If you are the best player how can your advantages be taken away?

If exploitive play is the best why would it ever be at a disadvantage and have to be "forced to play gto"?

All I am saying is it makes no sense to say something is objectively the best always EXCEPT in certain situations. It's not always the best then, is it?

The first question is so stupid I'm not going to bother answering it.

The second question is just as bad. I'm so bored of answering your questions man, please, just be quiet. You're in. Sound. I'll teach you loads of lessons when we play.

Nope I am going to keep talking. As long as I obey the rules of the forum there's no reason I can't post.

Cheers mate! Look forward to you taking something so seriously that proves absolutely nothing!

C'mon guys it's pretty clear what Yadoula is saying. He's saying that he's better at playing against average player pools than you are, in games where profiling individual players is possible. That's an entirely different question than who would win heads up.

In addition, if a person/bot were capable of playing GTO, it's completely obvious that their opponent would lose unless they also played GTO. The best exploiter would, in trying to exploit, land on GTO also. I doubt Yadoula denies this. He just doesn't think those methods are a good way to win money from other non-gto players.

The irony of Yadoula referring to me as a GTO-obsessed mod is that I have very little interest in GTO myself. Maybe I should post some of my 5 card draw HU sessions where every hand I raised pre-draw, drew 1, and bet post-draw regardless of my hand.

(I'm using 'he' for pronouns here, which is just an assumption of mine, really I have no idea)

That's not what his initial post implied, but I agree after his subsequent posts that's what he meant to say.

I would also argue how is that a determination of who a better player is?

Of course he doesn't deny this because it's obviously true. My point is he can't claim non GTO is greater than GTO if GTO can beat an exploiting strategy in some scenario, especially the only scenario we can solidly test GTO vs non GTO (hu).

Any way it doesn't matter because like 90% of his ideas about how good GTO players play is mostly based on how bad players play that have studied basic theory concepts and misapplied them at the table.


Haha I assumed that worked for 6 hands?

The main reason why everyone is so "obsessed" with GTO in this forum, is because you need to understand GTO, to be able to adjust to your opponents properly.

How can you tell when your opponent is playing too loose or overfolding in a certain spot, if you have no idea what GTO looks like?

Most people here are just trying to build good long term strategies as a base.

Everyone knows how to exploit, it isn't that hard or interesting if you understand GTO.

If you want to chat with people about how to exploit opponents at 10nl, you should be posting in No Limit Hold’em - Micro-Small Stakes forums, not here.

Thank you.

I have been trying to make that point for years to no avail.

GTO is NEVER better than exploitation. No wonder no one will take you on.

Yeah it is. I suspect that exactly half the time GTO is better than exploitation.

1-0

Come on old boy. Make this easy for me. Admit to everyone I'm better than you. Tell them that my understanding is better than yours. Explain to Zkesic that you don't need to know anything about GTO in order to exploit. Tell them that they have all been mislead. And that you yourself think that I am the king.

I don't know what my longest string is but it has to be at least 50 hands. Most people wouldn't play back at all so if they got excited about their hand and I didn't have much I could fold. Typically they'd get frustrated and leave.

I'd actually start heads up matches in nearly every game at low stakes like this against an unknown. I think it worked so well in 5cd because near-optimal play (especially in limit 5cd) was fairly easy to understand. So people were very used to playing by rote and making money off people who were strictly suckers.

Haha 50 hands was obviously way more than I was expecting. That is awesome to me for some reason.

Yadoula8 has earned the very first spot on my ignore list in two years. I suggest others do the same, unless anyone actually values his input in discussions. I don't know how he has evaded infractions from moderators for so long as his posting style does not belong in a strategy forum. Take your over the top rhetoric, insults, condescension and ego to BBV.

how many hands do you need to start exploiting?
would you consider streaming on twitch to share your ideas?
-----------------------------------------------------------
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...o-bot-1507435/

Just do a winrate propbet with a player who focuses on a more GTO-esque approach. 50k hands at midstakes 6-max on a trackable site. I'm sure you can find someone on these forums that'd take you up on it.

But I think if you beat a GTO player, I think it just mean he did not play gto well.

It's very realistic to happen however. All humans are going to deviate if they think they have an edge.

I think, correct me if i m wrong, the most obvious example was the match qui nguyen vs vayo. I think vayo was only capable of playing gto with small pots. But sometimes gto says make big call & raise. I give a lot of credit to nguyen for bringing vayo in a territory he did not master well, or chose not to enter.

It s not that exploitative beat gto. It s gto who can destroy itself. Either by overconfidence or lack of confidence... or by thinking at some point he can get better edge Without gto.

OP, are you a flat-earther? You do realize that even the most GTO-minded player takes exploitive lines when it is appropriate? These things aren't mutually-exclusive. What type of general strategy you use is often based on the skill level of your opponents.

As an example of what I mean: You sit at a table with four other regs and one fish. To "insulate" yourself from the regs attempting to exploit you, you try more or less balanced and GTOish versus them while immediately trying to exploit the fish (iso his limps, bet heavily for value, etc.)

And then as you get more hands on the regs you can begin attempting to exploit them too by strategically deviating from a more balanced approach to an approach that involves targeting their leaks that you are now finding (if any).

Lol sorry guys, I should have given you some credentials... I studied under well learned coaches for years and they taught me to play in the same way most regs learn to play. Balance until you find leaks, then exploit them. I made hundreds of thousands in profit and have now written an exploitative theory book which is finished and is ready to be released.

Whilst writing this book I worked out all kinds of weird and wonderful things about exploitative theory and now I try to explain these new developments to players on these threads but face constant opposition from all those who use the usual method. Hence this thread.

GR26 - You don't need to have any hands on the villain before you are able to exploit. You can exploit from your very first hand and, unless you are playing against very advanced opponents, it will be far more profitable than using GTO. It will NOT ALWAYS be better than GTO. You could exploit badly which will be worse than GTO (This is obviously the logic you're missing here Sklansky). As you acquire more information on the opponent you are able to exploit effectively more often than when you have less information, but you most certainly can do it straight away too.

I would describe these things whilst streaming on twitch, but, I have written it all out very clearly in my book, which is a step by step guide to exploitation. In this book I have mapped out the natural way that human beings strategize through their decisions in Poker. The tagline on the book is "Learn How All Players Think Through Their Plays". I spent a long time planning it out and I do honestly believe it is by far and away the most effective poker guide on the market. I personally think it is better than Sun Tzu's "Art of War" and this isn't purely arrogance lol, in the book I point out his mistakes and explain how to beat him.

No, WorldzMine, I do not think the earth is flat lol.
And KingKong, if it were a 1 on 1 competition, the perfect GTO player would draw with the perfect exploitative player. But, if there were a mixed field of players the GTO player would LOSE to the exploiter. (On average of course)... I bet Sklansky didn't realize that little gem. My book is blatantly going to replace his as the fundamental guide for all beginners.

I would be very interested to see the source material for this statement.

Afaik (though I don't keep up with cutting edge theory) we don't even know what multiplayer optimal play looks like, just that it exists.

This statement is false fwiw.

Well, I worked it out myself, and you know what, I'm not going to tell you lol. I'll explain it to you if you bow down to me and beg for forgiveness, but, otherwise, you're going to have to work it out for yourself. It's not very complicated.

No its not. You can ask Sklansky this one and he will be able to explain it to you.

Lol

This is one of the all time great troll sentences ever written in any media.