Why are you so worried about the GTO 3bet? You are very fixated on the outcome of you opening a weak hand and getting 3bet. We open hands because they are breakeven (mixed open) or profitable opens (pure open). These breakeven or profitable opens can be losing as limps. If you fold a breakeven open it's whatever. If you fold a profitable open it's a problem. If you make a losing limp with an otherwise profitable open it's a problem.

Keep in mind that these weak hands are profitable even vs the GTO strategy that includes a certain amount of 3bets. You will have to fold them vs a 3bet, but I don't see why that's a problem if they are profitable. Folding or limping them would likely make them less profitable or losing.

Opening a range that can defend more vs an optimal preflop-strategy is not a profitable exploit.

Lol mentioning the title of a book doesn't get you banned. I can say I read this and that in Modern Poker Theory for example.

The reason there is no such thing as a partial GTO-strategy is because in game theory the strategy profile of a NE requires players to employ a payoff maximizing strategy.

A strategy can't be partially payoff maximizing. There either is another strategy which will increase our payoff, in this case our strategy isn't a payoff maximizing strategy. Or there is no strategy that will yield a higher payoff, in which case our strategy is a payoff maximizing strategy, given the strategy of our opponent of course.

Exploitative theory can only be applied once a player deviates from the NE strategy, or in poker terms GTO. Of course this happens a lot when actual humans play poker, which is why it's also important.

However you act as if GTO play is of zero importance when one wants to win at poker. This is reflected by the title of this thread. "How to exploit the GTO 3bet.". You act as if GTO is a pathetic concept and anyone who says differently is stupid. Then when someone calls you out for this you try to sway your way out of the discussion by acting sanctimonious and misunderstood.

This is why people respond with such scepticism to your claims.

Y.J. PM me a link to your book, if it's real.

No, but you will rinse them when they 3bet against you.

They do respond to my posts with such hostility because I’m against GTO! I’ve been banned from loads of forums because I’m against GTO. No poker publishing company will publish your book if your against GTO... Thats not because exploitation isn’t better, its because you’re all obsessed with GTO.

You clearly have a huge problem with me saying the words “partial GTO strategy”. You can call it something else if you want. What do you call a player who knows PART of the GTO strategy? What’s his strategy called if not a “partial GTO strategy”? We’re not talking about someone who doesn’t know the GTO strategy at all, we’re talking about someone who knows PAARRTT of the GTO strategy. What the **** do you want me to call his strategy???????

GTO is ****ing with your head man!!!!!! Snap the **** out of it!

Revolutionary

You are isolating some nodes and populating them with some top % EV combos. Just because you increase your EV in some nodes (for example when you open and villain 3bets), it doesn't mean you exploit anyone. All you're doing is decreasing the overall EV of your strategy.

Even if you will have a stronger range in the remaining nodes in the game-tree it does still not mean your strategy gains EV. Since the GTO player doesn't adjust to any of this, you are just eliminating all the other +EV combos that would gain your strategy additional EV by opening them and not folding or limping them.

And that is only if the GTO player never adjusted. If they would adjust you would be in an even worse spot.

Your theory is useless and you make it worse by praising yourself for it.

GL brother

We can improve our EV against GTO on some “nodes”. On this you agree with me.

You’re saying that I would lose money by not opening the extra hands against someone who uses the GTO strategy which is also true.

I’m saying that provided the villain doesn’t know the entire GTO strategy, you can improve your ev against him when his strategy matches GTO, and you don’t lose any money because you play your weaker hands in the situations where he doesn’t know GTO.

It’s VERY SIMPLE! The only reason you’re all going mental is because you’re suffering from cognitive dissonance. Do you know what that is? Do you not think COGNITIVE dissonance will effect those who play a mind-game?

Sure.

But you do realize that most of the value of these weaker holdings come from the fold equity, because they usually have a hard time flopping a strong hand that can be bet for value on several streets?

I highly doubt you can make these more profitable by limping vs just opening them and realizing the fold equity they are mostly designed for. It's not like you will make them more profitable by limp/3beting pre, because they are too weak to start building a massive pot with because of mentioned reasons.

I think your theory is falling apart just because it's based on so many assumptions about how accurately you can play a line vs how accurately a suboptimal player plays against it. It's a highly subjective theory thus it's mostly just words.

It’s not my argument that is falling apart. All of your arguments have repeatedly crumbled to dust. As will this argument:

I do realise that your weakest opening hands make most their profit from fold equity when you open them, they might well lose money overall when you open them. YOU don’t realise that when you limp them this is no longer true. You said that I won’t be able to build a big pot with those hands, but nor do I want to as these hands suck. Limping is a great way to pot control.

Instead of thanking me for teaching you this, you say what, that “it’s just words”... what the hell are you going on about now??? I should be banned because I’m just using words. Is that where we’re at now?

Of course it’s real, are you crazy???...

My name is Yadi Javadi. I’m sure that was mentioned. Do you not know how google works??? Perhaps you thought I didnt think anyone else would know how google works so I could get away with pretending to have written a book?... if I was pretending to write a book I should probably have used a more generic name, with more generic initials.

