Originally Posted by kevinjet
So I got sequence ICM 47.5% -> PSM1 26% -> PSM2 93.6% -> PSM3 87.5% -> PSM4 49.3%.
Doesn't seem to be true…
I understood my confusion with those PSM results - BU range strongly depends on "BB call SB" range. And started to use PSM more widely than before.
Because of calculation time is increased in PSM - I realized: caching of NE strategy tables (lets define it NEST) is desired.
No matter of chip model, PSM or ICM. Even unrestricted ICM will take too much time for 10 tourney analysis.
Unfortunately, our computers have geekbench
below 83k yet
But fortunately, caching ICM/PSM NEST will take low space and save lots of time. At least, additional HDD costs less than CPU/MB upgrade (joke, but also fact). Anyway, players' local disk space virtually unrestricted in term of Nash DB, but CPU speed is limited physically.
Users perform calculation of many different configurations, however, some of them are equal to previous, especially initial two-three hands of identical tourneys.
No need to calc NEST again and again for the same situations - it could be just cached.
On user's bulk-request for selected hands, cache could be queried and marks placed for:
- analysis has/hasn't been performed with any of chip models.
- if yes, - do holecards belong to range?
For non-marked hands, user is able to bulk-calculate and store results in cache.
Developing server-side cache will be enough to create good community-driven VI-FP DB ( and store Vi along with NESTi ).