# teubsch

1 points

Hand History | teubsch posted in NLHE: 5/10 deep turn spot
Blinds: \$5.00/\$10.00 (2 Players) SB: \$1870.90
BB: \$1947.50 (Hero)
Preflop (\$15.00) Hero is BB with K A
Hero raises to \$30.00, SB raises to \$110.00, Hero calls \$80.00
Flop (\$220.00) A 5 Q
SB checks, Hero checks
Turn (\$220.00) A 5 Q 2
SB checks, Hero bets \$176.00, SB raises to \$523.60

### Jan. 15, 2015 | 10:40 a.m.

For some reason i can watch all videos on my ipad with the exception for yours. Could you pla look into it and fix for future videos. Thanks

### Jan. 19, 2013 | 6:59 p.m.

For most of the gto principles you discussed in your videos our defending frequencies, bluff frequencies, calling frequencies, etc are based on the size of the bet relative to the pot. We are therefore not taking villains frequencies directly into account in deriving heros optimal frequencies. I guess this is fine as long as villain c bets, folds to bluff, etc at a somewhat 'normalized' frequency and therefore plays a style that is close to gto.

It would however be interesting to understand what villains 'normalized' gto frequencies are at various streets / scenarios (flop / turn / river cb %, c/r, defending %, etc) in order to spot situations where villain plays a style where we should deviate from gto and play am exploitive strategy to maximize value. The simplest example is if villain only flop cb 20% as in that scenario we should presumably defend less than what a gto strategy would dictate. The same principle would apply to basically any situation you could think of.

If easy enough, maybe you could upload a cheat sheet with what you consider 'normalized' gto like frequencies in various situations, where the best counterstrategy would be a gto strategy. This would allow us to spot situations where we should deviate from a gto strategy and play an exploitive strategymuch more easily. Thanks