^Yes I've run simulations. I can't keep replying though. I feel like I'm spamming a thread with comments like this.

are you flexible enough to get your head out of the sand?

Many people say the lack of "standard" definition of GTO is due to historical reason. That is only half true. It is true we get stuck with the term of GTO because of its wide usage. But technically we have never get stuck with the definition of GTO.

The real problem is, we have not been able to find a definition to fit what the term GTO made to believe for the mass.

A lot of people here say: hey, GTO is Nash Equilibrium, what more do you want to know? But when you look closer, it does not answer the question.

In reality, close to 0% game is playing at NE state. It is natural to ask what will happen if I play NE and everyone else does not?

The answer is easy for heads up. you can imagine you both were playing NE and the other guy now change his strategy. Since that guy can not benefit from this move, and since it is zero sum game, you have the conclusion that your NE EV does not get hurt.

But that does not apply to, say 8 handed game when the other seven play none GTO. Of if you like, imagine you were playing NE and now they all make change on their strategy. There is really no answer on what will happen to your NV EV.

So, we are having a dilemma here: A) we say GTO is twosome NE, which we get to keep the benefit "can not lose", but invalid its application to multiple players game. B) we say GTO is NE for all kind of games, then we can not say playing GTO guarantee you not losing EV.

In marketing, people have been using the conclusion from game type A to promote game type B. That just make it impossible to have a "standard" definition of GTO, because it does not exist.

There is a difference between "not one top pro uses pio" and "not one top pro uses pio religiously"

For those who can not finish reading a single sentence in more than three weeks, it is advised not to participate in this discussion because it is just too intellectually challenged

wtf does religiously even mean here, nobody has ever implied that any player was NEVER deviating from sims, where did you get that?

why don't you ask that guy where he got his line?

Do you really believe I said what he said I said, after my OP talking about SHR players using GTO tools?

Isn't you the first guy reply the thread and followed the thread for quite a while?

I can not keep answering your questions especially you have been so rude with your ignorant questions.

I feel like this thread clearly shows the difference in knowing what game theory actually i as it relates to mathematics and analytics and arguing what game theory is as a brand name for "really good poker strategy."

We can, to my knowledge, find an equilibrium for heads up limit games with less than 20BB's - that is effectively "solved". The idea that equilibrium could be anywhere close to found at full ring cash games, with functionally infinite interrelated decision trees is comical, as is people talking about "the GTO way"( ESPECIALLY at <100NL games. lolwut). Perhaps it's a semantics issue with me.

RichZ has given good posts. Again, I don't necessarily agree with the conclusions (HUD's, for example, haven't ruined poker because people at low limit games either don't care or don't know how to use them accurately. One of my friends, who is otherwise brilliant, will make all kinds of wrong poker decisions off of 3 hands.), but the backlash and misrepresentation of what he's -actually- saying is mindblowing. I mean...c'mon mate HU4ROLLZ? Just sad, really.

I wasn't particularly rude, you're just overly sensitive and you may want to work on that, I can't deal with your insecurities here, we're just talking about GTO

I laugh every time Rich gets his feelings hurt because someone is disagreeing with him, then retaliates with a snarky, condescending remark. The internet is probably not for you!

A11K26, are you saying that GTO-play varies depending on which stakes you are playing?

What are you defining as GTO play? Because an -actual- genuinely GTO play hasn't, as we know, been calculated, and that's assuming that there is one (it's certainly not findable by current methods . The sheer number of decision trees (and options) in even a heads up deep stacked no limit game (10^160) sees to that.)

Assuming you mean what the layperson means, which seems to be "best lines against perfect -or- perfectly imperfect players", then yes, it would change by a number of factors, stakes included.

All solvers do (and I'm a fan of them for theoretical poker - I'm just not out here trying to "solve" the games at the mouthbreather stakes when I can just shove aces and triple my money) is add a layer of balancing to your play against a players assumed balanced range. It balances your balancing, for lack of a it's 12:30am here term. "Solver" is kind of a misnomer.

Sorry for rambling, I've very stream of consciousness. But to answer your question I have to first define your question. As the word actually means, no, because it doesn't exist. As how people mean it, yes, because population tendencies.

Are all these sub-30 post accounts written by the same person?

What is the term for this? where someone is pretending to be multiple persons back-slapping each other?

I will make a 3k$ credit to buy monkersolver and 2500 deposit on stars. Richz, i tried without solvers and it really doesn't work without study nowadays online believe me.
If you want to make something in the online poker world you need to adapt and accept the fact that playing GTO is the way to go.

This thread would have 8 posts from 4 people.

the term is astroturfing

i'm grunching so this isn't an endorsement that i believe that's happening (although that's usually the case when a bunch of new accounts pop up and take active interests in a particular thread)

However, as I mentioned previously, Rich is big poker influencer in the venn diagram of poker players not part of the 2p2 circle so it's very plausible his presence here would attract a lot of new people

IMO there is a big mistake to assume that if someone is not getting rich with poker, so they aren’t capable of writing a software that can give you a really good strategy, closest to Equilibrium that any human could ever reach by himself, and by using this strategy and tool another player will not be able to get rich himself.

