**balanced range**as the aggressor will ensure that we cannot be exploited, but does not necessarily constitute the best line of action in any given circumstance.

**GTO poker**solutions. However, they should serve as a useful introduction to a GTO concepts and increase our effectiveness in many situations where we are the aggressor.

- Our opponent is also
**very balanced** - We don't know our
**opponent's tendencies** - We have
**no specific population read**which will allow us to make an exploitative decision vs an unknown.

## GTO: Bluff:Value Ratio

If we have a bluff:value ratio of 2:1, it implies that we are bluffing twice as frequently as we are value betting. Logically, 33% of our range would be value-hands and 67% of our range would be bluffs in this case. Calculating the correct bluff:value ratio is very straightforward on the river, but gets increasingly complicated the earlier the street we are on. As such, we will start with river situations.

**bet-sizing**. Generally speaking the larger we bet, the higher the percentage of bluffs we should have in our range. We can calculate the ratio by considering the pot-odds our opponent is getting and how often he needs to be good to make a call.

**Example 1 - We make a pot-sized bet on the river. How often does our opponent need to be good for calling to be correct?**

**Example 2 – We make a pot-sized bet on the river. How should we construct our bluff:value ratio if we want to be unexploitable?**

We assume that our value hands are always good and our bluffs always lose, which may not always be the case in practice. In other words, our opponent always holds a bluffcatcher and we are perfectly polarized.)

**(33.333 * 2bb) – (66.6666% * 1bb) =**

**0.6666r - 0.6666r = 0bb EV**

## Earlier Streets

**GTO poker**always takes into account what may happen on later streets. In other words, we can't calculate what our flop bluff:value ratio is without knowing what our river bluff:vaue ratio is first. In order to know this we will also need to know which sizing we will be using on the river.

**flop range**will be strong enough to value-bet the river after firing flop and turn. We will think of all ranges as a proportion of our initial flop range.

If we are value-betting 10% of our total flop-range then we will be bluffing 5% of our total flop-range. Of all the hands we reach the flop with, 15% of them will be firing the river in this example

## GTO: Turn Bluff:Value Ratio

In other words, any hand we raise the turn with (whether it be a value bet or bluff) with the intention of firing the river, can now be considered a “value-hand” for the purposes of calculating bluff:value ratio on the turn. The hands we consider “bluffs” on the turn are those which will fire the turn and then proceed to give up on the river.

- 10% value hands which fire turn and river
- 5% bluffs which go on to fire the river
- 7.5% bluffs which will check/fold the river

## GTO: Flop Buff:Value Ratio

- 10% value hands which go on to fire the turn and river.
- 5% bluffs which go on to fire the turn and the river
- 7.5% bluffs which will fire the turn and check/fold the river
- 11.25% of hands which fire the flop and give up on the turn
- 33.75% of hands we reach the flop with are betting
- 23.25% of these hands are bluffs
- 10% are value hands

## So what can we learn?

- The larger we bet, the more bluffs we can have in our range
- The earlier the street and the deeper the stacks, the more we can get away with bluffing

## GTO: Why don't the results seem logical?

- We've assumed that all of our value hands will be used as part of a 3 street hand and not a 2 street plan. Adding more value hands will increase the frequency with which we fire the flop.
- We haven't discussed our check/call or check/raise ranges. We've simply assumed that if we check we are always giving up, which is illogical.
- We haven't factored in the
**equity**of our bluffs and our value hands. We've simply counted combos which will result in noticeable inaccuracies - We've assumed we are perfectly polarized on the river, and we might not be

**solution our model would need to take in to account all of these issues and more. Hopefully we can quickly begin to see that having an accurate calculation for any situation is a highly complicated procedure and at this stage really still involves much guesswork.**

*perfect GTO*