Hey all,

I'm finding myself falling behind and somewhat stuck with my study routine.

One problem is that I think I'm marking too many hands for review and then there's virtually not enough time in the day for me to go through every spot I found somewhat interesting/edifying (and still actually play, eat, sleep, etc). How do you time-manage your hand review process?

Similarly but more specifically, I recently bought CREV/GTO+ and—while they've already been useful in my relatively naive use of them—I was wondering: how do folks approach CREV and GTO+/Pio in their study? Like, when you sit down to study, how do you decide what you're going to work on? I'm getting some real "blank sheet of paper" issues with these tools on one end of my inaction, and then the other end of my inaction is "agh, there's no way I could run every hand I've marked for review through both of these processes".

And if anybody else uses both CREV AND solvers in their off-the-table work, I'd be really interested to know how you decide which hand/situation is a CREV question and which is a proper solver question (or when you want to see what the output of both is). Because, especially at low stakes, we're not concerned with playing strict GTO a lot of the time. For example, I played a hand today that I felt I took a kind of spewy line on... but GTO+ told me it was +EV. (I still think it was spewy.) So I'm feeling like sitting down with this hand and some CREV trees would be more productive, but I have no real sense of direction for these things yet other than trial and error.

Thanks for your input, everyone! A lot of the answers to these questions could probably come from watching a specific subset of RIO videos (I'll get to 'em; they're on my playlist!) as well as simply getting more experience with this level of NLHE study... but I'd really appreciate your individual insights for these off-the-table questions!