I mean... One thing is comming up with a strategy and a different thing is being able to apply it on the tables.
You could have someone that is really good on the lab with the help of some tools, but lacks skills on the felt that are necessary to apply this strategy when there are emotions, pressure and no software real time assistance while playing.

At the same time - as a succesful poker player I imagine you know that - there are many others variables that works together to make someone rich at poker.
Factors such as mental game, bankroll management, and a bit of running good, matters alot when talking about having success at Poker long term.

So I think that one could write a really good software with out the need of having world class results himself.

Meh. I agree it's gone too far. I listen to strategy podcasts and the pros get sent a hand from a live table at "mouthbreather stakes", an amateur villain raises and they start talking about hero's minimum defence frequencies and so on rather than "does he have it". Those pros would eat me alive heads up, but I wonder at a 9-handed table if they would win as fast as me against the 7 donks.

I've never really sat at a table where I didn't have a clear idea of the kinds of tendencies a given player pool was more or less likely to have but GTO can be good if you are out of your comfort zone because they do something you have rarely seen in that player pool - e.g. donk overshove flop for 4x.

Solvers solve by assuming the other player can see your range and adjust to it. In real poker they can't. If you're using them then lock villain ranges.

Please, do not describe OP as a "big influencer", such statement just hurts my eyes. He's practically a RAT in Chinese poker community because of the ignorance he has shown in this GTO discussion led by him. He claims that he gained tons of famous supporters on 2p2 and twitter to the non-English speakers in China. And if anyone disagrees with him, RichZ will:
1,blocks your account
2, Start attacking u personally with ppl who licks his ass.
3, indicate you are one bad "GTO coach" who makes living on scamming ppl with GTO.
4, List RichZ's results in live tournaments (mostly not NLHE) and say ur a joke comparing to the GRAND MASTER RICHZ.

Please OP, u cannot represent poker community in China. I'm ashamed to see ppl claiming he's an "opion leader" for Chinese poker players. No single great Chinese player/influencer agrees with him and plz stop being a clown to argue with a true influencer like punter123 and claiming u won the battle to Chinese poker community...

Pluribus was overshoving pots for 5x.

Right, so when a low stakes player does that without initiative (which is very rare) and it's not clear what the exploit is, a GTO-thinking inspired response is probably the best one.

A more common situation would be for example that when they check-raise flop and they just have it a lot of the time so you don't need to worry about being exploited. Particularly as (unlike a solver with unlocked ranges) they don't get to see in real time what our strategy is. They have locked ranges at least for the given hand, and usually pretty exploitable ones.

1. rich founded a very popular poker forum and even some poker magazines is not open to debate, there's nothing subjective about it - that is a fact

2. i never claimed any of the stuff you claim i claimed nor ever endorsed his ideas

3. since you're questioning credentials, you're a low stakes grinder - you may want to think twice going forward before attempting to call out others when you're talking about skill level/results/etc

again I don't even want to say this because this then paints me as you implied as a supporter of Rich's argument and beliefs, which I'm not - but I can't help but point out you're an idiotic and hypocritical ass clown with absolutely no perspective and needs to sit down and ensure he read something clearly instead of inventing new meanings to the english language and then attacking people for things they never wrote

gfy

I was trying to say that even weak players make GTO moves randomly and u can't define it with 100 % accuracy what they r doing and why.This conversation is useless because to denie GTO play is to denie science. There is still money to be made in poker,that is for sure.

They might make individual correct moves randomly, but ultimately there is still a probability space for what they have.

To take a classic situation, unknown villain jams full pot on the river, I need 33.3% equity to call. It's true that there will be a lot of "correct" value bets and bluffs in that range, but the question is what the numbers of them are.

(Assuming villain is polarised relative to my range and there are no relevant blockers in my range.)

If player type A value-bets 66.7% of the time, I'm indifferent to calling.
If player type B value-bets 60% of the time and bluffs 40% I should call.
If player type C value-bets 73.3% of the time I should fold

I don't need to "define with 100% accuracy" that I'm dealing with player type C in order to make an exploitative fold. It's enough that unknowns in this player pool* are more often player type C than player type B. In other words you're actually playing against player type D, the amalgam of all the players in the pool and you do have reads.

It's so rare that you don't have any relevant reads against the pool - though obviously there are exceptions when they do something really weird.

The above applies to 99% of the games in the world that actually run. The strategy for the other 1% might be different of course, but mostly we don't need to worry about being exploitable in games were the main exploitation strategy is "You wait till I get dealt AA, then I'll get you back!" and GTO has gone to far if pros are advising amateurs to play low stakes live based on that.

* more correctly "It's enough that bets in this spot from unknown players in this player pool are more often from player type C....".

I was kind of surprised you didn’t show up until now.

