Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Aballinamion, post: 6832717, member: 289533"] I think this is not a GTO thing and besides, I'm afraid many of our forum mates are pretty much biased only by this one perspective of GTO gameplay. This could lead to several mistakes in the long run. Allow me to explain myself: I don't understand why GTO had become a religion among poker players or why everything must pass to solvers, such as GTO Wizard. Personally, I like GTO a lot, I use it when I need it, I understand the foundation and the principles of GTO and have nothing against it, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying that many players are using GTO solvers too much. Concerning this specific hand to defend my point of view: GTO has a logic, a way of working that balances our range whether we are playing for value or for bluff. In this particular hand we are discussing, one of the players has a baby pocket pair and as you said, it is trying to represent QT, AK, JJ, KJ, etc, and this logic seems weak. Because if the players had at least one Jx, one Qx, Kx or Ax he could be doing the same (maybe). And the logic of bluffing using GTO is not only based on mathematics but it rests ultimately in the capacity our opponent has to fold: by bluffing a player that has no fold equity (as we observed), what is the point? And I see a bunch of players say that because "we open from such position and we own some table image, we can bluff whatever hand we have", and I disagree. The hand proved itself to be a failure, because opponent had no fold equity and insta-called the aggressor's bluff. The point is try to use these tools on our favor, when we know the opponent and we own the proper value/bluff range. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us

Language