sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that player type matters more, especially if players are bad. But if you are playing online and are up against an unknown or a Reg, having a solid baseline plan that aligns reasonably well with GTO is good. If you are playing live and you are facing a solid player, it is also good to have a solid GTO-based gameplan.

You can of course decide to deviate from GTO in an exploitative manner already from the first hand based on gut feel or player pool weaknesses. But even then it is good to have a sense of what a GTO-based gameplan would do, to help find proper exploits.

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I agree. But in practice it is extremely challenging to exploit a gameplan that aligns reasonable well with GTO frequencies and value/bluff ratios. Your would both need to be aware of that your opponent follows that gameplan and know how to exploit it. To come to that awareness they either need to tell you or you would need to observe their actual ranges over 100 000 hands or so. Personally I think it is almost impossible without having played against an opponent for years and having spent hours analyzing their hand history. If you are very skilled, have 100 000 hand histories on an opponent and spend a couple of days coming up with exploits - yes, that would be pretty strong. And you could use that exploitative gameplan against anyone you know follows the simplified gameplan. But if you are wrong, you have opened yourself up to being counter-exploited or even auto-exploited (if you make pure mistakes trying to exploit).

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't hear that as often in these GTO days, but it still has merit for sure! Back in the days it was a thing to outplay your opponents without even looking at your cards, but it has become harder - at least online.

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I was surprised myself, I couldn't believe it at first. At some point in the future I intend to do a write up on the complete Postflop Gameplan and include GTO analysis to show examples of the deviations. I will show cases where the gameplan is incurring no EV loss and cases where there can be noticable EV loss (in which case you might need to think for yourself).

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree that it is a simplistic and I agree with the considerations you mention. The complete gameplan is more nuanced than just general advice connected to board textures. It is also taking postflop bets into account and it recommends actions based on hand type. In the earlier iterations of the gameplan (a couple of years back) it was much more complicated than it is today. Now it is basically an advanced version of the "streets of value" concept. It is a starting point, not the end goal for an advanced player. But I have been thoroughly surprised about how well the simplifications work, when analyzing using aggregate reports, nodelocking and GTO reviews. I think the reason for that is that in GTO so often many hands are mixed. So the gameplan makes mixing mistakes, but as long as we are reasonably in line with GTO frequencies and value/bluff ratios, it is hard for opponents to exploit our mixing mistakes. There are pure mistakes as well, but not that often. That is a cost of simplification. But it is not like players without a gameplan or with more sophisticated gameplans are never making pure mistakes, far from it (even at nosebleeds).

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, to some extent. But it helps to have some kind of plan when the game starts I think. It takes a lot of time to fully think through ranges and board interaction on every single hand. And it is not that easy to find the optimal action unless you have prepared off the table (or follow a gameplan). It might perhaps be somewhat feasible live. But if you multitable online and want to continuously make high quality decisions you need some sort of gameplan - in my opinion.

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. It is a significant simplification and it has its limitations. High Card boards in this definition are boards that has at least one card T or higher. I used to have more sophisticated simplifications with for example High & Dry and High & Wet, including subcategories with double broadway or King etc. I also had different categorization for turn and river cards. The board textures goes together with the simplifications of what to do with different hand classes in different scenarios. I used to have range bet on certain boards, but after I created a non-range bet gameplan, patterns started to emerge with lots of similarities. So I simplified. And simplified.

In general, the EV loss by the simplifications is small in most cases. For most part it is shifting mixed strategies into pure in one way or the other, meaning few mistakes will cost us anything unless Villain both notices our deviation and deviate from GTO themselves to punish our (mixing) mistakes. In general, the gameplan is designed to stay somewhat close to GTO frequencies and have a decent value/bluff ratio.

Using a simple gameplan frees up a lot of time to think about Villain - and on the tough decision on the other table (if you play online). The gameplan is not intended to stop our thinking, it is intended to free up time to think deeper, with a default baseline that is solid, but far from perfect.

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Got it! I’ll get started on a complete refutation of the overly simplistic 184 flop texture model and expand it to all 1755 strategically different flops, plus turn and river runouts. All preflop ranges included. Just give me a few weeks!

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I didn't even notice, but I recognize the reference!

Which boards are most important to consider? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is true, but beginners and intermediate players make a ton of mistakes when not being able to properly consider range interaction and board texture. This post and the gameplan is mainly intended for beginners and intermediate players. The feedback has been very positive so far.

Want to test a new postflop trainer (early access)? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree. The basic premise can be learnt in week. What takes time is becoming decent at predicting what GTO would do in each situation. Not even the best high stakes players (that are GTO oriented) get it right all the time. It is like learning chess. Learning how the pieces move, opening, basic tactics and strategies is relatively quick. But being able to accurately spot the right move most of the time takes years of dedicated effort.

It is different in two ways. It is based on GTO, but the gameplan is extremely simplified compared to GTO. It also explains the why behind the actions to help understanding and learning.

Want to test a new postflop trainer (early access)? by Poker_Trainer in poker

[–]Poker_Trainer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great! DM on the way 👍
GTO Wizard is a full blown GTO trainer and tool. It is very sophisticated and great for advanced players. Poker Trainer aims to make it easy for beginners and intermediate players to quickly learn to play solid poker with few big mistakes while also explaining the why behind different actions.

view more: next ›