BUT WHAT'S YOUR RANGE

[seven-deuce]

GTO teaches us exploitative poker. Do you not understand this?

Why do you think so many top class poker players are completely revamping their game from a GTO perspective? They aren't doing it to try and miss out on all the value on the table by not exploiting villains, that's for sure.

I also don't understand how you can not see how learning those concepts you listen through a GTO perspective is useful. It basically tells us the answer to all the questions we have like how much should we be 3betting against this player, how much should he be 4betting? How much should we be stealing OTB against these two blinds, etc etc.

And ye, spitting image of my avatar. Just in the process of growing my hair out a little bit so it's that length.

Teach us how to learn GTO.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Teach us how to learn GTO.

... and define "balance" for us, as you mean it in this thread.

I'm now fairly convinced that we're all in agreement in this thread, but we're using terminology differently.
We've gotten all worked up, but we never bothered to determine if we all understand GTO in the same way.
The fact that Savy says, "GTO teaches us exploitative poker. Do you not understand this?" is clear evidence to me.

So how about we stop the finger pointing (of which I am guilty, and I apologize for any 'tardedness in my attitude) and iron out these terms?

[Savy]

I'm now fairly convinced that we're all in agreement in this thread, but we're using terminology differently.
We've gotten all worked up, but we never bothered to determine if we all understand GTO in the same way.
The fact that Savy says, "GTO teaches us exploitative poker. Do you not understand this?" is clear evidence to me.

GTO means we are attempting to finds ways to play almost perfectly. Poker isn't solved so obviously we don't have GTO but by attempting to learn it and seeing how we create really solid almost nash strategies (of which that donkr article I've linked to a few times does @sevenduece) we come across many ways of which don't work that may seem like they work. So we end up coming up with loads of really tight lines, knowing how people might try to exploit us whilst taking these lines and as we've seen why they don't work we have our adjustments already to exploit them, because we know how and why our opponents lines don't work.

When we are looking for all of these ways though our aim isn't to try and play GTO 100% of the time, in reality we'd be doing something wrong to be sat at a table where this would even be remotely needed.

I'm also not saying that hand reading and all those other skills aren't needed. They get developed over time. But trying to make them the main parts of our game when we know that this isn't how we go about "solving" poker just seems like a suboptimal way of going about poker.

[Pelion]

GTO means we are attempting to finds ways to play almost perfectly. Poker isn't solved so obviously we don't have GTO but by attempting to learn it and seeing how we create really solid almost nash strategies (of which that donkr article I've linked to a few times does @sevenduece) we come across many ways of which don't work that may seem like they work. So we end up coming up with loads of really tight lines, knowing how people might try to exploit us whilst taking these lines and as we've seen why they don't work we have our adjustments already to exploit them, because we know how and why our opponents lines don't work.

When we are looking for all of these ways though our aim isn't to try and play GTO 100% of the time, in reality we'd be doing something wrong to be sat at a table where this would even be remotely needed.

I'm also not saying that hand reading and all those other skills aren't needed. They get developed over time. But trying to make them the main parts of our game when we know that this isn't how we go about "solving" poker just seems like a suboptimal way of going about poker.

And now you're saying almost the exact same as my first post in this thread

[seven-deuce]

GTO means we are attempting to finds ways to play almost perfectly. Poker isn't solved so obviously we don't have GTO but by attempting to learn it and seeing how we create really solid almost nash strategies (of which that donkr article I've linked to a few times does @sevenduece) we come across many ways of which don't work that may seem like they work. So we end up coming up with loads of really tight lines, knowing how people might try to exploit us whilst taking these lines and as we've seen why they don't work we have our adjustments already to exploit them, because we know how and why our opponents lines don't work.

When we are looking for all of these ways though our aim isn't to try and play GTO 100% of the time, in reality we'd be doing something wrong to be sat at a table where this would even be remotely needed.

I'm also not saying that hand reading and all those other skills aren't needed. They get developed over time. But trying to make them the main parts of our game when we know that this isn't how we go about "solving" poker just seems like a suboptimal way of going about poker.

I didn't see a link ITT. Post the link, I'm interested in reading it.