Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc"

11-30-2012 , 05:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zobags
You do not understand what I am saying, which is probably my fault for not being clear enough. If you isolate the river, some strategies will be able to exploit a GTO strat on that street only but only because they played exploitably on earlier streets. So overall, the GTO strat will perform the same. This does not contradict what you are saying about GTO strategies.
No. a river gto-strat would be unexploitable. or not a gto-strat. you can't have it both ways.

i understand what you are saying, it's just wrong.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by franxic
No. a river gto-strat would be unexploitable. or not a gto-strat. you can't have it both ways.

i understand what you are saying, it's just wrong.
The GTO strat is for all streets not just the river. I promise you have no clue what I am saying.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 05:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zobags
The GTO strat is for all streets not just the river. I promise you have no clue what I am saying.
prolly true if you talk about exploitable gto-strategies. hope someone else can dumb it down for you, i surrender.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 06:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by franxic
prolly true if you talk about exploitable gto-strategies. hope someone else can dumb it down for you, i surrender.
I understand everything you are saying and do not need anything dumbed down for me. I hope someone can teach you to be less of a jerk.

I am pretty sure that almost everyone would agree that if we were to check-call all 3 streets with the flop top set and only top set, the GTO strat would value own itself hard on the river in many spots. Thus, we have exploited it on the river, but it is still the GTO strat. We had to play explotably earlier to get to exploit on the river.

Last edited by Zobags; 11-30-2012 at 06:11 PM.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 06:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by franxic
prolly true if you talk about exploitable gto-strategies. hope someone else can dumb it down for you, i surrender.
Zobags is right, you can't have a "river GTO" strategy that is independent of the rest of the strategy and unexploitable. As a contrived example, let us assume for arguments sake that GTO strategy would have both the BTN and BB reach the river in a modified game where only one bet is allowed per street with equal numbers of nut hands, bluff catchers and bluffs. If BB checks then the BTN will bet all nut hands, check back all bluff catchers and bluff a non-0 percent of the time. A BB GTO strategy will call all nut hands, fold all bluffs and call bluff catchers with a non-0 percentage. However in this case when playing the BTN we play in a sub-optimal way and never bluff so reach the river with only nut hands and bluff catchers. We now bet all nut hands and check back all bluff catchers however the GTO BB is still calling its bluff catchers a non-0 percentage even though it will lose every single time it does so - it is -EV for it to do this if we totally isolate the river from the rest of the hand! The reason this is the case is by never bluffing we have given up at least the same if not more EV earlier in the hand. The GTO BB is actually -EV against us purely on river play but its |EV(rest of hand)| >= |EV(river play)| which means it is still playing optimally.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 06:17 PM
^^tl;dr


sorry if i was a jerk, but if you understood what i was saying why would you keep stating the opposite?

a gto-strategy exists and it is unexploitable whatever the **** you do!

if it was exploitable, how could it be gto?

whatever weird examples anyone is going to construct, if someone finds the gto-solution for NLHoldem it will be unexploitable at any point. that is how a gto-solution is ****ing defined.

/rant, will go to sleep, have fun debating

Last edited by franxic; 11-30-2012 at 06:28 PM.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 06:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by franxic
^^tl;dr


sorry if i was a jerk, but if you understood what i was saying why would you keep stating the opposite?
Because the GTO strat considers all streets.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zobags
Because the GTO strat considers all streets.
since i made the mistake to look back at the thread before shutting my comp down, i might as well give a last answer:

a gto-solution considers all streets and all possible strategies on every street for any possible stacksize. and it would be unexploitable towards any sequence of actions and betsizes.

not sure why you think slowplay would not be covered, and it would certainly not exploit a gto-strategy.

if you exploit an opponent by slowplaying, you exploit his tendencies. a gto-solution has no exploitable tendencies.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangurino
No.
could you explain why please? on the basis of minimax?
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tutejszy
Yup, that's what's disturbed me.
You are not special.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerrod Ankenman
The answer is 1. Everything else is just attempts to package the ideas so that we can try to use them in human brains.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 07:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zobags
I am pretty sure that almost everyone would agree that if we were to check-call all 3 streets with the flop top set and only top set, the GTO strat would value own itself hard on the river in many spots. Thus, we have exploited it on the river, but it is still the GTO strat. We had to play explotably earlier to get to exploit on the river.
Saying you "exploited it on the river," doesn't really mean anything. There's no exploiting going on. It's like talking about a spot where you never bluff but GTO strategy still calls sometimes and saying you "exploited it with your valuebets." As you keep emphasizing, you have to look at the strategy as a whole. I think you understand all of this, you're just misusing the word "exploit."
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaytorr
The BB has an edge in the Push-Fold game at stack sizes above 7-8 bbs IIRC. And Chen and Ankenman argue that Push-Fold is likely optimal at stacks sizes below ~10 bbs in MoP.

