We currently offer this for specific trees, but not for entire databases. I can consider expanding this for future releases, although there are some technical challenges. One of them being that if the trees are stored with "Basic" storage, that the turn would need to be recalculated every time before a tree can be played. Also, I assume that the turn would be randomly drawn, and therefore the board+turn combination would lead to entirely different situations.

To export a database into separate trees, use "export_XXX".
This will export your database into separate files into the directory /flops/XXX.



You can then solve the trees separately with the "Solve all files in folder" feature.



After having solved the files, you can merge them into a database again by entering MERGE after "Import flops from file". In the menu, use the option "Use weights from a subset" and enter 111.

Scylla,

So you know how when, for example, live exporting from GTO+ over to Flopzilla Pro while playing against the solution-- say a database of them. In Flopzilla, we get the option to view an Equity matrix for each range and for whatever specific flop we are looking at. Would it be possible to include an additional category that graphs the overall EV for each hand in the entire range for whatever specific flop the user is viewing? So, to clarify, this would be an EV matrix showing the overall expected value against an individual flop, not the entire database at once (like the one in the aggregate reports).

I'd second this an EV Matrix like the one olin flopzilla would be good so we don't have to open flopzilla every time!

Really liking the program, great value for the price. I have a question, it's probably been answered before but I'm not sure where to look. I'm looking to install a nvme ssd in my PC, I'll have to reinstall windows etc on this drive. How do I go about resetting my license for GTO+ to activate it again once I'm done?

Yes.

At the moment this data is available in GTO+.
I can consider exporting it to FlopzillaPro for later releases though.

For that go to the "Contact" section on www.gtoplus.com.
There you can request a new key.

Ok, I will consider it for future releases.

Love GTO+ as it's the best value on the solver market by far in my opinion.

Potentially dumb question. I'm looking into simplifications with the idea that a certain amount of EV is acceptable to lose for a much easier to execute strategy. However, developing these simplifications requires locking + editing a strategy, then running the solver again to see how it preforms against the maximally exploitative strategy. If the EV is too low, I have to try a different lock and edit, then run the solver again. It seems like the re-solve time takes just as long as the initial solve.

Is there already an existing way to get solve time down when running against a lock and edit strategy? If we already have the GTO solution for a spot, it seems like that GTO strategy should be the starting point for re-solves, which in theory would cut down the re-solve time significantly. My impression is the solver is starting from scratch each time.

Will the extensive storage cut down on resolve time? Are there any settings I can adjust in general to cut re-solve time down?

I can look into it, although I expect that this may be difficult to accomplish.

The storage method only affects how much data is retained after a solve has been completed.
It does not affect the solve itself.

The only immediate factor is the speed of your CPU. Other than that, please consider using only single bet sizes on the turn/river, or at the very least not using overly complex play there. The quality of your solution will not significantly be affected, while making the solver run much faster.

It would be great to start over a play against solution session (i.e. remove all results up to now) without having to restart GTO+. Also if you could let your website allow use up and down or Pg up down keys to navigate it, it doesn't seem to allow it currently.

You can use "Edit session filters" to set whether a session is included in the results.

Hi scylla, would it be possible to implement a database of nodelocks on a tree, specifically for setting villains strategy on different turn/river runouts? I don't believe there's a way as of now to solve multiple nodelocks on a single sim?

First of all, many thanks for the feedback and regular improvement of the gto +.

Perhaps this was previously discussed, but still I will express my wishes for some improvements that I would like to see in the future.

1. Ability to lock individual hands or groups of hands (for example: top pairs, flush draws and etc) on node lock mode.

2. Add listed below features on “Play vs solution” mode:
a) Tab to see difference (on EV, % of bet/check/raise) between hero and solver decision; (https://ibb.co/wWJW94Y)
b) Ability to choose % of action (check/bet/raise) when we made a decision. (https://ibb.co/z5tSMdk)

Ok, I will consider it for future releases.

Do you mean that you want to add/remove a certain action for all trees in a database?
For that, edit one of the trees as you see fit.
Then clear the database and rebuild it from the edited tree.

Hi
Is it possible to add additional categories of separation of hands:
no made hand no fd\ no OESD\ no GS
pockets between the second and third pair
third pair
pockets below the third pair

add the ability to enable / disable these categories?

Hi, 1) Is there anyway to compress flops (for example if a solition needs 16GB ram, make it compress so it can be solved with only 12GB ram even if it takes more time)
2) Is it possible to import solutions from Simple-postflop to GTO+?

We can consider it for later releases, but right at this moment this is not available.

1) Currently we offer compression by a factor 2x.
2) We do not support savefiles from third parties; the differences in format are usually too great here.

Hey guys, I'm trying to ascertain whether I have used GTO+ solver correctly.
I found that GTO+ has 'SNG' mode for approximation towards ICM. The issue I see, is that this is single table ICM - and not multi table. I therefore wonder whether the results given to me by GTO+ are incorrect.
There were 22 players left, so I input all of the stacks that were at my table, plus the 2 lowest stacks AND the chip leaders stack. It also did not allow me to input all the payouts and jumps. I managed to get to 7th spot. I built my tree as such (I won’t show betsizes, I just input the ones that occurred):
https://gyazo.com/10ce3f6c0a264c544c1b2adda66a68fc
The first picture is the hand history screenshot (in grey), along with the payouts:
https://gyazo.com/ceedd8243232abd99f05f9422310a594
Open call range:
https://gyazo.com/e2e25da546a8d65ae8f309bb458df0cd
3B range (likely more linear):
https://gyazo.com/f721efe1e5e6250810c6a69942f82788
When I ran this solve without ICM, GTO+ suggested I should check jam on the flop.
However, I tried to run the SNG (ICM) mode and it suggests the flop was a check call as played:
https://gyazo.com/4f5f04fa992c87835823104fd8ff523f
Turn it suggests I was correct to XF:
https://gyazo.com/2b3b7a167e9c31112897e62de459f209
So, in summary my questions:

1. Have I used GTO+ correctly for a post flop ICM solve?
2. Do you think there is a better way of getting a closer ICM approximation?

Unfortunately this will not work. The correct prize structure and stacks are needed. Tournament dynamics don't really go together that well with GTO. The reason for this is that tournaments are non-zero-sum. This means that the GTO solution will only be effective if villain plays perfectly himself. If villain were to deviate from GTO, then your own strategy may not be effective either. This as opposed to cash games, where the GTO strategy will always work. It's for this reason that at the moment we're not overly invested in adding more tournament functionality to the software. We can consider adding more features here for later releases, but right at this moment we only offer Cash games and Sit&Go.

I want to edit a players strategy for a numerous turn cards, then run the solver.

We currently don't offer the ability to edit multiple turn cards. The problem is that edits made on one turn will not necessarily translate easily to another turn. For example if the board is Td9d6h then a Jd is a completely different turn card than the As. Edits made for Jd can not be translated to the As. CREV does offer the ability to, for example, set that every >=top pair must be bet, but again, top pair on one turn is not necessarily the same relative value as on a different turn. We can consider expanding this functionality for future releases, but in the end, it's perhaps better to just let the solver fill in play for the turn/river and focus on the flop. The turn/river lines are mostly only needed to estimate the EVs for the hands there.