How accurate is GTO?

[Murph1969]

I know it’s the optimal way to play against optimal players, but how good is it against the average low stakes human? I believe the shoving ranges, for example, are much looser than real players.

 

[Nafor]

Following GTO against calling stations/bad players would probably end badly. Against decent player GTO might work to some extent.
Make a note of your opponent's tendencies and use exploitative techniques if they seem to be more useful.

 

[IanP304]

I think GTO should only be used as a baseline strategy and we should always be able to adapt our strategy accordingly based on the players at the table.

 

[Luvepoker]

I think GTO is accurate to be honest But the flaw of it is it assumes you're playing against someone who i is playing GTO perfectly as well. I personally think GTO is a great tool, but we must adjust to the players who we are against. If you dent and just play GTO strategy you probably will lose more often than not.

 

[rastapapolos]

For me adaptation is the key, I have some basics about GTO and it helps sometimes in some spots especially if the guy is playing GTO also. But when facing a whale or a calling station it won't help, I have to have a real hand against them.

 

[TeUnit]

To me GTO is ok, but you really should be trying to exploit players first who have holes in their game. I feel like you are value poning yourself when you dont take advantage of easily exploitable situations.

 

[JappsPK]

An exploiter can exploit more the explored, if you dont exploit and only use GTO you're not exploiting the best potential of your hand.

 

[Matt_Burns88]

I believe GTO is a misnomer. Originally, it was referred to simply as "Game Theory" and then somewhere along the line it accrued the "Optimal", which I think is bullshit. A more accurate name would be GTE or Game Theory Equilibrium. Because that is what game theory is, right? It is the equilibrium where if two perfectly balanced players played each other, GTO is what their strategy would look like to make sure that they are totally unexploitable. Over a big enough sample size, both players would eventually end up totally even (of course, in reality this won't actually happen because variance is a bitch).
So from a perfectly balanced point of view, yes GTO is perfect. But, the thing is, NO ONE is playing perfectly balanced, GTO strategies, even the elite, top level high rollers.
When your opponent deviates from GTO, you should adapt to exploit those deviations. This is easier said than done at the top level, because everyone is aiming to play GTO, so it is difficult to spot the minor deviations, but at the low and micro stakes, a lot of players have not even heard of GTO, let alone know what it looks like or how to implement it, so in this case, while playing GTO will be profitable, exploiting your opponents many, many mistakes, will be far more profitable.
The thing is, before you figure out how you're supposed to deviate from GTO, you need to know what the equilibrium play is in the first place.

 

[dartablasta]

If you use GTO, in a long time period you have to win, GTO use % of millions of hands to know which is the best move!

 

[UnderDawg5501]

In my reading I ran across a scientific paper on GTO:
"Approximating Game-Theoretic Optimal Strategies for Full-scale Poker"
"D. Billings, N. Burch, A. Davidson, R. Holte, J. Schaeffer, T. Schauenberg, and D. Szafron"

Within it I found this statement to be interesting:

It is important to understand that a game-theoretic optimal
player is, in principle, not designed to win. Its purpose is to
not lose. An implicit assumption is that the opponent is also
playing optimally, and nothing can be gained by observing
the opponent for patterns or weaknesses.

Since they have not yet come up with a computer program to actually play real time with a human player, I can't imagine anyone having the mental resources to play full on GTO in a game. Some theoretical "best" choices perhaps.
A huge amount of experimenting and memorizing I have to imagine is involved to become somewhat close to GTO.

 

[eetenor]

I know it’s the optimal way to play against optimal players, but how good is it against the average low stakes human? I believe the shoving ranges, for example, are much looser than real players.

Well fun fact- what most people do not understand about GTO is that what they think is GTO is actually GTO Equilibrium strategy only-which is only one part of optimal play- That is when your opponent plays perfectly and you have to as well-

The other aspect they misunderstand is that GTO E....is played heads-up from the preflop action- add a third player in and we have to adjust our GTO actions which include bet sizing - OOP leading frequency and range selection--- check raising-freq & range selection and IP bet sizing and bet freq and range selection

A simple example of a GTO adaption vs a standard Villain multiway:
MP vs SB and BB single raised pot--- if the SB play near GTO -MP is C- betting 60% of range when checked to- If SB does not know they have 40% of range leads in this spot and check instead---which is often the case for many V -- then MP C-bet is 40% of range instead and there is a range adaption as well we do not just knock out the bottom of the range

You will often hear GTO has little to no value vs standard V which is basically correct if you are looking at it in it's simplest application- it can in fact be detrimental to your ROI if you try to apply it incorrectly- you mentioned shoving ranges for instance

The depth of study required to play GTO well vs standard V is intense but well worth the effort if you are serious about poker- a 2 year timeline is not unheard of to become competent in it's application many more years of course for mastery

 

[mateuszjason]

me thinks that the whole GTO strategy is a solution for the highest stakes. Super high roller, high roller or high cash games.

at our level i.e. freerolls/micro and low it probably does not work.