Game theory is understanding why someone does what they do and the best counter to that. GTO is the best thing to do in a situation. Basically, there is no such thing. When people refer to GTO, they're saying what a computer would optimally do vs another computer. If you had 6 computers playing each other, none would make any long term profit. However people make mistakes and have tendencies. The point is to adjust what is mathematically correct with other information you gather from players. Which is why it's so important to vary play; so others don't pick up on your tendencies.
I think the same way, but I am wondering why if the computer evaluates what to do versus other computer, why it has EV positive or negative in every act to do? Shouldnt it be always 0?
It seems odd to me that I clicked on a video claiming to explain GTO, and then watched the video spend significantly more time explaining exploitative play. Seems a bit like a misleading title.
I find educating myself on new poker theory is definitely interesting for sure, but for practical use at the 1/2 live level at your standard casino, its all sort of over kill here! Only because your basic 1/2 player isn't all that sophisticated when it comes to the game anyways. Would you agree?
I think the fact that your opponents are so unsophisticated means these thoughts/processes stand to give you a massive edge. Maybe not the push/call chart specifically but think through how you could apply some things: You know that the live donk calls almost all his big blind hands, so you can adjust your raise frequency and sizing to account for that. If you also know that he will never fold a flush draw on the flop but always leads out when he does hit it, you can over bet suited flops and increase your fold frequency to bets when the draw comes in. I think about it like this: if you KNEW your opponents range, game theory and trees can literally give you the optimal solution and strategy. Your experience/live reading helps you narrow opponents range.
most people are beyond being predictable these days, even in low cash games they have an awarenes of not being predictable. So GTO only effective if players dont play outside of standard play, but as soon as they do, GTO wont work.
@@HDsharp This is patently not true. GTO, or as close to GTO as possible, will always win vs ANY non-GTO strategy and b/e vs another GTO strategy. Playing "unconventionally" doesn't beat GTO anymore than "conventional" play does, they both lose.
@@futurez12 to beat GTO players, other people just bet above the odds the GTO players would call with. I say in cash games, playing the player yields better results. Maybe GTO is more important in Tournament play.
+McGavel1 I got Will Tipton's book on Optimal vs Exploitative and am now learning about EV and decision trees. It's really making me learn these fundamentals in a more clear way. For example I'm having to understand more about the equity of different ranges and it's quite surprising sometimes as I play with FlopZilla (which I just got - yay) at just how much equity crappy hands still can have preflop vs even nutty ranges. I'm starting to run random flops and play with the suits and gaps of the hole cards and it's such a great tool to get a better idea about spots. I can't wait to get better at it. Thanks again for the info on this vid.
Jesus Christ, the number of people in the comments that don't understand GTO is staggering. 1. There is no GTO solution for NL Hold'em 2. There are GTO solutions for reduced complexity NL Hold'em variants (which contain lessons that are relevant to NL Hold'em. See Half-street games, [0, 1] games and AKQ). There are also GTO solutions for certain situations that occur in full NL Hold'em. Bluff/Value bet ratios at the River are solved (This is not actually all that helpful, because even if it is solved the process of getting to the river such that you bet all your nut hands and bluff x% of your dead hands is not. On top of this, even if the math says you should bet x% of your dead hands in a certain situation, how are you going to randomly decide to bet? Roll a dice?) 3. Even if there were a hypothetical GTO player (that played perfectly) they would not necessarily be the "winningest" player. A hypothetical GTO player is simply un-exploitable. That is, no opponent can do anything to get an edge on a hypothetical GTO player (remember no actual GTO player exists.) 4. One of the "drawbacks" of exploitative play is that exploiting an opponents flaws typically opens you up to counter-exploitation. GTO is supposed to be a way to opt out of the exploit/counter-exploit loop and just profit from opponents making mistakes against your un-exploitable strategy. 5. One of the issues with a lot of these "partial GTO solutions" is that the underlying assumptions generating the solutions frequently give opponents waaaaaay too much credit. 6. Studying GTO will not help you more effectively exploit your opponents in any way shape or form. It may help you plug leaks in your game. 7. A lot of GTO solutions kind of assume you have a perfect RNG in your head. So take from that what you will. tldr; Don't bother studying GTO unless you're at a point where plugging leaks in your game is more important than figuring out how to exploit/punish sub-optimal play from your opponents (presumably at this stage you're very good.)
