This is the forum for CardRunnersEV, so this question would probably be better placed in the Flopzilla forum.
However, that being said, Flopzilla does not contain such a feature, so you would indeed need to do this manually.

Thanks for your help, i need a little help about Checkdown feature (gets X% of the pot)
Lets suppose: BB call OR (3bb) from BTN, so the pot is 6.5bb. In my database i see that when i call certain hands my BB/100 is 3. So:
POT BB/100 BB/hand % (gets X% of the pot)
6.5 3 0.03 =(((6.5+0.03)*100)/6.5)/2=50.23%

Another sample (3bet pot)
POT BB/100 BB/hand % (gets X% of the pot)
20.5 125 1.25 =(((20.5+1.25)*100)/20.5)/2=53.048%

Another sample (losing hands)
POT BB/100 BB/hand % (gets X% of the pot)
6.5 -50 -0.05 =(((6.5-0.05)*100)/6.5)/2=46.15%

Am i right?or absolutely wrong?

Sorry, the format is not very clear:
POT:6.5
BB/100:3--->So BB/hand:0.03
%=(((6.5+0.03)*100)/6.5)/2=50.23%

POT:20.5
BB/100:125--->So BB/hand:1.25
%=(((20.5+1.25)*100)/20.5)/2=53.048%

POT:6.5
BB/100:-50--->So BB/hand:-0.5
%=(((6.5-0.5)*100)/6.5)/2=46.15%

It's been quite a while since I last looked at this, and at the moment, given that we are working on our upcoming new release, unfortunately this particular subject is not the head space that I'm in, but it seems to me that what they probably mean is that if you have invested 3BB in the hand in total and you're making 0.03BB/hand, then you expect to make 3.03BB in the hand, and therefore 3.03BB/6.5*100%=47%. If BB/hand is 1.25 then this will be 4.25/6.5*100%=65% and if BB/hand is -0.5 then it's 2.5/6.5*100%=38%. I think that this is how we're supposed to interpret BB/100 and, at the very least, these percentages seem to be a bit more in the range that I would expect them to be. That being said, this question is probably best put to the support of the product you are using, given that they have access to the exact definition of BB/100 that they use in this context.

Hey scylla,

So when i try to run a nash equil simulation OTF to find the frequencies of calling + raising for both hero & villain do i have to create decision trees for both turn + river streets?

I've had it go checkdown for turn trees after flop decision trees/nodes and then i actually inputed the complete decision trees for the turn and it totally changed up all my flop frequencies which i thought were correct.

So when i'm building sim and using the nash solver + subtree builder i should always include all decision trees on all streets for every possible action and never use the checkdown feature (which is only used for quick basic EV calcs then)?

You should indeed not use the checkdown feature, but instead build your trees with the wizard and go with extensive play throughout the turn and river. The GTO solver is capable of simulating play for all possible lines and for all possible runouts of the board, so there's no reason not to take advantage of that.

How can I add more than 6 different weights to a range in CREV ?
I have noticed the gto solver uses more than 6 weights.

At the moment CREV's preflop editor offers a maximum of 5 weights. The reason why we have chosen for this current system is that it provides the user with visual feedback as to what they have entered in the matrix. In designing this (and other) software it has been my experience that it is really easy to make mistakes in input. Without visual feedback as to what you have entered, you will constantly make mistakes; at least, that is my personal experience. The thing is though, that you will never notice these mistakes (because there's no visual feedback), leading to a user often working with different ranges than they think they are working with.

So essentially, it is a choice between two approaches. The first is having only a limited number of weights in the matrix; the second is having an unlimited number of weights, but having no indication of having made a mistake in input. For our software, so far, we have made the decision to go with the first method.

That being said though, in our upcoming release we will offer a new system where it will be possible to enter any number of weights.
So if our current system does not work for you, then please check back for the new release.

How close are we getting to that upcoming release? I'm really looking forward to some of the things you have planned to make it more user friendly and accessible to less experienced players. I have Flopzilla, Power EQ, PT4, DriveHUD, etc - and CREV is the only software that's over my head. I realize this also means that's probably the one I'll get the most out of in the end. Needless to say, I'm quite anxious.

Thanks !

Development is done. We only need to update the website, create a demonstration video and do one more round of bugchecks (there's some types of scenario's that we still need to check). As long as the bugchecks don't reveal anything we missed previously, I'd say at the end of next week. As for being accessible, that's what this new release is all about; I hope we have succeeded.

Have a question when running the nash solver,

why does it have leading/donking frequencies like OTT or OTR i see the solver leading 20% or something on brick run outs into the PFR

I'm tempted to just remove those decision trees from my sims/calcs but can anyone explain to me why it would be "GTO/Nash"

Ah Scylla, please don't make it too accessible. We don't want the fish to get good. Poker is hard enough as it is!!

Fantastic. I'm greatly looking forward to it.

