx texture can bluff good or nott...

If the guy only bluffs 25% with a pot sized bet then he's missing profitable bluffing opportunities. Thus, your strategy as a whole gains ev even though your bluffcatchers show a loss. Your strategy could gain even more ev by folding all of your bluffcatchers, but you would become exploitable in the process.

OK now I understand all perfect and thx for comment
But generally at nl50 regtard don't adjust a lot then i can play exploitative line here or not?