The relationship between exploitation and GTO is fairly circular yeah

But when you bring it to real life, it becomes straight forward, if you choose to approach it that way.

Every line a solver takes is the highest EV possible, it just so happens that a GTO opponent will force multiple lines to be the highest EV possible. There are logical reasons you could find by looking at ranges, equities and lines on future streets to justify every line the solver takes very plainly, in exploitative terms.
For example:
If GTO mixes tpgk between overbet and check (both overbetting and checking are the best EV possible) on a certain 2 barrel spot on the turn.

There will be logical exploitative reasons within the sim for why betting is the best EV, say a big chunk of hands that are worse than ours calls that would fold river if we checked turn and bet river, and some hands we fold out have a fair bit of equity against us, along with some runouts allowing us to pick up two pair or trips and go for a third barrel.

There will be logical exploitative reasons within the sim for why checking is the best EV too, for example, we would make a lot of low equity hands fold by betting, that if we checked, would bluff river, and that way we would extract more value from them.

In this sense GTO has the prerequisite that all of the lines that are mixing have logical and simple reasons for why they're the best.

If you don't know the reasons and you mix blindly in real life, you are bound to take the second best line at some frequency, while if you understand the exploitative, logical reasons for both lines, you will be able to choose the best line against your particular opponent, particular pool, or particular way in which you think humans play.

EDIT: To add a conclussion to this. You should only mix when your opponent is so good that he doesn't allow one of your lines to be the clear best

EDIT2: To answer to the last part of your comment. Basic, human, exploitative logic already has your own range taken into account, in a fuzzy way (arguably you only need this fuzzy sense of your range), because exploiting your opponent is based on how he plays, and how he plays is based on what he percieves your range to be

Geometric seems like some new age fancy way of saying all in by the river just to sound intelligent.

First off. People play wayyy worse vs small sizing's. That might be some Brain Quest facts. Someone should look it up because no one is disputing that.

WTF do you think A5s/A4s even AJs is doing OTR here? They go OH ****im in an 0 ev spot OTR and have no clue wtf to do. If they think a little bit. A5s is better than AJs as a call. But it's still 0 EV. Then you have to think okay. This is an underbluffed spot so all my 0 EV bluff catchers are negative EV.

This is all within a 15 second time bank.

I'd rather polarize OTR. Every single time. It's literally not close. If your opponent has to think about a decision. I always want it to be for all their stack.

turn is def fine irl cause they tend to peel flop too much vs 1/4p and then going again small ott attacks those extra combos
after that if they don't fold turn enough, facing a small river bet becomes very oppressive for their weak catchers and also allows you to vb Ax thin
so I think bluffing any2 for 1/3 is pretty good but it would be the Ax combos you throw in that allows you to do so
jamming a lot idk, he'd have to fold a good amount of Ax but it has the potential to be significantly higher ev. the more you can get him to fold (in an already sizeable pot), the more using big sized bluffs skyrockets in ev. and ofc your value range makes more money too, tho in this case flushes are a small part of your range (you literally just have KQ/KJ/QJ clubs and a few fractions of scs if you even include those pre) and sets are prob better xc
strat talk aside, in a vacuum, jam if you think he folds half or more of his Ax combos, small bet if you think he doesn't. in gtoland, I don't think this gets bluffed ever.

Your line is certainly difficult to play against, I'll give you that. I just don't think it's particularly efficient.

Let's simplify things. When bluffing, your goal is to maximize fold equity for the best price. How much extra fold equity do you get for 3x shove vs pot? Maybe they fold an extra 10% of their range? You're paying a huge premium to extract the last few drops of fold equity. It seems to me that you're trying to win the pot instead of maximizing your value.

The point of paying such a bad price on your bluffs is to get your value paid off. How much value actually wants to play like this though?

I really dislike this line as I've said so in your last 20 spots in the exact same situation where I say small turn = not great.

Copy. Hand misplayed on all streets.

What is the exact reasoning for why you hate the small turn sizing?

Results.

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD Poker Tracking Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
HERO ($49.40)
BB ($26.63)
UTG ($25.35)
HJ ($25.10)
CO ($12.26)
BTN ($30.87)

Dealt to Hero: K J

UTG Raises To $0.68, HJ Folds, CO Folds, BTN Folds, HERO Raises To $2.86, BB Folds, UTG Calls $2.18

Hero SPR on Flop: [3.77 effective]
Flop ($5.97): T 4 A
HERO Bets $1.50 (Rem. Stack: $45.04), UTG Calls $1.50 (Rem. Stack: $20.99)

Turn ($8.97): T 4 A 8
HERO Bets $2.75 (Rem. Stack: $42.29), UTG Calls $2.75 (Rem. Stack: $18.24)

River ($14.47): T 4 A 8 6
HERO Bets $42.29 (allin), UTG Calls $18.24 (allin)

When you say 3x pot shove OTR- that is misleading since the SPR is just over 1. Villain only has $18 left.

