Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1270
Interesting - are there solvers that do this?
There aren't any that I'm aware of, but I haven't worked with with every solver. The closest thing would be the implementable strategies developed by Jonathan Little. He basically looks at solver outputs, and tries to match the frequencies with pure strategies.
For example he might say, "OK, solver is betting 60% of flush draws here," Then he chooses roughly 60% of the combos to bet at a full frequency and 40% to check at a full frequency.
He's sort of mimicking the idea, but the human-developed strategies won't have the same level of precision as a solver would.
The solver could do things to protect your range on different run-outs. Like if it always bet top pair with a queen kicker, it could also always check middle pair with a queen kicker. That way you don't lack two pair combos in either node when a queen comes on the turn (not that this is really necessary if your human opponent doesn't know your strategy anyway).
Even a solver ran this way to solve for pure frequencies would likely lose some EV vs. a mixed strategy. My suspicion is that the EV loss would be minimal in most spots though. The exception might be nodes with very tight ranges, where the solver doesn't have enough pure combos to effectively balance it's strategy.
It would be nice if a solver had a switch you could toggle on and off so you could compare the strategies and EV of pure vs mixed strategies, without the inaccuracies that comes from rounding every combo after the solve the way PIO does.