No 2 and 7.Yea I was reading an article about valuebet/bluff ratio and counting the opponents bluffs etc,but the number i come up with may vary widely from your number,it depends a lot on whther people are barreling gutters all the way as this article thinks you should count.Then youll be calling way too much.so the whole thing is very subjective i think
and for 7, yes how can you balance your check raising range on the flop,Im supposed to remember the exact percentage ive cr bluffed the flop out of the last 500 hands?If i cant remember that how the hell can anyone else?
Agree poorly explained. I think the numbers were stack-to-big blind ratios, with the decision-rule operating on a binary 'shove or pass'. So similar in principle to the original Harrington theory tables.
You'd have to play with the same group of people for several months to really start basing anything mathematical on it to win...and even the shittiest players vary their play, or adjust when they notice that, for example, every time I complete from the small blind the big blind raises...well I guess I will just stop doing it..doesn't take a genius.
You can't exploit GTO, that's the whole point of GTO. Explotative play will beat up on fish, but will get owned vs good players who play as near to GTO as is possible.
You can't play optimum GTO either. Theoretical leanings is all this is. Playing EV+ poker is probably the best paly these days especially for cash game players versus consistent competition.
"So dont be confused and think that we have perfect solutions or they gonna happen any time soon. Because it doesnt seem that way. We may be a few hundred years off...NLHE is going to be alive and well..." lol... NLHE is dead mate and its been like that for at least a couple of years... Even 6max solutions for PLO are out there... We reached a point where computers can beat top pros in NLHE as happened in chess 20 years ago. GTO solutions are here to stay and in conjunction with knowledge based systems/AI they will revolutionize all aspects of incomplete information games.
This wildly overstates even where we are now, even four years later. There is no optimal play for chess as whole - what there is is a body of mixed human/computational theory and tools that we think approximates bits of optimal play in the opening; is good (but probably far from optimal) in the middlegame; and is known to be optimal for some endgames ('tablebases'). You only have to look at how the introduction of Alpha Zero destabilised what we thought we knew about near-optimal play. And NLHE theory is miles behind chess theory. It's also interesting that today's best chess player, Carlsen, distinguishes himself most in the part of the game that is closest to being 'solved' (endgames). Game 6 of the recent world championship entered tablebase territory at some point, but Jan was miles away from being able to play it optimally , despite all the training with computers etc. Magnus exploited that to win.
It is bullshit. It is founded on guessing what your opponent is going to do. There are 500 page books full of charts and mathematic formulae all based on "if your opponent usually/always does X, do Y" kind of shit. Well, duh! That's poker in a nutshell, isn't it? I'm at the point now where I think most poker analysts (and I've read and watched plenty, by the way) are just creating this stuff to sell books and create an industry...meanwhile people like Patrick Antonius are top notch and never read books in their life...hmm...
I'm stating opinions but you cannot argue that it is all based on guesses...and that good players constantly randomize their play...you can't argue that.
LOL...then you don't understand the video or the idea. How can you know your opponents' range with enough certainty to base mathematics on it? This is not engineering, it's not chemistry...more like quantum physics or something.
He wanted a dumbed down version. Because isn't poker all about "I think I got you....I call!" Type decisions? ;) I both appreciate the videos and wish people would stop educating the fish. Thankfully there will always be people that don't have the capacity to understand these concepts.
Myopia, I am not sure why you are reacting in such way. I am a mathematician, and I can tell you this video does not tell you anything substantive or advances the public understanding of GTO or the decision tree. This video is been put together very poorly and it is incoherent in its explanation and descriptions of those concepts. I am not like Mark's "wtf" remark, but he does have a point.