Anyone who read the last part “how do I finally decide to write a GTO post in English” in my original post, or my long follow up in #174, should not be surprised I would get attacked from some of those Chinese GTO coaches, which I called out as scammers. Someone left comment on weibo: “just like the old Chinese saying: ruining one’s fortune is the same as killing his parents”

So I was prepared. I just didn’t expect that by far the most blunt attack is from a wanna be GTO coach. This samspeedstar is one of the more active members in my poker forum zhiyoucheng. His id is “79suited”. He has been quite respectful for five years until a month ago,(the last message to me on wechat was a goodwill on 1/24/20) when he made posts about this 2+2 thread. He said I was getting beat up here by those experts so badly that it hurt his eyes. His expression was so aggressive, that members in the forum asked if his ID was hijacked.

He offered an apology for his forum comment in one of my wechat groups which has over 300 students. I ignored him, which prompted his mad comments, which in turn resulted in him being kicked out of the group.

He made a post claiming he quit my forum with his contact information, yet he came back again and again trying to make a name for himself by attacking me, until he finally was banned. He followed me to weibo, got blocked, and his wechat channel with me was also blocked.

He has been all over Weibo, joining any talk related to me, and has been shunned like a plague. And he finally is here.

To answer his accusation:

1）I just explained how he got his accounts blocked.

2）I did publicly say he had better chance with his profession which he quit a few years ago to become a professional poker player. I said he does not have the talent to succeed as a pro poker player. And he has zero chance to succeed as a coach because of his personality. This is what I said about him: There are some people who do not care about their own credibility, but at least they pretend to care. This is the guy who doesn't even bother to pretend. He will lie right to your face while everyone knows he is lying.

3）When I talked about those scamming GTO coaches, I didn’t have him in my mind. He is not there yet. According to himself, he had only “informally”coached two players. He was not on my radar.

4）Anyone who knows me knows I am not a tournament player. I have been playing high limit cash games for over twenty years successfully, both online and live, as a semi-pro player. It was someone else who listed my wsop results to tease him.

Well, samepeedster, since you mentioned. I do feel like bragging now, that I have been the top one among all Chinese speaking players on the WSOP POY board four years in a row. And I am one of the 4 players among all players who have been in the top 50 on wsop poy for the past 4 years, all without playing even a single wsop event outside vegas. And I rank 7th in last year's 25K wsop fantasy league. Maybe I should have listed these results.

Since you went this far, I will make you happy by saying this: I am the number one influencer in the Chinese poker community. My credential is as the following. I challenge you to come up with someone comparable.

1）There have been over 100 Chinese poker forums over the years. My forum has more original technical articles at semi-pro or higher level than the rest combined. My forum has been the only one discussing all forms of poker, while no other Chinese poker forum has anything beyond holdem and omaha. And my forum is the only one still alive with any kind of meaningful discussion.

2）My poker magazine published 70 issues over a 7 year period, there are only two or three articles in the early issue were translated from English with approval of the author/publisher, and the rest were all written by the members from my forum with pay 6-9 times higher than standard rate. There existed five or six other Chinese poker magazines over the years, the combined original tech articles are less than 70.

3）I was among the first group that promoted poker in the Chinese world, and I was the first to promote it as an intellectual game. I have put more time on educating players than spending time at the poker tables for over a decade. My forum ID RichZhu alone has 4000+ post count. I have given free videos and open courses on the internet and played demo games at playmoney tables, along with free analysis. I have been the major voice against going pro by dropping out of school or quitting jobs. I am the one who has been calling out all kinds of scammers, from affiliation scam, site/club scam to coaching scam.

4）I have been a successful high limit cash game player, both online and live. Even for tournaments, I have also been very successful, both online and live too, although I do not play a lot. This just makes my contribution to the Chinese poker world more valuable and convincing.

Now tell us about your hero. You are allowed to make up stories, as long as they don’t look too weird.

lmfao so the guy who implied i was lying/misleading people for mentioning rich runs a popular poker forum in China is actually a long time member of said forum who just as a predicted, indeed came out of the woodwork because of Rich's presence here... jfc that's hilarious

rich, i don't necessarily agree with your stance - but my heart goes out to you having to deal with those 1/2 assclowns who think they know everything... i'm speechless a longtime member of your own forum is now here calling me out for mentioning you run a Chinese poker forum - dude has serious mental issues

I saw Vagine’s post minutes after it was posted. I didn’t feel like to answer it. Now that samspeedstar shows up, I can’t keep silent. I will state a few things here.

1）I have other accounts here at 2+2, but RichZ is the only account used in this thread.

2）Other than this samspeedstar, I do not know any Chinese poster in this thread. I explicitly told my friends/students not to jump into this thread. If vagine can make an implication/accusition like that, it is not difficult to imagine what would happen if he actually have a reason to suspect someone as my friend came to my defense. my friend will be eaten alive, and I will be a target as well. Also, 2+2 is not accessible in mainland China. The language barrier and the internet barrier is real.

3）While my OP was posted on Feb. 1, I didn’t start discussion in Chinese community until Feb 12. I openly stated that I didn’t want to argue with two different languages at the same time and I expected much more furious push back from the Chinese coaching business. And I was right.

Thank you for all your comments in this thread. I really appreciate it!