Quote:
Originally Posted by Unguarded
Fwiw, "initiative" is a fake concept from a GTO perspective.
Exactly. The sum total of the information we need to decide how to play a situation lies in the ranges: ours and the villains.
All "initiative" means is that the player with the alleged initiative has a at least relatively uncapped range. That range should be more polar, with strong hands and bluffs. The player who is calling will have a condensed range, more linear.
When we open and the villain three-bets (or when we defend our big blind head-up against the opener), when we flat 100% of our continuing range, we are denying a fair amount of nut advantage to the villain. Indeed, if the flop comes low when we defend our big blind, we will have the nut advantage, because we will have just as many overpairs in our range as the villain, and we will have all the sets in our range and the villain won't.
Thus a villain playing well will have to check back on the flop more often than if we just called when we have a four-betting range, and we will be able to realize more of our equity with our draws.
In big bet poker, because the pot grows exponentially with each round of betting, missing an early bet can cost a lot of profit by the river. This is limit poker, the pot grows linearly, and missing a small bet before the flop really doesn't cost us much, just one small bet.
(Not arguing with you, @Unguarded, just expanding on the point.)