> but it's due to the math indicating that it's an advantageous spot to do it, not because of anything he's observed about his opponent. I wonder about this di

> but it's due to the math indicating that it's an advantageous spot to do it, not because of anything he's observed about his opponent. I wonder about this distinction. This seems it would make sense if all the players played the GTO strategy. Suppose one agent were to play the GTO strategy, but an other player was vulnerable to bluffing. It seems reasonable to "tune" the bluffs to that player. In an extreme example, suppose every time a certain player would fold 100% of the time when another player played a certain way. It seems it would make sense for that other player to play that way when they wanted that player to fold, even under normal circumstances that play would be suboptimal.