I have found that it is not difficult for me to play similar to these GTOWizard recs in online games where pretty much everybody is working w 100bb stacks and many of the opponents are also trying to play a GTO-informed style, but in live games, the players are just all over the f***ing map. In Live games I end up playing MUCH TIGHTER for a number of reasons.

BET SIZES: GTO-W recommends 2bb open sizes (UTG through HJ), the CO is (2.3) and the BN(2.5) and the SB (3), (in full ring set up). In many Live games 5bb opens are the norm and everyone is just going to treat a 2bb open as if the pot is still unopened. Pretty much nobody opens to 2bb in my local games. 3-bet sizes in GTO-W are smaller than in Live games, also. All of this impacts the open ranges obviously, and the 3 betting recs. If we are opening larger than 2x, then our ranges should be much smaller than the GTO-W recs, obvious, no?

GAME CONDITIONS: In a lot of low limit hold em games people just don't fold often. When I am in LP, the pot is rarely unopened when it gets to me. There are usually multiple limpers, or a raise and 1 or 2 cold callers. Also, people don't 3 bet all that much in my local Live games, and when they do, it is a LARGE bet and you can usually be pretty sure they've got a real hand. When ppl 4 bet it is AA/KK, 7 times out of 10 and it is AK the other 3 times. Opponents call c-bets with much weaker hands then they should, sometimes they call with absolutely nothing. All of this is exploitable, obviously, but the exploit isn't to go even looser and inflate multiway pots even more, with very marginal hands like J8s, against calling stations who want to compare their marginal hand with your marginal hand at showdown. That is not the solution, imo.

STACKS: In my game, when the straddle is on, which is 80% of the time, it is basically a 1/3/6 game with 66bb stacks. This, of course, impacts our open ranges also and requires them to be much smaller than GTO-W recs. The SPR's are going to be low even in single-raised pots.
If there is a straddle and 2 limpers (which is how it looks more often than not by the time hand gets to the Hero in the CO) and Hero wants to raise pot-size or bigger, that is a $40 dollar raise +/- and if we get 2 callers (which would be not unexpected at all) then the pot is $130 and full-stacked players have $360 behind. SPR= 3.
This set-up favors big hands like TT+, AJ/KQ and disfavors drawing opportunities even though the pot is multiway and there is a potential for a big pot.
Open-raising w 21% from the HJ with hands like K6s, Q8s, A9o when you anticipate seeing a 4-way flop, very possibly without position, with a low SPR, is not a good set-up for us.
Finally, there are usually multiple broken stacks and guys who have 2-3x the average stack playing in the same hand, which complicates any kind of GTO analysis.

READS AND EXPLOITS: When playing with folks for 8 hours at the same table, we can get a pretty good feel for who is tight and who is loose and who is passive/aggressive and who is drunk and who is tilted and who is short-stack-scared-money and who is short-stack-all-in-loose-money and who is playing GTO and who is playing old-school and who plays poorly post-flop, etc, etc, etc.. We are trying to sandbag and trap certain players and we are trying to bully and overbet others.

So .... you know ..... do any of you really play these GTO-W pre-flop recs in Live games?
If so, are you min raising, as recommended?


Please don't flame me for saying something potentially critical of GTO. I actually respect Game Theory quite a bit and try my best to examine the lessons and learn from information that is out there. I'm going to continue to learn. I have been thinking about this for a while with regard to Live, low limit poker, though, and I think it is a mistake for me to adopt these ranges as default ranges in my local, low limit games. I think I am better off playing tighter, much tighter, and keeping it simpler. All due respect. What do you all think?

My understanding of GTO is it's a way to avoid being exploiting by a good player. I'm guessing you won't lose playing GTO at low live stakes but you won't crush. The best way to crush low live stakes is to exploit the usually abundant amount of bad play.

I have said many times on this forum that in any multi-way game—not just poker—once one player starts deviating from GTO, you are no longer even guaranteed that GTO will not lose, let alone that it will win a good amount.

In a typical live game you should almost totally ignore GTO recommendations.

Forget GTO in LLNL.

LLNL = value bet, value bet, value bet, fold w/o a great hand/draw when the average player starts betting/raising. It really is that simple, at least in my games. If only I listened to my own advice more often.

Thanks for validating my experience. That's basically what I've been doing, ignoring GTO recs, which is to say playing tight and betting BIG with my good hands, which includes opening large, overbetting the pot vs. multiple limpers and three betting with them of course, and trying to create a low SPR to make it easy for ME to play my good hands. This isn't really GTO at all but it's still good poker at these stakes.

I mean, a lot of it is still good. The GTO “Raise First In” charts keep me in line. Switching to “3bet or fold” from the SB works. Including SCs in my -betting range has been good too, it keeps me balanced. The concept of Blockers is good even at LLSNL, just as a way to push you in the better direction on borderline spots.

Really, the only spots where they fall apart are due to the average opening raise sizes being larger than optimal—so you need to tighten your calling range appropriately (especially from the blinds).

