Learning effectively the GTO based strategy
Posted by 1BuckPlease
Posted by
1BuckPlease
posted in
Mid Stakes
Learning effectively the GTO based strategy
I am a bit uncertain about my studying methods and I am really courius what do you think about it.
I have been playing cash games as a hobby from the beginning of 2020 started from 5nl and at the end of the year I am trying to despise my feet on 100nl with less success yet. Unfortunately, I do not have poker buddies, nor a coach, just me. So in one person, I have to be a motivator, a coach and a player. If you have ever tried to locate and repair leaks in your game on your own, you know how difficult it is.
But that's it, this thread is not about complaining.
My general study plan seems like this:
SPECIFYING THE GOAL
1. Find a topic to be improved in ( like cbetting, 3betting, defense against cbets, etc. )
2. Break down the topic into sub-topics
STUDY THE SUB-TOPIC ( at least for a week )
1. Make a new tag in HM3 for the specific sub-topic
2. Collect the right media related to the topic ( videos ).
On an active day (passive days = no poker)
1. Watch a video and take notes.
2. Review hands connected to the topic from your previous sessions.
3. Play a session (max 90 minutes) and tag hands (only those connected to the topic!!!)
4. REST
5. Play a session (max 90 minutes) and tag hands (only those connected to the topic!!!)
6. REST
It seems easy, right? Well, NO, if you are learning on your own.
My main problem comes from hand reviewing.
Lets take the following topic fot example: cbetting from BTN vs BB
the subtopic is: Cbetting on middle connected flops.
The process:
1. I open HM3 and take a look at my first tagged hand.
2. I open flopzilla and select from the predefined preflop ranges.
3. I try to split the ranges into big bet, small bet and check range and find the somewhat correct frequencies for each and try to place my holding in the correct subrange.
4. I check the GTO solution and usually get frustrated by the mixed strategies on the flop :)
5. Okay, move on. In case of cbetting, i try to define a defending range for my opponent and split BB's range into calls, folds, and raises.
6. Lets say, I am trying to give him a raising range of what percent? I dont know any mathemtical formulas which can be solved by the human brain on the fly to give the approximate raising frequency OTF for the BB. Okay, never mind, I have played a lot with my solver, I know that I should check/raise that specific flop ~5% of the time against a big cbet. Now, I have to just construct the range from the best combos. But wait, how many bluffs should I add to BB's raising range? Open up solver, try to find the universal truth, the common ground between these spots but I only see mixing, mixing and a little more mixing... ( Usually that is the point, where I would rather shut down my laptop and leave poker for a while :) )
8. With a somewhat frustrated mindset, I finish the review.
9. Then I open up the solver and try again to solve the specific spot but now, with nodelocking with more simplification (ignoring a ton of mixing, where i dont loose ev).
10. I examine the specific spot, but I feel, I have just learnt almost nothing from that review. I can see the exact solution, but I have a ton of unanswered "why"-s... Then i realize that the most usefull part of my day was watching that video in the moring...
I've a ton of unanswered questions all the time, like:
* how should I construct my bluff to value ratio in that spot with my range against my opponent's cbetting range? I don't know, I can check it in my solver, but it is just self-deception, It does not give me universal thinking.
* after checking back the flop, on a turn which favors my check behind range, how often should I attack and with what portion of my range with what bet size?
* on a flush turn, how should I construct my 2nd barrell range, how often should I continue and with that bet size?
* what hands are the best to semmi-bluff with on the turn? with what freq?
* etc, etc, etc.
All in all, I obviously have some clue about different spots, but what I am unsure, that when I am constructing ranges, how could I know, that I am not overbluffing, or underbluffing a specific flop for example? Do I really have to study the right frequencies for each possible holding in a specific spot? On the river, if were are in a jam or fold situation, math is simple, counting combos and taking blockers into account not mega-hard. But playing well balanced lines (especially, knowing that the line is not just somewhat balanced, it is WELL balanced) is really hard.
I can check the exact GTO solution of course, but - as I said - it does not give me a usefull formula what can be used in the future. In only gives a situation specific solution...
How can I be sure when playing (or reviewing), that my chosen line is +EV or -EV on the flop, or even on the turn? I feel, studying with a solver is more about studying the exact solutions not about studying the "why"-s...
I am seeking answers like this: If i check raise this specific turn with 6 combos of sets and 16 combos of straights, how should i balance my range with bluffs? I know these formulas have a lot of variables ( position, spr, ranges, etc.), but without knowing the numbers, how can we certain about our review results? How should I cange my studying method?
