Quote:
Originally Posted by realtimer
Exactly. That’s what I wanted to find out.
If you want to find the optimal bet size for a spot, then the best way to do this is to create multiple trees; one for each bet size that you want to consider. After that, check the overall performance for OOP to see which size performs best. To get the overall performance, go to OOP's first decision in the tree and check his EV below the table.
When doing this, you should notice though something rather surprising; the bet size barely seems to have any influence over the overall EV at all. For any bet size there's a GTO strategy that performs almost exactly the same as any other bet size.
This is also where the problem with the approach of using multiple bet sizes to figure out the optimal bet size comes from. This approach doesn't really work, given that all bet sizes are so close to each other in performance. Even the smallest change in your tree will lead to the solver landing on different frequencies.
It's also because of this that, as it turns out, using only a single bet size does not have any significant disadvantage as compared to using multiple bet sizes. Single bet play has roughly the same overall performance as complex play with multiple bet sizes.
It's for this reason that I would recommend just sticking to single bet sizes. The EV performance will remain roughly the same, but the trees become far easier to interpret. GTO solutions with only single bets are far earier to translate into something that can be used in practical spots; trees with multiple sizes on the other hand tend to be huge, and nearly impossible to interpret. As for the bet size, any size that you feel comfortable with should work. You can check for yourself if different sizes would make much of a difference by trying out different ones, although I expect that they will all be very close in performance.
Last edited by scylla; 10-21-2018 at 06:30 AM.