Adjust from “optimal” based on specific player types (when the old guy who’s played 6 hours without raising opens UTG and you have A5s, RESIST the urge to 3-bet him!), but in general, it’s what I stick to.

Hey Davo, my thoughts are that if we are opening to 5bb from MP, which is common in Live games, then we MUST tighten up the 'raise first in' ranges because the GTO-Wizard ranges are only "optimal" if we are min-raising. If we are not min-raising, but rather going to 5x, then the GTO-W ranges are way too wide.

Also, if we know that even if we raise we are going to get 3 callers and play oop, then we have to re-figure the hands we choose to raise with, and, I'd say, raise a higher amount so as to charge these fools more money AND maybe not go 4-way. The villains are not playing GTO in response to our raises so we have to change how and what we are raising in response.

If the effective stacks in the hand you are playing are 50bb or 60bb, or 70bb, or anything less than 100bb, then you might as well just throw these 'raise first in' charts out the window because they are not 'optimal.'

You mention calling ranges from the blinds. I didn't discuss this in my OP but I ALSO think that defending the BB with a 40% range and playing out of position versus a BN 2.5x raise is unwise, generally, AND as soon as the game conditions we have been talking about apply (bigger raise sizes, shorter stacks, stickier players) then it is not 'optimal,' so we have to shrink that range way down as well.

I have learned a lot from general game theory study and I appreciate it. I just don't like the ranges for my games.

I hate to say it, but I have started limping way more than ever, even first in. My player pool is so predictable and they limp w/ AK, AA, KK, etc.; they rarely raise pre; and they almost NEVER 3-bet. I don't limp with "normal" raising hands, but I find myself limping w/ suited connectors and gappers, smaller pairs, some big face cards, suited AX, etc. This is only because these guys are so easy to play against post-flop. The are fit/fold and they love to chase. It's awesome.

When I go to other venues (Vegas on Saturday, baby), I go back to basically no limping until I learn more, but in my "home" games, it pays.

I definitely agree with the advice to ignore GTO in live low stakes because there's so much to exploit, but by definition GTO should be plus EV against anyone not playing it against you, right? Otherwise by definition it's not GTO.

You are almost correct in 2-player games but you are wrong in 3+ player games. I made an entire thread about this once, just search it (it was my 3k post).

Adding to CallMeVernon, GTO only guarantees your opponent can't improve his payoff no matter what (i.e. he can't exploit your strategy).

Think of rock paper scissor.

The Nash equilibrium of the game is to randomize between R/P/S. This guarantees that your opponent is indifferent between any of the three actions and there is nothing he can do about it.

Now, say your opponent is extremely unthinking and just plays rock every single time. You play the GTO strategy. He wins 1/3 games, loses 1/3 games and ties 1/3 games, or on average he wins zero. Your payoff against him is also zero.

Playing last months only live cash games 1/2 9-player NLH in a european country, I noticed the following:

1) Players don't 3bet so often.
2)When they 3-bet their range looks almost something like top 10% (AA-88, AKo-AJo, KQo, AKs-A9s, KQs-KTs, QJs-QTs, JT)s.
3)When they 4-bet their range looks almost something like top 4% (JJ+,AQ+).
4)Post flop they don't bluff so much.
5)Fold easily to aggression.
6)Open is something like 8-10BBs.
7)3bet is something like 20-30BBs.

From my point of view I found some good lines. Correct me if I am wrong:

1) Buy in with higher stack. This allows me to cover most of the people and try to apply pressure.
2) Find the optimal sizing according to the table for open and 3bet. Usually is way higher that GTO.
3) Use preflop GTO ranges and add more calls in suited connectors and gappers.
4)Apply pressure post-flop with bluffing flop turn and river. This depends heavily on the villain type and on the board.
5)Use smartly check-raises and overbets!!!!
6)When being pressured from passive players fold.

I think that punishing players that have wider ranges by applying pressure is a way of making money in these type of games. This can be statistically proven with flopzilla. Most of these players don't hit the board almost 60% of the time.

Agree with basically everything, except at my games:

2)When they 3-bet their range looks almost something like AKs, KK, AA.
3)When they 4-bet their range looks almost something like AA, sometimes KK.

IMO, we need to change the terms and definitions for GTO.

IMO:

GTO = the optimal play for the situation. Regardless of being in equilibrium

Equilibrium = what most use "GTO" for now. Both players playing optimally and without being exploited


For example, if you took a rock paper scissor solver and told the solver that the Villain always plays rock, the solver would tell you to always play paper until their strategy changed.

Exploitive play is basically what you would get if you node locked a solver.


So, IMO, you can absolutely use the optimal strategy in all games regardless of the play style of the Villain.


And, also by definition, being exploitable requires the possibility to be exploited.

For example:

Hero notices that V1 always does X, so Hero always does Y to counter.

V2 notices Hero always does Y. He plans to use this to exploit Hero

However, Hero does not do this against V2, therefore by default, Hero is not actually exploitable by V2



Long story short, exploitive play is the Optimal decision and can be solved with the correct inputs into a GTO solver.



And you can mix the two for a hybrid style (this should be what everyone is already doing).

