> Where is the proof?

von Neuman proved it for 2 players in his classic "Theory of Games and Economic Behavior": https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.215284/page/n3...

Nash proved it for n-players: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1063129/pdf/pnas015...

> "GTO" is only possible against perfect play to begin with

This is a very common misconception, probably because GTO is usually explained as the equilibrium reached by 2 perfect players. The key insight of GTO is that you do not adjust your strategy to what your opponent is doing. If you play the equilibrium strategy and they don't, you're guaranteed to make money.

> And I also never claimed exploitative strategies guarantee everything, for the same reason "GTO" doesn't either. It's a game of incomplete information.

I didn't say you did, I was just making my own independent argument as to why intuitive play is dangerous and people often end up deceiving themselves into thinking they're winning players.

> And, there are pros that have been winning for long amounts of time knowing zero about GTO theory.

Which is why I said that, IMO, 90% of pro players fundamentally misunderstand poker (and that's not even counting the losing players who think they're "pro").