I am a fairly new player to poker and I want to start at the bottom and work my way up the microstakes. I am a U.S. player so I will be playing on Global Poker and Ignition. I have read that once you are beginning it is better to learn and play with exploitative poker and good fundamentals, especially at 4nl and 10nl. I was wondering, though, if i want to get to 100nl and 200nl online, when would be the best time to begin GTO study such as reading both of Matthew Jandas books and exploring PioSolver and GTO range builder? would it be at the 20nl? 50nl? or something else entirely?

It is a fine experience to play the lowest or so limit without the GTO knowledge; after that, it is a major revolution to understand the GTO math.

The softwares fit in at any point one feels one needs to increase accuracy rather than mainly adjusting/exploiting the GTO to players. It is also possible to use a couple of styles (preflop or/and after), so the ranges need to be changed.

There are also old school styles (more so at PLO) that do not play the GTO postflop (it might even be better when it comes to the scare card issue) and it might work just fine (at any level perhaps but they know what they are doing), but they too have upgraded more or less post flop also.

There is a problem that NLH cash might become too GTO but it seems partly more like the latest Janda book at some games, that is not GTO, e.g. the bet sizes (exploitable like the c-betting frequency, but it seems it isn't exploited too much at this time. I exploit it moderately, keeping the edge alive). Can still be a problem even anonymous, if it is a tell on average.

The MTTs play more the stack sizes and psychology or so than GTO but one needs to be good preflop (in any NLH game).

How you continue postflop, the GTO goes into exact details; how much and with what hands to break your ranges on every street and post flop situation vs. your opponent's ranges. The PIO might be advanced enough for in-putting all kinds of information but the cardrunner's EV is cheaper and likely a fine step in-between (after the GTO math).

I use mostly just the split of ranges math, and tecnically select hands for balance, that I do in my head and I have no plans to work with PIO. My NLH is mostly limited to MTTs where the GTO is only one part.

Much of the high level exact GTO play is useless in about any game, considering how the players play at about any limit and during Fridays, so to say. As so, knowing the math and exploiting goes at least a very long way still. One should have one's ranges pretty okay though, as the money can come only from bluffs in many situations. Plus one needs to use logic.

I did develop my own "basic" PLO GTO style based on NLH, PLO solver (I don't have it) and the top players' styles (their turn play seems pretty good and logical with some optional styles but the flop often seems 90% air and the river generally seems to be played too timid especially OOP, that IMO is against the theory of poker, although good logic bets happen all the time, especially when the turn is checked).

Seeing some Snowie style inspired moves -- I don't play at all like Snowie, considering it weak, although it can more or less split ranges in a math way postflop (but it is way off balance on the turn generally and plays the flop badly enough and can be too exploitable on the river) and its preflop play is respected -- but not the only way to play or even a correct one. But in NLH one might get away with bad (aggro) preflop play, as one is folding equity.

There are also some preflop GTO solutions for NLH that one can buy, but one does well enough with the math for a long time at least. It is hard to impossible to use bot ranges exactly, but with math one can work out more sensible human ranges and all stuffs out there help one to build one.

Can you tell us or show an example of the GTO math you are referring to.

Such thing doesn't exist yet.

Yeah, that's why I asked. Maybe he is onto something.

I suppose under particular assumptions, you can say the math to make villain indifferent to calling or folding is a "GTO-like" solution for it makes hero unexploitable, but that alone is not necessarily GTO.

playmoney

Theoretical concepts are useful from day one.
I VPIP with AA more often than with 72o, because GTO solvers indicate that the former makes more money than the latter.
Using GTO tools/software actually helps you to find imbalances you can exploit.

The sooner the better. Knowing the balanced decision makes you a better exploiter. Then as you move up, you will see opponents that are less exploitable and be somewhat prepared already.

To me, the divide occurs less along the lines of theory vs practice and more along the lines of conceptual understanding versus specific solutions to specific spots.

For example, theoretical understanding of relative hand strength (an understanding based on the width and make-up of each players' range, where a specific hand falls in that range, etc) is really the only understanding that of relative hand strength that's useful long-term. Similarly, a theoretical framework for exploitation/counter-exploitation is the only useful one long-term rather than things like "don't bluff fish" and "always fold to a turn raise." Understanding range advantage and polarity advantage and many other concepts and how they apply to various common situations is immensely helpful.

Using a solver to see what a hand is doing in a specific spot is less helpful, but so is just reading top posters' reckons on what to do in different HHs. Though both using solvers and reading HHs can be valuable when you're coming at it with a broader perspective of forming hypotheses that get disproven and refined with more study. Threshold math is often misunderstood and grossly misapplied by players early in their study and largely not directly applicable to strategy at the tables, but the same could be said for taking notes on players with no real understanding of exploitation. Theory often gets conflated with "balance," which is generally going to lead beginners down the totally wrong path, though even that's useful for understanding exploitability and coming to default strategies to certain spots that you can adjust accordingly.

It's also bares repeating that GTO is a largely inapplicable term to multiway pots (even unopened pots preflop), especially if there are fish involved in the hand. There's no such thing as being unexploitable in these spots, though some general understandings of the value of varying your strategy enough so that you're not easily exploitable on any of the common parts of the decision tree can be useful.

Purely practical advice is just a get-rich-quick scheme in a venue where there's little money to be made even if it "works" by some technical definition for a while. If you purely study theory, it'll take you a veritable eternity to so much as beat micro-stakes, but very little of the learning experience will be wasted.

I would say to wait a little bit and stick to the fundamentals/basics to develop some poker sense, GTO comes way after I think.

Tempting to say "asap" but it's important to get the fundamentals down first, why we bet etc, or the result will be tons of wild misapplication.

I recall an avid Polk YT vid watcher who seemed to think high pair with one overcard was a good hand to overbet jam flop with as a bluff because it "blocked straights".

It does depend on the limits but be careful. I've found players on $0.01/0.02 cash tables on pokerstars that you need to be balanced (GTO-like) against.

Since your are a new player as you say, let me show you how a typical poker career looks like:

Level 0 player - the fish: bluffs too much. Most players (including me) starts here.

Level 1 player - the (bad) tight aggressive: Beats the fish. Reaching this level teaches you the power of value hands.

Level 2 player - the decent loose aggressive: Beats the bad tight aggressive. To reach this level, you need to beat the guy who bets only for value. This is a turning point in your career because once you know you shouldn't play only for value, then you start being decently "balanced" (GTO like).

Level 3 player - the master: play very good balanced (GTO).

On low limits, I've found that most players get stuck on level 0 and level 1 you're right. But you will find some players at level 2 too. I would advise to stay on low limits until you beat level 2.

Early. Though it may not be immediately useful (as exploitative play will beat GTO play at lowest levels when it comes to win rate).

If you don't you'll eventually have to follow the words of a little green guy:
"You must unlearn what you have learned"