What strategy is -ev preflop that is ev postflop over infinite hands? That doesn't make any sense because we are talking about two specific Pure GTO bots heads up in this case where exploitative play isnt factored in at all.

This is the conclusion I came to, otherwise GTO would simply be fold even weaker parts of your range and the game trees are more defined towards higher ev holdings. The reason Q4o is a fold and Q5o is a call is that the ev is worse than folding and losing the big blind.

There is no Nash equilibrium if there is no equilibrium. The ranges must be known.

Fold all hands except AA.

Here is yet another way to illustrate part of what I am saying:

Suppose you and I both know perfect holdem GTO. We play where you have the button every time. Who knows why. But I am in with the dealer and there are certain bad hands that he SECRETLY will not deal me. Suppose he refrains from dealing me just enough hands to negate your button edge playing normal GTO.

But then he finds out what we were doing. He is mad but he is willing to continue the game IF I tell him exactly what hands I can't be dealt. The problem is that if he knows this, he will once again have an edge. If I have to tell him the eliminated hands I now have to add more hands I can't be dealt if I want to get back to even.

it is very simple what he's saying though but it's still losing vs GTO, if you think peeling the trashier hands (that are still slightly +EV in theory) will compound into larger mistakes postflop then yes folding it pre flop vs a GTO bot is probably best

that strikes me as a pretty bad example, if the dealer will not deal you certain hands I assume among the worse hands you'd usually play then automatically your range would be stronger and even if he knows that he can't gain an edge because he himself is dealt those bad hands, this would just be unfair, you'd be playing by different rules

So add trash hands that are breakeven and have a ton more hands that are middling/ higher in ev? That doesnt change anything at all in terms of pure gto. It would play the same range vs your range no matter how strong it is.

You are repeatedly and elaborately explaining that you do not understand what GTO means.

If you stop saying GTO, and say "pretty good but not world class strategy in a ring game where there are some weaker players, too" then probably everything you are saying would be pretty uncontroversial.

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but “GTO” doesn’t differentiate between preflop and postflop. It’s all part of an overall strategy where your actions postflop will be dependent on your preflop ranges. If you’re starting off with flawed preflop ranges, your postflop strategy is going to be inherently exploitable. In my mind, the most understandable consequence would be that you won’t have adequate board coverage on boards that interact with the bottom part of your preflop range, the hands being suggested to fold.

A well executed, balanced strategy will naturally exploit your improper preflop ranges and put you in terrible spots postflop on boards and runouts that your range of hands can’t effectively maneuver.

Any informed deviations from GTO in response to your deviations would just be icing on the cake, so to speak.

No. To see this clearly, imagine that the non GTO player only plays aces. He loses all those blinds. But when he plays, he clobbers the bot. In fact the bot not only loses when he is played with, he
almost certainly loses even more than my gandma would with the same holecards.

Why though? Why is the GTO bot losing any more than a regular player? GTO doesn’t dictate that you call every bet on every board and never fold. Also just playing AA doesn’t equate to winning 100% of the chips you wager. If you’re only playing AA you’re basically capped at 1 pair on every runout. I feel like this thought exercise always assumes you only play AA and win + get max value vs a bluff catcher every time you enter the pot, which is not representative of reality. You’re also assuming that the EV gained postflop >>> the EV lost preflop which I don’t think is a given. Add in that you’re losing a lot of EV postflop from not having playable hands and natural bluffs in basically every spot.

Don’t want to come off as combative, I appreciate the response.

if the dealer doesn't deal you certain hands you're getting replacement hands which have a higher ev. when you get dealt those hands in reality and have to fold them they're losing money.

Because a decent human player would never bluffcatch against a player who never bluffs, while the GTO bot would bluffcatch as much vs a mega nit as vs a maniac.

He is not saying that.

But you can gain EV in some branches of the game tree at the cost of losing (more) EV in others.
The point (I assume) is that playing slightly too tight preflop is the best way of losing the minimum to a GTO player.

This is operating under assumptions like bluffs never improve to make the best hand.

The player who doesn’t bluff enough is already sacrificing more EV than the bot would lose from calling “incorrectly”.

Sure, a competent human can make more money vs a bad player who only plays AA but both will still be profitable (good player and GTO bot).

FWIW, I think we’re mostly arguing over semantics here and yeah, in reality vs players who are just trying to execute an approximation of “GTO”, tight is right.

So the opponent has an incorrect preflop range , pretty sure he’s not playing gto anymore as that incorrect range makes him exploitable for more than he was before.

