This is really confusing me. I first noticed that my results in Pio were overbetting the flop (SRP IP) in spots where GTOW doesn't overbet at all. I reproduced one of many of these spots in GTOW as closely as possible in Pio, expecting strategies to be very similar again after inputting perfectly matching ranges, stack sizes, etc, so I could figure it out from there. However, after solving to 0.5% accuracy, there were still differences, see below.
Here are the ranges from GTOW -- 100bb 6-max, BB calls UTG raise. I reproduced these very, very closely in Pio, but as I no longer have a subscription, couldn't just copy the range directly.
Here's the GTOW flop strategy for IP after BB checks -- note that there's virtually no overbetting, and the 1/3 pot sizing is the most frequent.
Here's the flop strategy for the same spot in Pio -- note that we're overbetting 11% of the time, and the 2/3 pot sizing is the most frequent.
Finally, here's the tree setup from Pio -- BB always checks, and IP has three sizing options. The starting pot I noticed after has an extra big blind instead of a sb, but this can't be that significant. I also figure that although in GTOW BB is sometimes donking, that absence of donking in the Pio tree should just slightly cause IP to check more, and perhaps favor a smaller sizing.
Last edited by Kler; 04-22-2024 at 06:51 PM.