This is a discussion on Exploitability X Balance within the online poker forums, in the General Poker section; Do you know the importance of rocking your game, and knowing how to exploit your opponent?
Nowadays we see many players speaking in the beauty of
Do you know the importance of rocking your game, and knowing how to exploit your opponent?
Nowadays we see many players speaking in the beauty of being unexplored and playing GTO, and I think this is something really cool, yes, in theory. Legal for if you study and understand, but not to apply - at least in tournaments low, mid and even low-high stakes.
I'll explain why. It is a concept that has become fashionable after many regulars (in schools of video like Run It Once or in Forums like the twoplustwo) start talking day-and-night about. However, they are all players of cash game, where you are facing the same opponents at a much higher frequency, always with the same stack range, almost always 6 handed (or HU) and an infinitely more field hard and well trained. In tournaments the thing is quite different.
Playing tournaments, we will hardly face the same situation as often as in the cash game. The repetition of situations is much more rare, be it by different stacks, different tournament timing (early game, bubble, late game), dynamics, opponents, and the concept itself of tournament life. Understanding GTO or Unexplained Game is very important high-level cash game, yes, because you will not face this type of variation of situations because, in addition to the reasons cited, the field of cash games is also much more homogeneous than the Field of MTTs.
That said, I believe that in MTTs the best way to play is to think in exploiting their opponents most often without think that they can defend themselves as a machine. It is to think, therefore, to attack (which is the core of the concept of exploiting), and not to defend oneself (core of the concept of balance or balance).
The overwhelming majority of tournaments do not quite understand these concepts (especially the weaker players) and ranges from The guy who thinks about his hand to the guy who can make a reasonable reading of your whole range, but does not fit properly. And this in different and infinitely variable situations. So every time you make a move in the name of balance, you give up EV (again, look at the danger there). As a football team facing a much worse opponent, winning of only 1x0 and playing on the defensive to hold the result, afraid to attack and expose themselves and take a counterattack, when could annihilate the game without major concerns.
Imagine that you have 23off in Small Blind with 12bb against an opponent who folds 99% of the range and only pays you with KK and AA. Against it, you can shovar any two profitably, because it will exploit the DELE error (and ignoring the fact that you, in doing so, are also exposed and exploitable he will not realize it much less exploit it!) Thinking about balancing your range, in the example above, would build a absolute range of shove, where maybe 23off becomes fold and with that, your EV in the spot as a whole will be decreased for no reason, in favor of a beautiful and balanced game.
share with us what you think.
I think it's right to be the aggressor in tournaments, but we have to have a B plan for when the situation goes out of control, I plan the plays in advance always imagining the worst scenario, so I can leave with minimized losses. And if it turns out to be favorable, I can extract as many chips as possible.