L
LongRover
Rock Star
Silver Level
GTO means Game Theory Optimal. Have you read a book or watched a video about GTO recently? Earlier on, learning about Game Theory Optimal sometimes gave me the idea that everyone who is anyone in the world of NLHE was talking about, or using, it. But, really (!?), not according to what I later found out. Pouring through as many articles as I could read, and watching as many videos as possible, I came to the conclusion that like-minded readers and viewers can neither fully understand nor use Game Theory Optimal any more than I can. The truth about GTO is that it is a theory looking to solve all possible NLHE situations, and those who teach this theory should know that it has not yet reached the point where this is possible.
Why? Because GTO is a theory that seeks to solve NLHE mathematically. According to RedChip, "... no-limit hold'em can be treated and solved like a math problem." However, RedChip further states that "Somewhere out there in mathland, there is an optimal strategy for no-limit hold'em..." So what does this statement imply? It implies that no one has yet to find the elusive optimal solution to NLHE. Doug Polk confirms this when he says that "The GTO strategy for No Limit Hold’em supposedly exists, but is not yet known by any human or even computer." As such, GTO is simply a theory, an unproven one at that, and an unproven sub-set of math-based Game Theory. So, I think, it should be approached with a healthy dose of skepticism and used sparingly, because, at present, it leans more toward testimonials and situational affirmations rather than mathematical substance.
Looking for the optimal solution to NLHE reminds me of the never-ending search for the ever elusive Theory of Everything, or (TOE), as it is referred to by the scientific community. Now Game Theory Optimal and The Theory of Everything are hardly the same, but I find it difficult to think of one without the other because neither have been solved. GTO is about solving NLHE mathematically no matter what possible situations arise. But. like Robert Woolley concludes in his article about the subject, "It is likely to be many years before a game as complex as full-ring, deep stack, no limit hold-em is fully solved, meaning that the GTO move for every possible situation has not been determined."
Now TOE is supposed to be a single theory explaining everything about our universe. Finding the TOE remains one of the major unsolved problems in physics. People like Einstein and Hawking tried and failed to put together such a theory. So, I guess, what I am saying is, just because Einstein and Hawking gave up on finding the TOE, does not mean that today's poker theorists should give up on the search for the GTO of NLHE. Why? Because, as so affirmatively embedded and implied within his statement above, Woolley is postulating that there is a GTO solution to NLHE, and that - in time - it will be found.
However, importantly, theorists should not talk about GTO as if it exists today - it does not. They should, when discussing Game Theory Optimal topics, in writing or viewing formats, always remind readers and viewers alike that GTO is an expressed theory that exists in all reality only within the minds of those who are aware of it, and that it remains an unproven theory, and, more so, that it remains in its very earliest stages of expression. As things are now, there actually is no GTO in the world of NLHE anymore than there is a TOE about the universe around us. Simply stated, GTO, like TOE, is a theoretical expression of a future formulation or equation, that might one day be found, but has yet to be. So, there is no GTO in NLHE, yet!
Why? Because GTO is a theory that seeks to solve NLHE mathematically. According to RedChip, "... no-limit hold'em can be treated and solved like a math problem." However, RedChip further states that "Somewhere out there in mathland, there is an optimal strategy for no-limit hold'em..." So what does this statement imply? It implies that no one has yet to find the elusive optimal solution to NLHE. Doug Polk confirms this when he says that "The GTO strategy for No Limit Hold’em supposedly exists, but is not yet known by any human or even computer." As such, GTO is simply a theory, an unproven one at that, and an unproven sub-set of math-based Game Theory. So, I think, it should be approached with a healthy dose of skepticism and used sparingly, because, at present, it leans more toward testimonials and situational affirmations rather than mathematical substance.
Looking for the optimal solution to NLHE reminds me of the never-ending search for the ever elusive Theory of Everything, or (TOE), as it is referred to by the scientific community. Now Game Theory Optimal and The Theory of Everything are hardly the same, but I find it difficult to think of one without the other because neither have been solved. GTO is about solving NLHE mathematically no matter what possible situations arise. But. like Robert Woolley concludes in his article about the subject, "It is likely to be many years before a game as complex as full-ring, deep stack, no limit hold-em is fully solved, meaning that the GTO move for every possible situation has not been determined."
Now TOE is supposed to be a single theory explaining everything about our universe. Finding the TOE remains one of the major unsolved problems in physics. People like Einstein and Hawking tried and failed to put together such a theory. So, I guess, what I am saying is, just because Einstein and Hawking gave up on finding the TOE, does not mean that today's poker theorists should give up on the search for the GTO of NLHE. Why? Because, as so affirmatively embedded and implied within his statement above, Woolley is postulating that there is a GTO solution to NLHE, and that - in time - it will be found.
However, importantly, theorists should not talk about GTO as if it exists today - it does not. They should, when discussing Game Theory Optimal topics, in writing or viewing formats, always remind readers and viewers alike that GTO is an expressed theory that exists in all reality only within the minds of those who are aware of it, and that it remains an unproven theory, and, more so, that it remains in its very earliest stages of expression. As things are now, there actually is no GTO in the world of NLHE anymore than there is a TOE about the universe around us. Simply stated, GTO, like TOE, is a theoretical expression of a future formulation or equation, that might one day be found, but has yet to be. So, there is no GTO in NLHE, yet!
Last edited: