Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceres
yes but respectfully how have you proven this beyond a few general assumptions? If you disagree with gto I'm all ears but you have to show why and how you disagree or it's just talk that you want people to take as gospel.
Why does a solver play QQ as X on the turn? How are you playing your other Qx? etc etc. I'm all for simplification like, but even that needs to be proven before deploying
Respectfully, I've been asking a series of questions, so we can use reason to find the best line. If we're just looking for a GTO solution only, we can /s, no?
We can plug in some numbers if that makes you feel better.
We want to know if B/B/B is more profitable than B/X/XRAI. To do so, we need some general assumptions (correct that, educated guesses), correct?
How do you get to these numbers, other than make some educated guesses and employ some reason:
1) XRAI
We want to know how often our opponent is checking behind on the river and we lose.
We need to know how often our bluff is called and we lose.
2) B/B/B
Conversely, we need to know how often B/B/B on this board gets folds, and what our sizings should be on T+R.
Option 1 is the highest risk, and probably has the highest fold%. However it also has a guaranteed lose% when opponent checks behind on river.
Option 2 is the lower risk option, and has less river fold%, but also makes up for that when it gets value from what% of draws we want to say exist on the turn.
Do you want to plug some numbers in, or is it getting any clearer yet?