Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafeeio
Thanks for the continuous updates over the years!
I have a few observations / suggestions regarding GTO+.
Currently importing a hand range string from Equilab doesn't work correctly, some hands are not being recognized because the syntax is different from Cardrunnersev.
The preflop menu was the first menu that we designed, and, given that we did not have a full understanding at that point how the rest of the interface would end up looking/working (it's a creative process, so any plans at the start of the project are subject to change) we have decided to leave out some details (a predef submenu is another example), in order to circle back to it at the end of the design and fill in everything that remains. So, indeed, some details are missing here and there throughout the interface, but we'll get to them in the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafeeio
I would love to see a bit more distinction between various lines, especially when it comes to the blue/green/red colors. First of all, in different situations green is being used for both check and call which confuses me a little bit.
We expect to offer customization in this area at some point, however, we will probably stick to using the same color for check and call, given that check/call is simply the passive continuation of a line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafeeio
Lastly... how feasible would it be to have an option to turn the game tree into pure decisions only when the equity is nearly the same for betting and checking (maybe with a threshold that you can input yourself)? Currently there are just a ton of hands that for example are being bet 90% of the time and checked 10% of the time. This is not very practical and it makes the distinction between "Entire decision", "Bet" and "Check" nearly pointless because both lines still show up in the bar.
We get this rounding request from time to time, however, in my view it achieves nothing in making the ranges easier to interpret. GTO solutions are admittedly hard to interpret by the human brain, however, this would only achieve switching from one system that's difficult to understand to a different system that's difficult to understand. An additional downside is that important information is lost. The reason why certain hands are a mix between two actions is because the EV for both lines is the same. So the player does not care which line he chooses. Rounding loses this very important piece of information. Even if the solution says 99% bet and 1% check then checking 100% of the time will still give you the exact same EV. The mix is not there as a preference for a certain action; it's only there to set up GTO frequencies for the subsequent lines. When trying to make sense of sets of large datapoints the correct approach is to organize the data into categories and graphs. For example, when displayed in terms of "top pair", "set", etc to me personally the data becomes a lot easier to understand. And a strategy like "check the stronger top pairs, but bet the weaker ones 50% of the time" is quite a bit more easy to remember as opposed to trying to memorize what to do with individual hands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafeeio
Second of all, it would be great if there was already an indicator at the point of betting or checking if this is going to be a bet/call, bet/raise or bet/fold, but most importantly if it is going to be a check/raise. This would help navigating the hand a lot.
This should be quite easy to see after one of the upcoming updates where we will add certain tree navigation functionality.
Last edited by scylla; 08-26-2017 at 05:27 AM.