You joke, but I carry a backpack full of colored pencils and range charts everytime I play live. It's really annoying though when the opponent isn't filling it out fast enough and some misreg fish calls clock. They'll never understand GTO or be good at poker.
im not sure any human would get close! but he likely understands the principles of *WHY* better than almost anyone, so even if he misses exact combos he probably gets relatively close to correct frequencies. but who knows!
When I used to play seriously I had this go-round with my coach. My argument was this: “if when you node lock ONE STREET the solver has such a dramatic adjustment, then the adjustment it would make it you node locked EVERY street, would not even be recognizable as GTO or balanced.” If a solver could approximate the actual strategy of your opponent it would look like a wild, drunk idiot playing live poker. There would be tiny bets, huge bets, and all kinds of weird shit.
(This is keys from discord )I understand the reasoning behind the x 100 OOP argument, but I do have a slight problem with it. Yes, the IP player will make mistakes if checked to. However, will we not also make arguably larger mistakes in our response to IP bets? Especially deep stacked, vs small sizes and wide ranges, it is incredibly difficult for OOP human to construct a maximally exploitative response. I would think that you could easily find yourself making more BB mistakes since you’ll end up bloating pots OOP. Would like to hear your thoughts on this
got a video coming on why i play this way oop coming in next week or two with a lot more reasoning behind it. imo - they make MUCH larger mistakes vs x then bet when they are in position.
I found some pretty simple rules that capture like 99% GTO EV. I guess I am just not smart enough to balance my ranges like the solver does. The way I figure though is maybe I can do the solver thing for like 5 or 10 hands before I am smoked. With the rules that i try to find, I can play for 30 minutes to 1 hour pnline before I need to take a break. I will say I am not the usual 1 trillion bb/100 crusher like everyone in the comment section seems to be, I just play 25z as a hardcore hobbyist as in no desire to be a pro.
@@hungryhorsepoker it is difficult to find them, and it is a lot of playing around with the solver, but I figure 98% of EV captured for a simple strategy is way better than the 100% EV of a complicated strategy. That way I can play at a higher level longer than if I had a complicated strategy. That is my 2 cents, like I said, not a crusher, still trying to get there slowly but surely
Interesting how the solver still chooses to x range vs Villain despite villain way under stabbing flop in the first scenario. It’s definitely bc villain is using that big sizing that he should never use on that spot! GTO Sizing matters folk!
Gto still kills the low stakes. Can’t count the number of times I do something like a check, bet, bet line with value and the noobs say “I thought you were just trying to buy it”
I don’t think the betting small on the river as IP is a good strategy even if the player is passive. - the loss of EV of getting bluff raised when betting thin as IP is -(pot+ bet) vs the value you get is just the ‘ bet ‘ and if the bet is small like you suggested ie B33. That means if you get bluff raise 1 in 4 times you are just breaking even with your small river bet. The point is you are risking a lot to get a little EV by betting small. The real exploit is not to increase the frequency with thin value but to not put strong hands in the small bet range. Since you do not get raised enough. It’s a subtle difference but it’s huge diff in EV. You are not wasting the potential of nuts by using it in the small bet region.
You’re implying they bluff raise enough to make your thin value bet unprofitable but then say they don’t bluff raise enough to make your nutter hands profitable!? Contradicting yourself a bit there pal And raising 1/4 times is definitely way over doing it and your nuts should just go small everytime as an exploit.
My takeaway is that each street I should ask my opponent to fill in their range for that spot and proceed from there
This is hilarious
@@JT-Bettermanway too much, I would be brain dead after 2 streets.
You joke, but I carry a backpack full of colored pencils and range charts everytime I play live.
It's really annoying though when the opponent isn't filling it out fast enough and some misreg fish calls clock.
They'll never understand GTO or be good at poker.
@@PhonyBologna I switched to highlighters... complete game-changer.
I know poker gto! For every action i take, i can find at least a 1% agreement in a sim, especially if i set it up right! 😂
Yeah spot on, thanks for this. Most and me included are just clicking buttons and at the casino to have fun.
we're all just clicking buttons!
Having fun is not as good as playing poker.
Thx for info, I think knowing the players especially online helps almost just as much as memorizing when to bluff k h hands lol
yep!