This

This thread is hilarious. Sklansky makes a point that is pretty obvious: you can give up a little ev by playing too tight preflop to lock in a small loss vs a gto bot, and in return the bot will lose a smaller amount of ev postflop back to you while also making it easier for you to play against it (make fewer mistakes) as your range is stronger. No one is able to understand what he is trying to say, it is then re-explained over and over except in more bizarre convoluted ways perpetuating further confusion.

pretty much lol, feels like the way he's trying to make his point is needlessly complicated

Some of your range is stronger. I think that over folding vs a gto bot will cause you to lose more money

I get the impression everyone perception of a “GTO bot” bets all 3 streets with every single hand so you just gotta wait for fem aces and hold on.

Doesn’t work like that. Bot gunna go bet bet check with his top pairs anyway lol. So your aces are going to get two streets of value.

I understood his point until the bit about the dealer secretly swapping your cards out.

I think David needs to give us another example

I like that this thread is not about HCL, but I think this goes back to a language thing. It is good to shift your ranges against opponents if you know their ranges, but game theory optimal means just that, it accounts for the "what if" of opponents playing a tighter range. It's not something that guarantees profit in the short term but in the long run, it does. It's in the name.

I see some man vs bot challenges in the near future.

But only because it locks up the money in pots that should not have been conceded. If it continues to play the rest of the hand using the initial GTO strategy it started the hand with, it will not add to its profit against near perfect opponents. Seems like lots of people don't get this.

(Notice that this discussion provides a good illustration of why expert human non GTO pros often outperform the GTO bots. In a head up game against against a player who throws away quite a few more hands than he should before the flop, a bot will not make note of this and adjust. It will still win but not nearly as much as the human who will play a looser strategy preflop and a tighter one postflop.)

Hey man do you mind please simplifying your words, I really would like to understand your logic behind your thoughts but I can’t get past the big words. Sorry if that may seem dumb but I feel like myself and others that are a bit behind the eight ball may understand better with a bit more simplicity.

Not trying to come off rude or anything but I honestly can’t tell if you’re trolling or trying to get a point across that my brain is struggling to comprehend.

I have some questions if you don’t mind answering.

1- Have you used a solver before and what is your experience with GTO.

2. Do you think there is a strategy that can exploit a GTO strategy long term.

3. Is your post focused towards recreationals playing small volume or GTO regs.

4. What is the end point of your argument.

5. If you have found a Strat that can beat GTO would you be willing to DM me and talk business.

Btw not trolling just really trying to understand how so many peoples brains have broken in this thread and why.

A lot of people in here insisting that OP doesn't understand GTO seem to ironically have very little understanding of how GTO works 3+ handed.

When one player in a ring game deviates from GTO preflop, the equilibrium shifts in a way that can only be accounted for if you know everyone's exact ranges. What was GTO before someone deviated from equilibrium is now no longer guaranteed to breakeven, because once someone deviates from GTO a completely new equilibrium replaces the old one. In theory this creates a situation where the player who deviated is now losing in expectation if everyone perfectly adjusts (fun fact: some other players at the table might also lose in expectation even if they perfectly adjust to the deviation), but if no one knows there was a deviation or they don't know how to adjust then the player who deviated can realistically win in expectation, because he's the only one who can know the new equilibrium, and the old GTO strategy is now making mistakes on every street. Everyone in here who thinks there exists a GTO strategy in which you can always breakeven or win in expectation without knowing when your opponents deviate from equilibrium is fundamentally incorrect.

TL;DR: OP's idea is completely valid and shows a much deeper understanding of how unstable equilibria work in ring poker than everyone in here who's arrogantly dismissing it and telling him he doesn't understand GTO.

(Notice that this discussion provides a good illustration of why expert human non GTO pros often outperform the GTO bots. In a head up game against against a player who throws away quite a few more hands than he should before the flop, a bot will not make note of this and adjust. It will still win but not nearly as much as the human who will play a looser strategy preflop and a tighter one postflop.)[/QUOTE]

Okay this comment I think confirms my questions above. This logic is severely flawed for multiple reasons given the example.

1. Expert human non gto pros don’t beat bots.

2. A bot doesn’t need to worry about someone over folding because it generates from all combinations and is balanced.

3. Playing a loser strategy preflop and a tighter one postflop doesn’t affect the game tree or ev in the slightest vs a bot.

This is where we are all having disagreements. Your perception of Pure GTO is misunderstood.