I'm fine with defining a bluff as a bet where you have little or no expectation of winning when called. Differentiating between good bluffs and bad bluffs is not necessary when defining what a bluff is.

Link to book please

No answer? In your poker utopia, do sites ban all winners or just some (who may not even be the biggest winners)?

What if a player exploits whales but plays Nash-like against elite villains? Ban or no? Does the site keep separate stats on how you play vs each villain?

Lol I didn't say winners would be banned. That's crazy talk... Yes, in my poker utopia you can exploit whoever you like.

Were just working on the cover ATM, it won't be long now

So if a site weren't interested in banning winners, why would it be interested in banning non-exploiters? What would the site gain from it, aside from the fact that it would purge a subset of winners?

And how far from Nash must one deviate for it to count as exploitation? Is there any current human who would be banned?

Wahay! That's a ok comment mate! Almost brings a tear to my eye

When you play GTO I'm sure you know that you will not be open to exploitation. This means that potentially there is a minimal amount of profit to be gained from you by others. So your table then has less potential profit on it.

The more the players deviate from GTO, the more potential profit there is at the table. And that's as simple as it is. If everyone at a site were forced to exploit, the tables will be very valuable. People who are good at playing poker the natural way will make a killing! We will all want to play there.

Yeah, we would be directly removing allllll of the GTO kind of players. To begin with this might seem bad, but as soon as all those guys see how valuable these tables are, they will all have a huge incentive to learn exploitative theory properly. You will all be at those tables in no time.

I have no idea how far the casino would force the players to deviate, but as I think, it should be different in different stakes. In the lowest stakes versions of this game, the players should be forced to deviate more, and then less in the higher stakes games.

Message is probably automated too, everyone gets ******ed tips via PM at the end of the month. Except the weaker players who get a pep talk about how they are playing well.

Well, if its possible to give the players a rolling 'score' of sorts that would be awesome?... This is all I wanted to know

... Hmmm, with so many of you so against this idea, it is blatantly as perfect as it seems! Just think of all the different strategies people will use to exploit! Think of all the counter strategies! It will be so beautiful!!

Haha it is really funny that I'm the only one who sees how inevitable this is. I've been thinking on it for a while now, and this kind of game is blatantly going to be the end game for my poker revolution.

I bet it'll be pretty easy to give the players a rolling score, in the grand scheme of things.

If I deviate from GTO that's good for the other players to exploit me. It's not necessarily good for me.

We can't all be exploiting each other. There has to be at least one player getting exploited, and that player wants to move closer to optimal until he can't be exploited by the others. And then the others move closer to optimal. And that's how the game ends up the way it is now.

Yeah, but without the option of playing close to GTO the player will have to learn to exploit better instead, or move to the stakes that he can beat.

I'd expect about a third of the players at each table would be losers... Pure guess like.

... Hmm, this new rule would change everything.

I hope you realize that you have totally derailed another thread in this forum with your bizarre poker world view. The thread had the potential for interesting and multi-faceted discussion. Yet you chose to make it about yourself and your strange views about GTO poker, and squeeze all the oxygen out of the thread.

This benefits the site.

This is bad for the site. The more money the players win from each other, the less rake the site makes. The only way such tables would benefit the site is if the players were of roughly equal skill.

The player getting exploited probably doesn't know GTO, so he might adjust closer to it without even knowing it (which happens naturally even when everyone is playing purely exploitative poker). But then you're saying the site would warn him that he has become too GTO-like? So the site would teach him GTO so that it could later ban him if he didn't change the way he was naturally playing?

Would you prefer the site display a HUD telling you the GTO line, so that players know what they're not allowed to do?

But what you're saying is that I can never stop being exploited by others players (my strategy has to be exploitable by definition). I have to play a strategy which my opponent can beat, and if he's doing that, what is my option? I either move towards optimal play or I quit to stop losing. Since you're cutting out option one, I'm leaving.

Those aren't your only options. You can over-adjust so that you're exploiting Villain. Then she'll have to do the same.

Granted, if you two keep going back and forth like that (including Yadoula's preemptive adjustments), even without ever getting closer to equilibrium, the average result might be close to equilibrium, because for instance if GTO says to bluff this river 40% and you alternate between 20% and 60% (depending on what you think she thinks you think she thinks you think she will play like today), your average is 40%. Idk if Yadoula's site would then count you as being a GTO player.

