GTO not even close to optimal

[Axmanace]

If

No, it's an equity calculator.

And just for the record, not that it really matters I guess, but I actually created the first GTO calculator in this space over 12 years ago. Myself, and a friend, built a competition bot based on nash equilibrium to compete in the AAAI poker bot competitions and we won first place, beating teams from MS, google, etc... We turned that into Ace poker coach, and it was the first GTO advisor that would automatically analyze your played hands. BUT, and here's the funny thing, people at the time didn't understand why you'd choose to balance and vary your actions with different hands in your range. It was seen as unreliable because it was advising to Check X% of the time, bet Y% of the time, and so on. The poker community didn't get it, so it was literally the only piece of software I've developed that wasn't a hit. Ironically, it was way ahead of it's time.

You can still download it here, but it's not been in development for years.

Ace Poker Coach for Windows - Free download and software reviews - CNET Download

Download Ace Poker Coach latest version for Windows free to try. Ace Poker Coach latest update: September 15, 2016

download.cnet.com

So I understand GTO play pretty well. And I understand its limitations, and the group think of the poker community pretty well also.

if it’s only an equity calculator - why does it run simulations?

Maybe I misunderstand - but you don’t need to run simulations to calculate equity.

Unless it is referencing some other tool.

 

[Poker Orifice]

This thread is a really good example of why poker is profitable.

Player X (who knows 0.5% of GTO) is arguing with Player Y (who knows 0.6% of GTO) about who knows more, completely wasting time/energy.

Neither player is able to see how infinitely small their knowledge is compared to what they don't know and also what they don't even know that they don't know.

Stubbornness (especially in regards to "knowing") is a major hinderance to results.

The ideal opponent is one whom thinks they know what they are doing, and has many blind spots.

The only thing I know about GTO is that I do not understand it, and that's OK. I also understand that the typical MTT player is going to make such horrible mistakes over and over again, that GTO/any advanced theory won't be applicable.

Seriously, it seems much more advisable to simplify your game and make sure you are picking "good spots." One big insight I quickly had was how many 50/50 or "close calls" you can simply avoid, and still be OK to make a deep run. As a beginner, you can simply take all the easy spots that are no brainers and work in spots from there. You will likely go too far and have to dial it back a bit, but this is how one gains perspective and intuition as to the proper push/fold spots while shortstacked.

Poker is funny, we can really overanalyze it at times and get "caught in the weeds." It's not that hard, don't make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Also, trying to be correct and prove other people wrong is just silly. Almost as silly as an online badge to "prove" competency. If you truly believed in your abilities you wouldn't have to prove anything to anyone.

I'm not claiming to know anything, and that's the point.

This post deserves a badge!

 

[Poker Orifice]

“Yo Adrian! To my feeling a bit... unbalanced”

 

[John A]

If

if it’s only an equity calculator - why does it run simulations?

Maybe I misunderstand - but you don’t need to run simulations to calculate equity.

Unless it is referencing some other tool.

It's not running nash equilibrium sims to understand what the best ranges are. It's just looking at the hand(s) and spitting out the equity of both ranges via running board run out sims.