Exploitative vs GTO Play: Which One Wins More in Practice?

[100moralnenhuma]

In your experience, is it better to aim for Game Theory Optimal play, or focus on exploiting weaknesses, especially in low-to-mid stakes games?

 

[dannystanks]

I learn GTO so I have a baseline of what my opponents are supposed to do in a given situation. When they don’t play GTO then I can make a plan to exploit what mistakes they are making.
So I use both.

 

[pentazepam]

I learn GTO so I have a baseline of what my opponents are supposed to do in a given situation. When they don’t play GTO then I can make a plan to exploit what mistakes they are making.
So I use both.

This is the "pro approach" in tough games.

In soft LIVE games (and nano stakes online), GTO knowledge doesn't hurt, but exploiting weaknesses should be so easy that you don't have to learn GTO at all.

 

[SpanRmonka]

Knowing the basics of GTO, and improving on frequesnt occurance simple spots is always a good thing.

However, when I see people saying stuff like, and they raised with garbage and I got drawn out on, or they called my great bluff, when I was telling a story and representing a certain hand, you knowing they were playing players who don't look for that stuff.

There's no point representing a flush if your opponent can't fold top pair. Or running any bluff on them at all for that matter!!

Not that I really play mid stakes, but certainly at low stakes you have to focus on playing the players, and mostly assuming that GTO will not be the mst effective method of playing poker.

 

[Marshmalo1994]

In your experience, is it better to aim for Game Theory Optimal play, or focus on exploiting weaknesses, especially in low-to-mid stakes games?

I just learn that GTO is great to become a micro stakes winning player, but if you want to advance to low-middle games, you have to start playing an explotative (is that the word?) game. And I have to say, I've play for many years now and studied a lot, but I'm not sure what that means 😂