Game Theory Optimal vs. Exploitative Strategies in Short Deck Hold’em

Knowing when to play balanced and when to press the edge can be the difference-maker

In Short Deck Hold’em, the choice between Game Theory Optimal (GTO) and exploitative strategies can heavily influence a player’s long-term success. Short Deck, also known as 6+ Hold’em, uses a 36-card deck with the 2s through 5s removed, which shifts hand strengths, pot odds, and equity calculations. This different setup challenges traditional strategies and opens the door for more nuanced decision-making.

Game Theory Optimal play is all about balance. A GTO player aims to make decisions that can’t be exploited in the long run, regardless of what opponents do. In Short Deck, this might mean defending wider ranges in certain spots or continuing with hands that would be folds in regular Hold’em.

Since equities run closer together in this format, GTO strategies tend to favor more aggression and bluffing frequency, maintaining equilibrium and making it difficult for opponents to take advantage of predictable patterns.

On the other hand, exploitative play focuses on deviating from GTO to take advantage of specific tendencies in opponents. For example, if a player consistently overfolds to river bets, an exploitative approach would involve bluffing more in that spot.

In Short Deck, where players are still refining their understanding of optimal ranges, there is more room to identify and exploit such patterns. This makes exploitative strategies especially profitable in softer or unfamiliar player pools.

The challenge comes in choosing when to stick to a balanced GTO plan and when to shift toward an exploitative line. Against skilled opponents, leaning toward GTO can help minimize losses. But when facing recreational players or clear leaks, adjusting your play to exploit those tendencies can boost win rates.

Ultimately, top players in Short Deck combine both approaches, starting with a solid GTO foundation and then layering in reads and adjustments.