How close do you think linus would be on average to the solvers strategy? Do you think even he gets it wrong often
im not sure any human would get close! but he likely understands the principles of *WHY* better than almost anyone, so even if he misses exact combos he probably gets relatively close to correct frequencies.
but who knows!
If he played piosolver hu 200k hands do you think it would win? If so how bad
When I used to play seriously I had this go-round with my coach.
My argument was this: “if when you node lock ONE STREET the solver has such a dramatic adjustment, then the adjustment it would make it you node locked EVERY street, would not even be recognizable as GTO or balanced.”
If a solver could approximate the actual strategy of your opponent it would look like a wild, drunk idiot playing live poker. There would be tiny bets, huge bets, and all kinds of weird shit.
Great breakdown. Thanks, guys!
our pleasure, glad u enjoyed!
I think this guy used to be my school bus driver
rockwood school district?
@@hungryhorsepokerthat is crazy
It's possible to exploit the bots online at least short term. They over fold when you check raise turn and jam river.
A fellow Stocker is a rare thing indeed
(This is keys from discord )I understand the reasoning behind the x 100 OOP argument, but I do have a slight problem with it. Yes, the IP player will make mistakes if checked to.
However, will we not also make arguably larger mistakes in our response to IP bets? Especially deep stacked, vs small sizes and wide ranges, it is incredibly difficult for OOP human to construct a maximally exploitative response. I would think that you could easily find yourself making more BB mistakes since you’ll end up bloating pots OOP. Would like to hear your thoughts on this
got a video coming on why i play this way oop coming in next week or two with a lot more reasoning behind it. imo - they make MUCH larger mistakes vs x then bet when they are in position.
I found some pretty simple rules that capture like 99% GTO EV.
I guess I am just not smart enough to balance my ranges like the solver does.
The way I figure though is maybe I can do the solver thing for like 5 or 10 hands before I am smoked.
With the rules that i try to find, I can play for 30 minutes to 1 hour pnline before I need to take a break.
I will say I am not the usual 1 trillion bb/100 crusher like everyone in the comment section seems to be, I just play 25z as a hardcore hobbyist as in no desire to be a pro.
that’s actually a really really great way to look at it, find the simplification that captures most of the ev!
@@hungryhorsepoker it is difficult to find them, and it is a lot of playing around with the solver, but I figure 98% of EV captured for a simple strategy is way better than the 100% EV of a complicated strategy.
That way I can play at a higher level longer than if I had a complicated strategy.
That is my 2 cents, like I said, not a crusher, still trying to get there slowly but surely
Interesting how the solver still chooses to x range vs Villain despite villain way under stabbing flop in the first scenario. It’s definitely bc villain is using that big sizing that he should never use on that spot! GTO Sizing matters folk!
Gto still kills the low stakes. Can’t count the number of times I do something like a check, bet, bet line with value and the noobs say “I thought you were just trying to buy it”
wut
@@hungryhorsepoker lol
@@hungryhorsepoker😂
Its almost like we make poker more difficult than it really is...
yes!
I don’t think the betting small on the river as IP is a good strategy even if the player is passive.
- the loss of EV of getting bluff raised when betting thin as IP is -(pot+ bet) vs the value you get is just the ‘ bet ‘ and if the bet is small like you suggested ie B33. That means if you get bluff raise 1 in 4 times you are just breaking even with your small river bet.
The point is you are risking a lot to get a little EV by betting small. The real exploit is not to increase the frequency with thin value but to not put strong hands in the small bet range. Since you do not get raised enough. It’s a subtle difference but it’s huge diff in EV.
You are not wasting the potential of nuts by using it in the small bet region.
do passive players bluff raise rivers?
You’re implying they bluff raise enough to make your thin value bet unprofitable but then say they don’t bluff raise enough to make your nutter hands profitable!? Contradicting yourself a bit there pal
And raising 1/4 times is definitely way over doing it and your nuts should just go small everytime as an exploit.
Solver don’t surf…
16BB/ hour Tom should be in jail for theft, sheeesh.
15" POKER HAAAAARRRRDDD
couldn’t agree more
@@hungryhorsepoker 🙌🙌🙌