Winner of a video, I have been researching "spread betting definition" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Ever heard of - Keton Jenackenzie Equalizer - (just google it ) ? Ive heard some interesting things about it and my work buddy got amazing success with it.
![[柴犬ASMR]曼玉Manyu&小白Bai 毛发护理Spa asmr](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0TsXQ7z2Dh4/mqdefault.jpg)
Game theory is understanding why someone does what they do and the best counter to that. GTO is the best thing to do in a situation. Basically, there is no such thing. When people refer to GTO, they're saying what a computer would optimally do vs another computer. If you had 6 computers playing each other, none would make any long term profit. However people make mistakes and have tendencies. The point is to adjust what is mathematically correct with other information you gather from players. Which is why it's so important to vary play; so others don't pick up on your tendencies.
And that is a perfectly understandable explanation. Thank you...
But to "vary play" can be encapsulated in a pretty basic game theory concept, that of the mixed strategy.
I think the same way, but I am wondering why if the computer evaluates what to do versus other computer, why it has EV positive or negative in every act to do? Shouldnt it be always 0?
Thank you for this clear explanation of GTO. Do you have a video on recommendations on how to get started with GTO in a baby-steps type approach?
It seems odd to me that I clicked on a video claiming to explain GTO, and then watched the video spend significantly more time explaining exploitative play. Seems a bit like a misleading title.
Cool stuff, thanks for sharing. I"m reading "Theory of Poker" and wanted to learn about this topic.
The basics of the push/fold Nash chart could have been explained better to understand the following points made.
when you say at 8:40 'when your bb is more than 3.5 times', of what do you mean?
That means if the big blind is 1000 then you have 3500 chips i would imagine . He doesnt really explain too much
I find educating myself on new poker theory is definitely interesting for sure, but for practical use at the 1/2 live level at your standard casino, its all sort of over kill here! Only because your basic 1/2 player isn't all that sophisticated when it comes to the game anyways. Would you agree?
I think the fact that your opponents are so unsophisticated means these thoughts/processes stand to give you a massive edge.
Maybe not the push/call chart specifically but think through how you could apply some things:
You know that the live donk calls almost all his big blind hands, so you can adjust your raise frequency and sizing to account for that. If you also know that he will never fold a flush draw on the flop but always leads out when he does hit it, you can over bet suited flops and increase your fold frequency to bets when the draw comes in.
I think about it like this: if you KNEW your opponents range, game theory and trees can literally give you the optimal solution and strategy. Your experience/live reading helps you narrow opponents range.
most people are beyond being predictable these days, even in low cash games they have an awarenes of not being predictable. So GTO only effective if players dont play outside of standard play, but as soon as they do, GTO wont work.
@@HDsharp This is patently not true. GTO, or as close to GTO as possible, will always win vs ANY non-GTO strategy and b/e vs another GTO strategy. Playing "unconventionally" doesn't beat GTO anymore than "conventional" play does, they both lose.
@@futurez12 to beat GTO players, other people just bet above the odds the GTO players would call with. I say in cash games, playing the player yields better results. Maybe GTO is more important in Tournament play.
seems like GTO is for the pros, think i will let them keep it and stick to my low limit fish :P great vid btw
You'd be surprised how many fish are on larger games. Sure, they'll be people you want to avoid but there's always plenty of dead money to go around.
you are a good speaker
Cool, I've never heard of an EV tree and it looks very informative to play with, like you said. Thanks for the tips.
+McGavel1 I got Will Tipton's book on Optimal vs Exploitative and am now learning about EV and decision trees. It's really making me learn these fundamentals in a more clear way. For example I'm having to understand more about the equity of different ranges and it's quite surprising sometimes as I play with FlopZilla (which I just got - yay) at just how much equity crappy hands still can have preflop vs even nutty ranges. I'm starting to run random flops and play with the suits and gaps of the hole cards and it's such a great tool to get a better idea about spots. I can't wait to get better at it. Thanks again for the info on this vid.
