I'm old enough te remember a time before the GHB receptor had been identified.
As I always make clear, affinity ≠ efficacy . It's also worth noting that within a series, the compound with the highest affinity may not be the compound with the lowest EC50 (highest potency). Now you have to bear in mind that when I studied, docking calculations were not calculated but I suspect that it IS the docking conformation that might be part of the reason why compounds with a lower affinity might still be more potent.
The above paper has a lot of references. I am happy to dig them all out if that is what people want.
Now I didn't like GHB for manifold reasons, among them was the caustic taste, feeling of having been poisoned and not least the fact that there seems to be an ideal dose for each person. I presume this to be a playoff between sought activity and side-effects. I think it also worth noting that many sources simply describe GHB as an 'intoxicant' and it does appear that GHB has GABAgenic activity more general than it's simple activity at a single receptor.
The mode(s) of toxicity displayed by GHB appear to be due to it's action on the GABA receptors. To be clear, drugs like benzodiazepines act as positive allosteric modulators rather than acting as a GABA mimic.
But (R)-HOCPCA had the highest affinity (0.11 µM) compared to that of GHB (4.3 µM) at the GHB receptor.
I note that HOCPCA is unsaturated, a feature seen in H-TCA which apparently does not act as a CNS depressant.
So I merely offer this as a starting point with the aim of promoting discussion.