Whosnext, you abusive guys derailed the thread, you made it all about me by insulting me over and over again. Which is the only reason for your post right? To insult me... Well your post doesn't make any sense mate. This is very much a conversation about the future of poker. You normally like this? Rude and confused?......

Heehaw, It will clearly be better for the casino if they have more profitable tables... Your entire post makes no sense, the only reason u posted was because u can't accept that the obvious and simple post you quoted made clear sense.

Bladesman, good post man... Look, your mind is playing tricks with you. Your saying there is nothing you can do but play GTO, but exploiting doesn't work like that... Imagine this same thing but in boxing - New boxing rule, you are no longer allowed to throw an equal amount of the different punches. You, personally, are bad at defending against somebody who has a great right uppercut, and this is the reason you keep losing to the guys who use this often... What do you do?

(This might work well actually, using a different game to describe the Levels to somebody who has lots of Poker knowledge... But I won't get my hopes up. I expect your going to want me to map out boxing and even after I pull it off non of you guys will see it like I do.)

Heehaw, your talking about individual situations now, of which there are many, so this is nowhere near as much of an issue as everyone in this generation of players think.

All exploitative strategies are exploitable. GTO is the only unexploitable strategy, but is almost always not the most profitable strategy.

If you don't agree with this, whosnext is basically right about you and you are spewing some nonsensical word salad that contributes nothing useful.

Fair point, although the practicalities of only being allowed to over-adjust make my head spin.

No, I'm not saying the only thing you can do is play GTO. I'm saying it's absurd to imagine that the top games won't tend towards it. There's plenty more reasons for this I could go into but since you've so far done nothing to explain the practicalities of your idea it's not me obfuscating discussion here.

I'm not going into a bad analogy with a hypothetical boxing rule that absolutely nobody would ever dream of introducing in reality.

Whoa... Is this NLHE or LHE?

3/6 limit, for now.

I played at a site once where in LHE the bets were capped at 3 raises (preflop only) and it was interesting. It became much more difficult to get a handle on someone's preflop range.

I mean seriously. I don't spew, what did you call it, nonsensical word salad that contrubes nothing useful... Of course I agree with that paragraph. But if I didn't, why would everything I have ever said suddenly be nonsense? Please, don't answer that question. Only you guys seem to be posting on this thread n I can't be araed with u.

So then it's barely different from regular 3/6 Limit, where already like 6 players see every flop.

At a profitable table you describe, the sharks take from the fish rapidly. At a table infested with GTO players, the fish lose a little less rapidly, the non-GTO regs lose slowly to the GTO players, and the GTO players pay rake during their otherwise break-even confrontations with each other.

Which table causes more of the fish's deposit to be lost to rake, as opposed to ending up in the hands of other players?

You're falling prey to the bad logic of a riggie who thinks sites want every hand to be a cooler where someone gets felted. Sites want the opposite. They'd rather you pay $1 rake a hundred times than $3 rake once.

Yes, but the point I was making still applies. If you're losing under X bb/100 at a hypothetical table full of GTO bots, Yadoula Poker will tell you to exploit or GTFO. That will give you a large menu of things to adjust, but the same problems arise.

Sharks won't just take loads from the fish, they can take loads from the other sharks too. And you can't think why a casino might want to create a game where this happens??

Here's the message I'd send - "There are lots of ways to exploit. If you can't do it then go play by yourself somewhere else."

Sorry, but I am not in a good mood after what just happened in London...

You wonna know what I think will happen in the end for poker... I think that people will stop playing for money. I think that they will play for pride and prestige. They will play to learn, to develop themselves as people. GTO will then finally die and we players will be looked on as sports men and women who spend our lives developing our minds.

I don't think I'm crazy. I reckon I'm just one of you guys, a poker player, who specialises in theory n happens to have cracked all sorts of wierd and awesome things. One of the things I can see is how games evolve over time, and I personally think a financial revolution is coming. I think that money/trade is about to be replaced, and, from then on, Poker will be different. Everything will be different.

You speak as if people who try to understand GTO ignore exploitative play when GTO is actually the apotheosis of understanding exploitative play.

That is actually true, but its not the problem... The only reason there's a problem is because Nash's equilibrium enables us to aim at GTO before we fully understand the theory behind exploitation.