Solid op, nice replies. Thread has potential.
Quote:
GTO means "unexploitable" - it means you're playing the Nash Equilibrium.
I tried to draw a line in the sand between the difference between Nash Equilibrium and gto here in the theory forum. There were mixed replies. Here's what I took away from it:
Until someone deviates from Nash equilibrium, there is no difference between gto and Nash.
Once someone deviates from Nash equilibrium, there is a difference between gto and Nash. While Nash is unexploitable, it is not necessarily maximally exploitive vs the opponent's best counter strategy going forward after the deviation. Gto, however, is necessarily maximally exploitive vs the opponent's best counter strategy going forward after the deviation.
Quote:
Unless your opponent is ALSO playing GTO, it is not usually the line that will make you the most money.
Correct Rusty, but there are exceptions I think: for example if I'm on the button vs a very tight small blind and an expert big blind, I'm still going to raise some extra hands to exploit the small blind despite the threat of counter exploitation from the big blind in the form of less folding and more 3 betting. I'm going to attempt to play solid poker vs the big blind, considering my adapted range and how the expert should play vs me. I think that in this case the most profitable line isn't Nash, but it's a sort of post deviation gto vs gto battle.
Quote:
You could make more money by exploiting the player. But exploitative deviations from GTO are, by definition, no longer GTO.
There's a Rounder's reference in there somewhere "you see all the angles; you just don't have the stones to play em."