I’m not confused. It’s solved to the point we know weak tight is not the right strategy. Zero of Bruce’s hands would be solver approved.
Also it is solved in that we know a GTO strategy would always win. It’s just that people are not able to execute the solution.
Bruce is trying to play highly exploitable poker against a range of weird opponents in the belief that he will win more than by playing conventionally.
You say poker’s solved to the point we know weak tight is not the “right” strategy but you’re not considering his opponents’ exploitable tendencies - there will be players out there where playing weak tight maximises your win rate against them.
The only way this is true is if Bruce magically finds himself is super rare, far end of the bell curve, low stakes live games over and over and over. In 99.99999999% of low stakes games aggression wins.
It’s either that or he is using the wrong strategy.
Paying weak tight in one hand may be optical. Doing so in every hand is simply bad play.
Lol when we say solved we don’t mean someone in LLSNL is going to play perfect every hand and apply gto strategies.
We mean that we know weak, passive play is not a winning formula.
Bruce’s opponents “exploitable tendencies” just beat him every day, in multiple game formats for 5 figures. Perhaps that happened for a reason?
Sure, but you also know those local players are not playing anywhere close to optimally. They’re the typed that when they raise/get paid you roll your eyes because you know exactly what they have and can’t believe their opponent does not.
Winning $10/hr at 1/2 set mining just doesn’t bode well if you want to play tougher games.
The sample size is billions of hands. This isn’t 2001. We know the right strategy for low limits and it’s absolutely not weak tight.
I would bet ALOT of money there are no winning players set mining only unless they play in some rake free home game. It’s hard to beat 1/2 rake in the best case.
Don’t think it’s unreasonable some super nits win $2-10 an hour. It’s just insufferable and sad to have a VPIP of 10 or whatever and make $5 an hour.
Locally the biggest nit with the dumbest face up sizings was a small winner. The type who would 10x pf with aces etc.
If there were a way to verify I would take this bet all day long. If you don’t tilt you can make money playing phil helmuths top ten hands from the early 2000s I’ve seen the nittiest players get paid off again and again.
Maybe if playing aggressive too. If playing passive, zero chance.
True, and I’m in no way arguing its anywhere close to optimal in any game I’ve ever seen.
Do you think you can do this with a $7-9 rake?
Probably still on weekends at least. Still only played in mtrl where it’s that high.
Also if the buyin cap is above 100bb
Rake in Alberta is $6-7.
Still pretty hard to beat for real money although most games allow 200bb buyin.
Edit: I guess $1-2 of that is jackpot drops which are technically neutral ev.
No it’s not. I’m right and you are trolling. Carry on.
I’m not attacking Bruce. He is asking for opinions. The fucking thread is called poker strategy.
Troll better.
I thought that was just in Vegas?
Lol you are not trolling but “honestly” arguing weak tight is the right strategy. Next up anti-vaxxers are right by fidget.
Troll better.
Onto ignore. I have no intention of letting you and jal bait me into your love of drama.
Other than fidget, I’d be curious where I am misunderstanding GTO? I only play for fun now so have no intention of doing more than playing around with solvers as I’ve done the past few months but if I have some egregious misunderstanding I want to correct it?
He was playing low limit buyins in Vegas. These aren’t tough games, despite his insistence on playing stuff like Razz.
Vegas during the WSOP are the softest games you will see at their respective stakes. You can run bad, but the games will never be easier.
The word optimal doesn’t mean it’s the optimal way to play poker against exploitable players.