The SB does have the disadvantage of acting first preflop, so it's not inconceivable that the BB could have an edge at some stacks sizes.
Forgot to add tha one other obvious exception. Where the big blind is essentially the button, Since he goes last on the round where the money is bet.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 07:10 PM
I think I misinterpreted something the same way as I'm assuming Zobags did - no idea why but I read something as meaning that the river play of an optimal strategy was unexploitable independent of the rest of the strategy i.e. you could take only the river part of a GTO strategy and plug it into any strategy and the river play would be unexploitable.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ike
Saying you "exploited it on the river," doesn't really mean anything. There's no exploiting going on. It's like talking about a spot where you never bluff but GTO strategy still calls sometimes and saying you "exploited it with your valuebets." As you keep emphasizing, you have to look at the strategy as a whole. I think you understand all of this, you're just misusing the word "exploit."
I agree with this and apologize for misusing the term and creating confusion. Thanks for the reply. Do you agree that, on the river in hold 'em, the GTO strat must make an assessment as to what villain's range should be?
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 08:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zobags
I agree with this and apologize for misusing the term and creating confusion. Thanks for the reply. Do you agree that, on the river in hold 'em, the GTO strat must make an assessment as to what villain's range should be?
The GTO strat is the best response to the opponent playing optimally, so it is the best line against the range the other guy is "supposed to" get to the river with.

Talking about it in terms of making assessments or what the GTO strat is "thinking about," is more confusing than useful, IMO. Making assessments is something people do. The GTO strat is just a list of situations and the correct actions to take in them.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 08:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
The right way to beat a mediocre player is to play as close to GTO as possible except in those situations where it is clear that you shouldn't. Essentially combinining the two types above.

Even though I am not a head up player simple logic tells me that an excellent human will likely beat a semifish for more than a bot would. For example say that you noticed that your opponent is folding 30% of his buttons. A bot would not adjust for this and call too often preflop. It would also play a bit too loose from that point forward. It would give up EV to the semi fish because its strategy has to at least break even against a player that raises 100% of the time preflop. Which is a looser strategy than the proper one for this situation. Of course the EV it gives back to thne semifish is no more than the original gift it was handed by the extra preflop folding. But an expert human, unlike the bot, would not return nearly as much of that gift
Hi David,
What do you mean by break even and are you implying that GTO would be 100% button pfr?
If it turns out to be less, would it still need to break even against 100% pfr, which would be a non GTO strategy?
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 09:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ike
The GTO strat is the best response to the opponent playing optimally, so it is the best line against the range the other guy is "supposed to" get to the river with.
One clarification: the GTO strategy doesn't just optimize against a villain's range on the river. It considers all streets. For example, it might fold more often on the river if it is costly for the villain to show up with a bluff in that spot.

Your statement is still correct, and I'm sure you're aware of all this, but it's best not to think of each street in isolation.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 10:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaytorr
One clarification: the GTO strategy doesn't just optimize against a villain's range on the river. It considers all streets. For example, it might fold more often on the river if it is costly for the villain to show up with a bluff in that spot.

Your statement is still correct, and I'm sure you're aware of all this, but it's best not to think of each street in isolation.
I agree. I thought I was making that point myself in my post but apparently it wasn't very clear.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 10:02 PM
Oh, when I said the answer was 1), that was because I only read the first two words of that option, concluded it was right, and posted. My bad. All that explanatory stuff after that is wrong, sorry.

GTO doesn't know from bluffs or value bets or semibluffs or blocking bets or anything. It just maximizes against its nemesis. All those other things are just names we put on things so that we can wrap our heads around how to play in all these different situations and draw conclusions about one situation from things we know about another and stuff.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 11:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerrod Ankenman
The answer is 1. Everything else is just attempts to package the ideas so that we can try to use them in human brains.
So, am I understanding this correctly?

I believe that Jerrod just announced that he doesn't have a human brain.

So, the obvious question, what kind of brain does he have? He's really a cyborg in a very realistic (this guy is hairy!!) simulation of a human body? He's an alien inhabiting a real human body? Enquiring minds want to know!

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
11-30-2012 , 11:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerrod Ankenman
GTO doesn't know from bluffs or value bets or semibluffs or blocking bets or anything. It just maximizes against its nemesis. All those other things are just names we put on things so that we can wrap our heads around how to play in all these different situations and draw conclusions about one situation from things we know about another and stuff.
Haha this paragraph is so good.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
12-01-2012 , 12:09 AM
Fossilman and Ankenman in the same thread

swoon.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
12-01-2012 , 01:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ike
The GTO strat is the best response to the opponent playing optimally, so it is the best line against the range the other guy is "supposed to" get to the river with.

Talking about it in terms of making assessments or what the GTO strat is "thinking about," is more confusing than useful, IMO. Making assessments is something people do. The GTO strat is just a list of situations and the correct actions to take in them.
Since I was misusing terms, I will atempt to state more formally what I was thinking when I said,

"I would think a GTO strat would have to assume villain is playing GTO as well."

For HU Hold 'Em, the nemesis of a GTO strategy is itself a GTO strategy.

Is this correct?
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
12-01-2012 , 02:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zobags
Since I was misusing terms, I will atempt to state more formally what I was thinking when I said,

"I would think a GTO strat would have to assume villain is playing GTO as well."

For HU Hold 'Em, the nemesis of a GTO strategy is itself a GTO strategy.

Is this correct?
Yeah, that's basically correct. To be more precise, the GTO BB strategy is a nemesis of the GTO button strategy and vice versa. There exist suboptimal strategies that are also nemeses of the GTO strategy.
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote
12-01-2012 , 03:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ike
There exist suboptimal strategies that are also nemeses of the GTO strategy.
o.0 how could any deviation from GTO play vs a GTO opponent have a neutral or positive effect on your winrate? please elaborate. i've never heard of this. also thanks for all your great posts ^_^
Hoss_TBF: "All top players use game theory, distributions, bluff ratios etc" Quote

      
m