Quote:
Originally Posted by NL Loki
1. If I play an exploitable range (e.g. overbluffing/underbluffing or overcalling/undercalling) vs a GTO range that isn't unadjusting to my exploitable tendencies, am I losing EV compared to if I play GTO myself.
Most probably, but not necessarily. A calculated nemesis to a GTO strategy won't be a mixed strategy. There also might be spots where a player deviates from GTO in spots that never come up against a GTO opponent (for example if a player folded 100% against a 100bb open shove). In general practice though (as in human play), if you aren't playing GTO you're almost certainly making -EV mistake (overbluffing or underbluffing for example) when playing against a GTO opponent.
Quote:
I think I ran a sim a while back and it showed that if a player is betting polarised on the river and keeping the bluffcatchers indifferent (so at equilibrium), but villain is either overcalling/or overfolding, the non GTO player is playing a losing strategy. Where does the EV lost come from.
It just depends on whether villain is overcalling or overfolding. Obviously if villain is overcalling it comes from the value hands and if overfolding it comes from the bluffs.
Quote:
Otherwise where is the edge from GTO player if it's not adjusting to an exploitable strategy. This isn't scissors, paper and rock where GTO is breakeven against every strategy, in poker GTO is supposed to be winning against non GTO strategy right?
Even in an imbalanced RPS game where say rock gets say a 25% chance to reverse and rip through paper, you still have a GTO solution and situation where a pure counterstrategy can be calculated.
Quote:
Even if you use a static GTO range and don't adjust to your opponent, your overall strategy should still be winning...
Again, usually but not necessarily.
Quote:
2. At GTO, most bluffs are 0EV
I would say most bluffs are semibluffs or are using blockers, so must bluffs are +EV. The opponent's calls are also +EV. This is the case when there is money already in the pot.
Quote:
If a bluff is +EV, it would be 100% in the bet range right?
Against another GTO range yes, otherwise you wouldn't be at equilibrium.
Quote:
The only hands that are range mixed (e.g. bet 70% check 30%) are hands that are indifferent at 0EV. Is this statement correct?
No. This one is a bit harder to explain but generally ranges involve mixing with better hands in order to be uncapped in certain spots. The difference in EV between checking and betting might be zero, but presumably both spots would have a positive EV.