For example, today at a 1/3 $1k cap match stack (plays like 5/10), I had just tabled AA and have long history and image with these V's as not playing smaller cards.

Two hands later, in a button straddled pot, it was limped around and I raised to 6x with 32ss.

Flop was 332

I stacked a player who had TT and he said and I quote "you don't play those kinds of hands." It never even crossed his mind I could have that board covered in my range. He thought he was against broadway cards and sometimes big pairs.


While this is a very basic example, it illustrates how even at the lowest stakes and lowest level of thinking, we can still mix frequencies profitably.

Good tool to have with zero reads on the table, but as soon as you have reliable info you should try exploiting player tendencies.
If someone is raising wide to your right and plays fit or fold u should 3-bet IP with any hand that has a mixed 3-bet strategy and try to take it down with a C-bet.
If someone to your left is raising limpers too often and heÂ’s getting lots of calls bc table knows heÂ’s loose, then limp your range to him and squeeze accordingly with an UTG opening range.
If limps arenÂ’t being punished then I agree with Java, limp your suited connectors and suited Ax. No reason to bloat the pot OOP with these marginal hands that honestly donÂ’t play that well OOP at LLSNL in SRP or especially being 3-bet. Like wise if you can get away with limping off suit broadways, you can consider it if people or limping all there offsuit one gapers and are chasing gutshots etc.
if someoneÂ’s 3-betting you a lot tighten up your GTO range and open all hands, rely on GTO 4-bet ranges to inform you how to widen your range for that.

In general use it as a tool to inform you where you can make exploits. Try to be creative in how you achieve low SPR pots with your monsters and high SPR pots with your more speculative hands.

Will check it out, but if this is true, what you're saying is GTO doesn't exist for 3+? i.e. there is no equilbrium strategy, right?

There is an equilibrium but the point is that the definition of equilibrium does not imply what you think it does. In an equilibrium, one player can’t increase their own EV by deviating. Equilibrium is defined as one individual being unable to exploit the collective. With only two players, “the collective” is one player, which is why 2 player games are very different from games with more than 2 players.

I have a lot of experience with GTO Wizard, and unless you are talking about the 6 or 8 max straddle and ante solutions (for specific app games I think), they don't have a specific live solutions. The 9max 100bb 50nl rake general solutions are just that, and by no means designed specifically for live.

As far as live goesI personally use those solutions only as an RFI guide, and deviate significantly for sizings, 3bets and cold calling preflop. Postflop, I am really only using my knowledge of GTO as a heuristic for some boards when HU, but I mostly throw most of my GTO study out the window for live and work to exploit.

GTO is a great tool though, because working with Wizard has helped me get better at understnading how poor players make mistakes and how to exploit them.

I believe that GTO is a much complicated thing when solving for 3 people, as in 3 way, one player could play the theoretical 3 way GTO solution, but the actions of the second player could cost the first player EV that goes to the third player.

This is obviously a simple explanation, and a better theory player could explain it better.

You might be interested in this short Phil Galfond video where he discusses the approaches to adjusting GTO preflop RFI ranges to different types of suboptimal live play (blinds defending too tightly or too widely, for example).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLGK...CJiu2KjB4oSJEQ

There are common live situations where it can make sense to tighten up. Specifically, Phil mentions that some opens are only profitable because they steal the blinds often enough. If you have a loose player in the blinds, or a loose player in the BTN, it may not make sense to open the weakest hands in the CO (eg the K5s, JTo, etc).

I would also point out that if players in the blinds are bad postflop, that swings it the other way; that factor should make you want to open wider, relatively speaking (Phil also mentions this in the video). So there should be no hard and fast rules.

To add on to what CIE just said, if you have multiple players who are all playing too loose or all playing too tight, it theoretically could be not just suboptimal, but losing, to continue to play the weakest parts of whatever your “GTO” range is. This is why you can’t just study optimal play when you want to play in a live game with multiple people making massive deviations.

OP, I open tighter than GTO would suggest because raise sizes are bigger unless I want to play 7 ways pots and usually OOP. My reasons to tighten are a) bigger raise = theoretically tighter and b) GTO ranges rely on fold equity which rarely applies in LLSNL games.

I'm learning GTO, and don't have much experience on live games. Just to share some thoughts:

I think GTO theory is always correct, and applies to any situation. But that does not mean that a specific solution is correct for a specific game.

In live games where the strategies vastly different from a GTO player, the solutions in GTO wizard simply does not apply, not only because that you need to exploit to deviate from GTO, but also because the input (such as bet size, effective stack size, etc.). If you have a GTO solver that can run preflop, input the parameters that are close to a live game, then the preflop range will be very different than GTO ranges. I believe such ranges are still good guidelines.

As already been pointed out that live games generate way more multi-way pots. But that's a weakness of existing solvers. And the amount of computation would be huge (similar to the solution of three-body if there is such a solver. Seems GTO wizard has access to super computers, not sure if it has such solutions.

For big stack games, GTO postflop is still good, just need to adjust up value-bluff ratio against multiple players, I think.

Just my 2c...