this is a bad analogy. at the highest level, poker is entirely math. the player with a better understanding of GTO will demolish someone who tries to "learn people"

▲

JohnMakin 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

playing "GTO" doesn't mean you will destroy people, this is a common misunderstanding of the term. It means that you are playing in a way that cannot be exploited - this does not mean you're also playing in the way that will win you the most money.

Also, there is no "better understanding" of GTO because poker is an unsolved game, and the assumptions you feed into a GTO playstyle can change quickly or be wrong. The thought you can sit there like an automaton with a set strategy and win is false.

been playing off and on professionally for 20 years

▲

KK7NIL 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> The thought you can sit there like an automaton with a set strategy and win is false.

This is provably false.

You're absolutely right that GTO does not guarantee you'll win the maximum against a fish, but neither does exploitative play. In fact, exploitative play can't guarantee you anything, which is probably why old-school pro players are perennially going broke throughout their careers (that and bad bankroll management).

IMO, currently, over 90% of pro poker players (especially live and in the US) fundamentally do not understand how poker should be played (which is why they get so easily destroyed by the new generation in online heads up).

	▲	JohnMakin 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> This is provably false. Where is the proof? > You're absolutely right that GTO does not guarantee you'll win the maximum against a fish, but neither does exploitative play. In fact, exploitative play can't guarantee you anything, which is probably why old-school pro players are perennially going broke throughout their careers (that and bad bankroll management). I'm not arguing in favor of one or the other, I am just correcting the misunderstanding. In reality, you should adapt to the conditions at the table and your opponents habits, because "GTO" is only possible against perfect play to begin with, so you're always going to be playing slightly imperfectly. so is everyone, because you cannot know everything. And again, it's almost never the way to win the most money. It's a distinction not a lot of GTO nerds understand. I'm not arguing against it at all - I use GTO solvers to work on stuff a lot. And I also never claimed exploitative strategies guarantee everything, for the same reason "GTO" doesn't either. It's a game of incomplete information. The skill comes in using incomplete information in making good assumptions - that is almost nothing to do with math. And, there are pros that have been winning for long amounts of time knowing zero about GTO theory.

▲

Cpoll 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I suppose I should take your username into account and take you at your word, but wouldn't a player that entirely plays mathematically be easily exploited?

I assumed table talk was at least 10% of poker. Mind games, conditioning your opponent and making reads are present in most sports.

	▲	QuotedForTruth 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If you play game theory optimal (GTO) then you by definition can not be exploited. For poker a GTO strategy is extremely complex where each decision you make depends on the exact situation and includes varying your decisions over time. Like bluff raising 60% of the time and folding 40% of the time you’re in some very specific situation. It’s basically putting your opponent into a situation that they can’t make a profitable decision in the long term. It’s not really practically possible to do. But if two people did they would have 0 expected value over time against each other. If one player slightly differed from game theory optimal strategy that would give the other one positive expected value. There is no way they can change from GTO strategy to exploit you. However, this isn’t necessarily the most profitable way to play against real people. When your opponents aren’t playing GTO, there will be some non-GTO strategy that exploits them most effectively. Like if they call too much then you should raise for value more often than against a GTO opponent and bluff less.

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

zeroxfe 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's a world of a difference between "at the highest level" and your typical casino poker game. (GPs general point still stands.)

▲

vonneumannstan 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is exactly wrong. At the highest levels you play your opponent, not only GTO. No one can play pure GTO and you exploit how your opponent moves off GTO.

	▲	KK7NIL 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Maybe if you have a lot of hands and so are confident they're deviating in some hand, otherwise you risk getting exploited yourself. The players who study GTO instead of trying to win these meta mind games have proven to do very well in online heads up while the old-school mind games guys keep going boom and bust.

▲

dyauspitr 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Other than the basics, math is not going to help you win at poker over reading people. The shoot is shuffled after each round, you can’t card count your way to victory. Hand win probabilities are basic math that most poker player just learn instinctively because it’s not that complicated.

	▲	KK7NIL 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Your knowledge of the application of math to poker is very outdated, look up "GTO poker" on YouTube.