I never even heard of Rochambeau!
dope intro
Sick... Got it 👍
Jesus Christ, the number of people in the comments that don't understand GTO is staggering.
1. There is no GTO solution for NL Hold'em
2. There are GTO solutions for reduced complexity NL Hold'em variants (which contain lessons that are relevant to NL Hold'em. See Half-street games, [0, 1] games and AKQ). There are also GTO solutions for certain situations that occur in full NL Hold'em. Bluff/Value bet ratios at the River are solved (This is not actually all that helpful, because even if it is solved the process of getting to the river such that you bet all your nut hands and bluff x% of your dead hands is not. On top of this, even if the math says you should bet x% of your dead hands in a certain situation, how are you going to randomly decide to bet? Roll a dice?)
3. Even if there were a hypothetical GTO player (that played perfectly) they would not necessarily be the "winningest" player. A hypothetical GTO player is simply un-exploitable. That is, no opponent can do anything to get an edge on a hypothetical GTO player (remember no actual GTO player exists.)
4. One of the "drawbacks" of exploitative play is that exploiting an opponents flaws typically opens you up to counter-exploitation. GTO is supposed to be a way to opt out of the exploit/counter-exploit loop and just profit from opponents making mistakes against your un-exploitable strategy.
5. One of the issues with a lot of these "partial GTO solutions" is that the underlying assumptions generating the solutions frequently give opponents waaaaaay too much credit.
6. Studying GTO will not help you more effectively exploit your opponents in any way shape or form. It may help you plug leaks in your game.
7. A lot of GTO solutions kind of assume you have a perfect RNG in your head. So take from that what you will.
tldr;
Don't bother studying GTO unless you're at a point where plugging leaks in your game is more important than figuring out how to exploit/punish sub-optimal play from your opponents (presumably at this stage you're very good.)
Nice comment bro
Theoretically there is a GTO solution for NLHE.
No 2 and 7.Yea I was reading an article about valuebet/bluff ratio and counting the opponents bluffs etc,but the number i come up with may vary widely from your number,it depends a lot on whther people are barreling gutters all the way as this article thinks you should count.Then youll be calling way too much.so the whole thing is very subjective i think
and for 7, yes how can you balance your check raising range on the flop,Im supposed to remember the exact percentage ive cr bluffed the flop out of the last 500 hands?If i cant remember that how the hell can anyone else?
Very interesting, have you guys saw the program from carageie univeristy where they made a program based off of nash equilibrium to play poker?
ZlZlZlZlZlZl yes, I don't think it's based on Nash though.
what's the title of that?
I never heard of Rochambeau!
Gto in 15 mins classic
In the rock, paper, scissors, example why always choose paper when scissors beats paper some % of the time?
Does GTO apply to NL Holdem tournaments?
yes
Obviously...
U need to be explain what ev is and terms like that for new players
"i'm not a mathematician", ok cya then...
hahahah the EV tree fucked me up, like how smort is this shizzle
Isn't eve a Pokémon?
Your push nash chart makes no sense and did not explain it. What are numbers, eg 20+.
Agree poorly explained. I think the numbers were stack-to-big blind ratios, with the decision-rule operating on a binary 'shove or pass'. So similar in principle to the original Harrington theory tables.
This vid stops making sense about half way through
i believe in what u are saying.... i just don't understand a lot of it... wish i was smarter
It's not you, it just wasn't explained well. The push/Fold charts will have to remain a mystery.
2 minutes in and you havent said a damn thing
Don't be rude.
@tommy aronson im doing this virtually
So how do you analyze how your opponent is playing? How do you learn proper EV and all that bullshit?