Believe me: I've been playing in the micros all month on two different networks and you do NOT have to worry about things being too accessible for the fish. These guys have never even heard of CREV or PIOSolver and I doubt they ever will.

At the same time, we could definitely use more at the tables in today's market and anything that will draw them in is a + in my book. The fact that the game is so challenging and theory heavy today already keeps tons of players off the tables. We need to bring them back in.

The GTO solver algorithm does not provide motivations as to why it arrives at a certain solution, so this is not a question that is easily answered. What the solver does is provide a solution that is the given Nash distance of dEV away from the true equilibrium. This Nash distance is something that we can measure, so we know for a fact that the solution is correct, however the reason why this solution is chosen is quite a different challenge. The task on our end is to create tools to help users make sense of the composition of ranges. That being said, our solver seems to always arrive at the same solution as other GTO solvers (with the exception of the exact composition of bluffing ranges; the frequencies are the same, but the hands that are used may vary), so other products will give you the same solution. Our upcoming release will allow you to take a closer look at the composition of individual actions though, as well as the ability to recalc turns/rivers to a dEV of 0%, so with any luck you should be able to get some deeper insight from that. From what I can tell, particularly on the river, donking ranges are always polarized, so OOP will be betting with a combination of nut-like hands and non-showdown trash, while checking intermediate hands that he wants to get to showdown. I expect that you will find a similar distribution in the spot that you are referring to.

Hi Scylla,
My question is about editing weights (or frequencies) for individual hands in result of equilibrium solver.
Afer I calculate a solution, a result is a "custom" range. Hovering over it and pressing 'space' brings up a table of hands in that custom range and most hands have mixed strategy, like 91.09/8.81 for ratio of bet/check.
If I want to modify strategy for the hand, all I can do is only set 100% weight to certain action for certain hand, like edit 91.09/8.81 to 100/0 . But I'd like to set it to 90/10 .
The question I need to find an answer to is: if I deviate from calculated GTO strategy by making it simpler and using preset weights, like 50%, 75%, 90% istead of 47.89%, 71.87%, 94.66%, how much EV I lose ? It seems like miserable change in terms of EV, but if done for all hands in range... who knows.
I guess, max exploit tool would give me such answer, but I simply cannot change weights. Am I overlooking something or there's no way of doing this? And what can be a workaround?

This will actually be available in the upcoming release.
So please check back in about a week.

I play 10-25c and the average player knows what they are doing. They all fold to UTG raises. They often raise the flop to potential bluffs etc. My ranges are all nailed and it isn't particularly profitable.

Thanks for the post scylla very informative

So none of my player pool really has turn/river donking or leading ranges so would i be better off without running those decision trees in the nash solver?

I'm trying to find the nash equilibrium and then compare with deviations/assumptions of villain, but will not including the turn/river leading ranges mean that the solution is no longer nash? (confused, but i hope you get what i'm saying)

what cardrunners ev has better than piosolver? i am using only pio but i am open to any change

The solving speeds are similar within a bandwidth of about 30% (sometimes faster, sometimes slower), so there's no siginificant difference there. The interface is different, however, whether it is better or not is subjective, so I can not list that as "better". It's probably best if you judge for yourself. One big difference is that we offer an analysis system for the equilibrium solutions. Also, we can solve for tournaments. And we offer more elaborate locking options. For videos on our interface, locking system, tree builder and analysis system, please go here: http://www.cardrunnersev.com/download.html

That being said, we will have a new release shortly that we have worked on for the past 6 months, so please check back for that. We're still very busy with all the remaining details, however, we expect to be done in a few days.

Our software offers various ways of setting restrictions to the play that is considered by the solver. If you feel that your opponent will play in a certain way, then you can just enter that play and lock it for the solver. There's nothing wrong with entering play for your opponent as you see fit. The solver will simply give you better instructions on how to proceed versus that player. In fact, the better that you can enter his play, the better the advice. In the case that you're describing, where villain never donks, the best thing to do is to just delete the donk actions from the tree. The solver will run slightly faster, given that it won't need to calculate those lines anymore.

Are you a US player? Where are you playing?

I'm a US player and I was referring to mainly rec networks. They don't pay attention to the things you're talking about at all under 10NL.

If you put in volume at WPN, then no - It's not particularly profitable and it requires tons of study/range construction/hand analysis. Two different worlds. On the rec networks these guys talk about what they had after the hand, play drunk and on tilt, and are just auto profit. on WPN, I can't even beat 2NL and 3/4 of the players are regs who put in tons of volume. I desperately wish I had access to ROW Stars.

I'm new to this software and cant wrap my head around it. I can't set up a tree for 3 handed play in a 9 man stt? The only option I see for number the number of runners are at 6 and 10; which throws the prize pool off. Only calculating options seem to be only for 2 players to a flop.

Can u please steer me in the right direction