Preflop isn't misplayed. Flop is standard too.

Why ask for thoughts if you are the only one right?

Pre is not standard vs UTG. KQs is a 3bet. Flop is not standard (UTG knows they have aggro here).

But, but, I am sure you will just berate me because despite all the posts in this thread, you are right.

It amazes me how often you post in such an authoritative tone despite admitting only recently getting back into online poker since BF.

Preflop is absolutely standard. If you aren't 3betting KJs in the SB, then you are playing way too tight.

It's not that he's the only one who's right, it's that you're usually wrong lol

You don't even know preflop play. Please learn that first.

Preflop is perfectly standard.

There are arguments surrounding bet sizing strategy on the flop. But whatever OP chooses, this hand will be wanting to bet at a v high frequency.

It is not 100% frequency 3bet. Perhaps I should rephrase.

I use a pseudo GTO approach, because I don't have time to rng, etc. on Ignition Zone tables.

So as to balance ranges, I placed for SB anything not 100% 3bet to just call.

Perhaps that is too tight. But by merging the range, I keep the pre flop equity vs UTG tight, basically 50/50 (and better if UTG is opening too lose).

My 3bet range is 64% against UTG. Now, this is only SB. Since it is not 100% 3bet, I feel confident its not necessarily standard.

Balancing is different for moi, so KJs is 3bet vs UTG in HJ, (KTs only from CO), and call from all other positions.

My VPIP ranges from 24 to 27. So its not like I'm slacking. Charts are from 2021.

i imagine we wanna go big with our value bets on the turn

Thanks! There's a lot to take in here haha, but essentially we have to ensure certain hands are in each part of our range because our opponent would exploit us otherwise, which leads to less EV?

There are spots where the solver puts every combo as a mix, meaning every line with every combo is the exact same EV? However, hands that have clear logical reasons for betting or checking are always doing so respectively at a very high frequency. The other hands are all mixed at some frequency. What's up with that? How can every hand have the same EV with every action? Is it just a frequency thing at this point? Obviously if we bet our whole range 100% of the time, we'd start losing EV right? Is it just so we can show up with anything in every line? How is that higher EV than just bluffing the strictly worst combo 100% of the time, for example, instead of bluffing the worst 10, 10% of the time?

The solver mixes all its ranges together. Its not too surprising because if you always take the same line with the same hand then there is going to be a strategy which exploits that. To counteract that it mixes the same hands into different ranges, so that eg checking flop on a particular board doesn't mean you never have an ace and your range is absolutely capped, only most of the time you don't have the ace and v can't auto profit by bet bet betting because sometimes you're ahead.

There's some theorem where mixing your strategies is basically always better than playing this way 100% of the time, so the solver will always mix more and more (not because of the thm but because of its underlying mathematical truth). As players we sometimes simplify and mix less, which is theoretically less optimal but practically not always sacrificing a meaningful share of ev

Also the relationship between gto and exploitative play is fairly nonmystical. You exploit deviance from optimal play. Saying I will value bet because he can call with worse isn't exploitative because he SHOULD call with worse (else your bluffs are too profitable), you exploit by saying he will call MORE THAN HE SHOULD. GTO effectively emerges from strategies trying to exploit each other, when they reach a pairing where no player can increase ev by changing strategies.

But I don't really disagree with anything aner0 said, except the way he uses the word exploitative

Watched my favorite coach do coaching yesterday. interesting dynamic with AKs. Player didn't cbet flop, but bet turn. Coach had him sit out, and explained the ev wasn't there.

I ran this through solver, and found that on that board and turn, for this particular combo of AKs, there was less than 30% EV on both flop and turn. Only one combo of AKs had better ev. Claimed trying to bluff with this hand is minus ev in the long run, and a leak. (Even though villain folded)

@alpha2112 is spot on. Its why I mix my ranges, based on frequency, and AA is not always a shove, and why JJ is instead a squeeze out of certain spots. Most of the mistakes I make are not adhering to these principles, and the most money I make are when opponents make mistakes with wide deviation from GTO.

Though, my sims often show a lot of cbet whole range on flop, you need to carefully dig into each hand to see the ev, and where hot to cbet. This takes a LOT of practice.