You'd have to play with the same group of people for several months to really start basing anything mathematical on it to win...and even the shittiest players vary their play, or adjust when they notice that, for example, every time I complete from the small blind the big blind raises...well I guess I will just stop doing it..doesn't take a genius.
how to make a pokerstars poker bot to win you money while you drink beers at the bar-its what it looks like to me haha :D
This is what happens when the geeks try to outsmart the real poker players. Its all nonsense. I will continue to play exploitative poker .
You can't exploit GTO, that's the whole point of GTO. Explotative play will beat up on fish, but will get owned vs good players who play as near to GTO as is possible.
You can't play optimum GTO either. Theoretical leanings is all this is. Playing EV+ poker is probably the best paly these days especially for cash game players versus consistent competition.
Did this nigga say shove with 9/5 off @3.5 bb He'll nah
Lulz
What the hell is this?
"So dont be confused and think that we have perfect solutions or they gonna happen any time soon. Because it doesnt seem that way. We may be a few hundred years off...NLHE is going to be alive and well..." lol... NLHE is dead mate and its been like that for at least a couple of years... Even 6max solutions for PLO are out there... We reached a point where computers can beat top pros in NLHE as happened in chess 20 years ago. GTO solutions are here to stay and in conjunction with knowledge based systems/AI they will revolutionize all aspects of incomplete information games.
This wildly overstates even where we are now, even four years later. There is no optimal play for chess as whole - what there is is a body of mixed human/computational theory and tools that we think approximates bits of optimal play in the opening; is good (but probably far from optimal) in the middlegame; and is known to be optimal for some endgames ('tablebases'). You only have to look at how the introduction of Alpha Zero destabilised what we thought we knew about near-optimal play. And NLHE theory is miles behind chess theory. It's also interesting that today's best chess player, Carlsen, distinguishes himself most in the part of the game that is closest to being 'solved' (endgames). Game 6 of the recent world championship entered tablebase territory at some point, but Jan was miles away from being able to play it optimally , despite all the training with computers etc. Magnus exploited that to win.
wtf
Other than a math-based shoving chart, can anyone explain to me exactly what GTO is?
It basically sounds like bullshit to me
It is bullshit. It is founded on guessing what your opponent is going to do. There are 500 page books full of charts and mathematic formulae all based on "if your opponent usually/always does X, do Y" kind of shit. Well, duh! That's poker in a nutshell, isn't it?
I'm at the point now where I think most poker analysts (and I've read and watched plenty, by the way) are just creating this stuff to sell books and create an industry...meanwhile people like Patrick Antonius are top notch and never read books in their life...hmm...
It is (in fact) the opposite of what you claim. Which is explained in the vid.
I'm stating opinions but you cannot argue that it is all based on guesses...and that good players constantly randomize their play...you can't argue that.
No. GT has nothing to do with guesses and nothing to with randomization.
LOL...then you don't understand the video or the idea. How can you know your opponents' range with enough certainty to base mathematics on it? This is not engineering, it's not chemistry...more like quantum physics or something.
Your gulping drives me nuts. Disgusting!!!
5 minutes in... wtf
+Mark Saraceno thx!
+Mark Saraceno What did you want that you didn't get?
+Mark Saraceno What did you want that you didn't get?
He wanted a dumbed down version. Because isn't poker all about "I think I got you....I call!" Type decisions? ;)
I both appreciate the videos and wish people would stop educating the fish. Thankfully there will always be people that don't have the capacity to understand these concepts.
Myopia, I am not sure why you are reacting in such way. I am a mathematician, and I can tell you this video does not tell you anything substantive or advances the public understanding of GTO or the decision tree. This video is been put together very poorly and it is incoherent in its explanation and descriptions of those concepts. I am not like Mark's "wtf" remark, but he does have a point.
Winner of a video, I have been researching "spread betting definition" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Ever heard of - Keton Jenackenzie Equalizer - (just google it ) ? Ive heard some interesting things about it and my work buddy got amazing success with it.
Fuck off bot
This is fucking monotonous.