If I mention that books name or it’s contents I’ll be banned. Rusty might ban me for just saying my name. He nearly banned me because I said that someone using part of a GTO strategy is using a partial GTO strategy.

Exploitative theory get you banned from forums. If you don’t love GTO, the GTO obsessed will see that you are silenced. You’d have to be some kind of smooth talking exploitative legend to hold your own, as it isn’t just the communitys that are generally obsessed with GTO, the mods are obsessed with GTO too. They all despise exploitation without even realising it, their minds reject tany exploitative information, these guys can’t even make sense of the words you write. GTO has fully fried their brains.

I know you've put a lot of time and effort into this. The emotional investment of yours is very clear.

You say this stuff is "very simple", which instantly tells me you don't know much about the complexity of the game.

You've failed to prove your theory works. There is only your subjective opinion, nothing else.

Wish you the best.

I proved it works in RPS. I’ve proved in works at the tables. I proved it works by using simple logic. You just don’t understand how it works.

If I explain it a beginner they understand. I’ve tested this loads. It’s primarily your trust in strategies that causes the cognitive dissonance. This creates a emotional barrier in your mind, making it more difficult for you to understand new exploitative theory consciously. This is something that we could be testing for under proper scientific conditions. We would be testing for it if I had any kind of support from others in my field...

The Levels: Learn How All Players Think Through Their Plays. Author Yadi Javadi, publisher Yadoula Javadi-babreh. Can you confirm this is your book? This is the only review I could find:

Holy crap it's a real book hahaha

Yadi, would you like to test your limping theory under more rigorous conditions? I invite you to play a HU game against me on RangeVsRange. This is just poker played with ranges instead of hole cards. You can take the BTN, play your limp/raise/fold strategy, and I'll defend the BB. We will play through every branch of the game tree with ranges face up. You can use your exploits and I will use game theory. At the end, we'll get a full EV analysis of all lines. What do you say?

Ah it’s a shame you didn’t post a picture of the cover, which is bad-ass!

Yeah that’s me. I don’t really sell the paperback, I’ve just been travelling the forums and the poker groups giving out copies of the PDF for free. I must have given out over 10,000 copies and the feedback is generally good, sometimes it’s great.

The paperback version is my original version, which actually contains two small schoolboy errors. In the free version those two errors were quickly fixed, but I figure it’s best to leave the original with its warts for a while. After I sell a certain amount I’ll update the version. In 100 years it’s actually those errors that will make copies of the original version worth way more.

I set out to write a easy reading poker guide that covered all exploitative theory. I was going to call it something like: “THEORY”. Clever me thought it’d be a good idea if I organised the theory into the Levels of thought. After all, the levels of thought represent the stages of a players development, and this is a book designed to develop players.

That’s when things got confusing. I thought it’d take a few months to knock out a feature length guide, but it ended up taking me 5 years to organise all poker theory into the levels of thought.

By the end I had realised that these levels don’t just represent the stages of a players development, or advancements in a thought-process, these levels belong to the mind. I’d spent 5 years mapping out the mind, organising the stages of not just a poker players development, but the development of all decision making beings. This was no longer just a poker theory book, it had turned into a book about the Levels.

This software does sound interesting, but I think you’re asking me to design an entire HU strategy for the Button which sounds like a mammoth task? Especially since I’ve always played 6 max.

I get the impression that all we’ll really work out is whether or not I can design a better HU strategy than you can? I think that to get any more information than that we’d also have to compare my win/losses with that of some GTO bot.

I’m not really sure how it’d work, but if it won’t take much effort we can give it a go and see what we learn?

I think you are the NEW John Nash.
Your theories will be a poker revolution

YOU ARE THE GREATEST!

"Limping is a move that is massively underrated, as many live players will tell you."

Greatest sentence of you - I think this will be remembered the next 200 years.
I will go to a casino right now to get limping advice from the great NL1/2 regs at the live tables.

Nash was plagued by dark spirits. He will be remembered as the bringer of doom. He unleashed a madness on the world that is destined to destroy the entire planet.

I’m just a street rat who happens to see GTO for what it really is and so feels obliged to oppose it. You guys could help, but evidently none of you can get past the madness. I’m on my own. Luckily for everyone, I’m a sick strategist and I do have a plan to save all your asses!

It’d be a lot easier with some help, but I think God has it all in hand anyway. It’ll all work out. GTO will fall and the best among you will be ashamed of yourself for all the abuse you’ve given me.

I think you are just a troll at this point. Nash Equilibrium concepts are proved mathematically and via overwhelming evidence. This stuff is no more up for argument than the existence of gravity.

Yep I agree with Worldz.

Time to close the thread.

Not quite right. The time that this thread should have been closed is

08-26-2020, 01:34 PM

I didn’t say Nashes theory was wrong. So the math is irrelevant.

You do realise you make absolutely no sense? You’re just going mad because your obsessed with an equilibrium strategy. If i say anything bad about Nash or GTO you go mental and try to get me banned.

You are clearly trolls. Trolling all over my thread with mindless condemnation. I bet you’re not usually like this...