Sorry for the long post.
I wish you all a Merry Christmas!
Loading 4 Comments...
From your post it seems like you're trying to run without being able to walk.
You should not use a solver to look at specific frequencies and try to emulate that. We all want to be able to do that, but you just can't.
What you need to do is try to understand why the actions in the solution are the way they are.
Imagine your BTN vs BB cbet. This is how I would use a solver to look into this:
Create a database solve with 163 flops and let it run.
Export to Excel and create an aggregated report
In this report I'll see the average cbet strategy and do several type of splits. Betsize preference, board texture, etc... . You called these subtopics.
See if I can create some all round concepts from this. Building heuristics to use in game basicly.
Test these heuristics for their validity with other solves.
You can expand on that and see if you can simplify. If you notice some boards have a high frequency for small sizing, add these to a seperate category. Create a new database solve where you cbet 100% for that sizing. What happens to the EV? Is it a huge loss?
Some example heuristics:
- When BTN's range has a lot of marginal hands with incentive to bet we use a small size at high frequency.
- When BTN's range has very few marginal hands or no incentive to bet then we use big size for lower frequency
- BB connects better on middling connected boards due to offsuit combo's
- BB should have a donking range on some boards. Very few people do this. Be careful on these boards.
I usually use aggrated reports for studying as well. In this case (cbetting) I used a subset of 66 flops. I grouped them, made aggregations and made notes into One note about the heuristics. After that, I did the same in case of defending, check rainsing and so on. After ( I thought ), I have the big picture, so its time to practice with playing versus snowie, or GTO+ trying these findings in "game".
When you are on the atomic level and analyzing a specific hand, how can you know that your line against a non GTO ( human :) ) player is +EV on every street? Adding somewhat realistic ranges in single raised pots (where ranges are wide) are hard and time-consuming, you have to simplify a lot. But if you just put this hand into a solver, you just cannot learn a lot from it.
Stincking to this topic (cbetting in srp), when you face a questionable spot during your session, how do you analyze it then?
If you played the hand according to your strategy then I don't see why you would worry about this. Going exploit strategy is something I do advice people doing. I approached this by doing a population analysis on 44 million hands. Noticed where population is doing things wrong and adjusted my strategy.
If I didn't do this I would try to approach this from the viewpoint of what my opponent is saying that he has. Most people would say "Think about their range". People just vary a lot, especially at microstakes, to make these range reads. You can have an understanding of how easy or hard it would be for your opponent to do. If for example you are barreling, ask yourself how your opponent should defend. Do you think it's easy for them to do this? If it's easy then it's likely not a big +EV play. If it's hard then it's likely a +EV play.
Same for defending vs aggression. How hard is it for your opponent to find the right bluffs? If it's hard, then it's likely an underbluffed spot. If it's easy then it's likely an overbluffed spot.
If I find it a questionable spot it's because I don't understand that spot. I'm missing knowledge to help me there. I don't look at that specific hand perse, more wondering which information I'm missing to understand this spot. Then see if I can somehow find this information.
I must admit that having a decent study group, study partner, or forum, helps here.
Doesn't entirely solve your problem but thought I'd just throw this your way because if you look at flop strategy it's going to be very hard to understand when you don't look at it through this lense.
Value to bluff ratio is actually less important than your ability to deliberately skew one way or the other on all future streets/runouts. Basically when you're generating aggression it's more important to be able to overbluff nodes as a response to overfolding than it is to hit the exact correct frequencies at every point on the game tree. The reason for this is your opponents will not be able to adjust to minor frequency deviations but they will be able to adjust to a spot where you run out of bluffs by folding their entire range and in this case you need to counter adjust but supplying yourself with not just enough bluffs to be balanced but enough to deliberately over bluff them to punish them for their nittyness (and as a result force them to start calling you when you have a value bet). Try and think of flop x/r bluffs as in terms of what turn cards you either 1) double barrel 2) give up and are happy to x/f 3) make a value hand. Often you'll see the range constructed something like x amount of strong draws that almost always double barrel on bricks (except when they x/r again on turn) + y amount of weaker/backdoor draws that give up on bricks but double barrel when other draws complete.
If the reason that a hand plays the way it does on flop doesn't make sense start looking at what it does on certain runouts, if you find a weird x/r on flop then maybe look at some turns where everything gets there and it will start to make sense why you include this hand.
Be the first to add a comment