No, it's literally the definition, taken from MIT lectures.

From my perspective:
CardrunnerEV is just an equity calculator that is no any better than Equilab. GTO+ is really obscure software that looks like it provides randomised results.

So why not changing strategy by either player?Because u can't do any better when u reach Nash Equilibria.That's what word optimal(the best u can do)stands for.So when someone deviates from Equilibria that one is giving u the chance u to make more money.So we reach another myth,that gto play don't work for microstakes.It is complete nonsense that any other approach can make more money at micros and that's because u can't put recreationals on exact ranges.LLinusLLove is gto bot that noone can exploit him and somehow he is not breaking even(zero sum?!)

Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk

CardRunnersEV is EV calculator.

Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk

This is not an interesting debate it is the same debate that ruins any thread with the key word GTO in it. Two plus two would be easier to read if they banned GTO.

lol

Then your max exploit line should be not opening those topics if ur not interested. Bye bye

If vulnerability is a primary issue, wouldn't you say that even a small x/r is more likely to clean up equity than a cbet? Folk shyt themselves v raises. One counter-point could be that btn cant float recklessly wide v a cbet with BB in the pot which should increase its effectiveness.

However is the equity worth protecting if BB was destined to show interest? One benefit of checking is I get to see what BB does before putting money in the pot.

Word Optimal stands for zero-sum game and you can do better than that by exploiting other players tendencies that has nothing to do with Nash, GTO and Solvers. In micro stakes all that exploitation boils down to playing TAG vs LAG and vise versa.

Yep. In defence of your play, if villain is bet-happy and drops a brick in his trousers facing a raise, bet/folding hands like 33-77, KQo/KJo without a diamond Pio wants to x/r 100% of your range, and that's regardless of whether he 3b jams all of his flush draws or only 50% of them. The ranges below show villain's flop decision when checked to and then their decision facing a x/r. Its not perfect of course, I didn't spend too much time fine tuning the betting/folding ranges.

40bb t82 Bet villain by Cody Wagner, on Flickr

40bb t82 FOLD villain by Cody Wagner, on Flickr

Hero T82 xr by Cody Wagner, on Flickr

No xraise, since small xraise is terrible on this flop given IP can just flat with insanely good price then use position . We built up a very big pot and on the turn just have to check-fold.

Don't think in small stakes games we get xraised or reraised bluff on this flop too much other than a very strong draw. So if get raise vs cbet its instafold.

Other option is a xfold, i dont think xcalling is any good on this runout by average small stakes player who will usually (?) bet only decent stuff here.

So probably XF flop > Cbet flop > xraise flop with small size

lol omg do you realize PIO is for HU play and its a 3 handed pot?

Pio construct a range for BU and "hero" for HU pot. It has nothing to do with 3 handed wtf

Its like using a hammer where you need a screwdriver.


Villain betting almost any A3s? half of 65s? etcetc

Yeah it's not perfect but in the situation once BTN leads and BB folds, it's now HU. So won't it only matter then if there is a significant difference between BTNs flop betting ranges when the BB is in the hand and when they arent? I cant see it being too different if we're talking about a rec who bets too much.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I don't accept this. The float bet IP on dynamics boards is the new cbet, completely out of line. Tbf it's an effective exploit because check ranges from most players on such flops are far too weak.

Interesting, thanks.

Since you were using your HUD, lets not forget that villain is producing this rather nitty line of: BTN: 36.28 BB (VPIP: 19.12, PFR: 10.29, 3Bet Preflop: 3.70, Hands: 69) on a lol sample size it is true, but none the less you have seen him play very tight for the better part of an hour. Which makes a guesstimated range of after you check raise the flop pretty optimistic IMO, if only because a villain this nitty will probably not be flatting a lot of those hands pre-flop. I also think the ranges on the charts in this thread are far too broad for the type of player your villain seems to be. This post is basing it's points on a description of the villain that is the antithesis of the player the villain seems to be. The ranges used for the calculations may be fine in a theoretical sense, but the hand was not played in theory, it was played in an actual game. I think that the results you get from your calculator are only as good as the data you give it to work with.

As for your point here, Remember that with a c-bet you are risking 3bb-3.5bb to win 8bb; with the x-raise you are risking 10bb to win 12bb. This should always be a factor when you are debating c-bet versus x-raise.

also, this, fold pre: I meant to point out earlier that you could actually fold this one pre. Not saying I never would bring it in, but A-2 is not a great hand in MP and the suited aspect should never be considered more than window dressing pre-flop, since suited hole cards only create as flush about 1 in 12 times. Also check raise larger, 1.5x original bet is pretty weak. If I'm going to check-raise bluff, I will go 2x or 3x the original bet. But I would not advise x-raise bluffing with your stack size anyway, because you risk getting pot committed to a bluff, which is not a good thing.
I've played around 9000 online MTT's and I've won over 130 times, which works out to a "not too bad' once every 70 tournaments. I've won one massive "donkament" with thousands of entries and others with over 1000 runners, but most of my wins have come in fields of 500 or less. About 40 of my wins have been in some form of Omaha, and I've also won tournaments playing 8-game, stud08, 5-card draw, and limit holdem. I've also won several hundred SNG's and MTTSNG's, no idea exactly how many and not inclined to go through my records to figure it out. My online cash rate is about 16%. I've won twice live, with 4 or 5 chops and about 20 cashes total from about 75 live tournaments.

PIO players are legit whales lol.

This wouldn't work in a cash game where stacks are much deeper, why the *** would it reccomend this with a 40bb stack. Like what are you trying to fold out that calls the flop x/r.

I don't mind the flop c/r, but once you are called it's game over man. Shut that down and hope for a cheap river club.

He'd be making an error if his station a pot jam for stacks range was as wide as his flat 2.5x flop x/r range