Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkMan
if you pokerstove 23o and 63o vs co push range 63o has higher equity and yet your app has 63o a fold and 23o a call
It is very possible for a valid range to include or exclude individual hands in ways that are "non-obvious" or contrary to how those hands matchup head-to-head. Card removal effects due to opponent ranges are often the reason for this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkMan
Holdemresrouces.net does not calculate actual Nash equilibrium strategies. They are only approximations. And, until we've got quantum computers on our desks, this is going to be true of *any* software that claims to calculate Nash equilibrium strategies for multi-player NLHE poker games. This why I'm so reluctant to use the word "Nash" anywhere within SnG Solver... it can be misleading without putting a whole bunch of asterisks and footnotes after it.
When you turn off "Advanced ICM" in SnG Solver, it calculates a NE *approximation* using a similar method to what holdemresources.net does. The operative word being *similar*. The specific algorithms are certain to differ in a lot of ways... how we construct ranges, initial conditions, weighting operators, how we get strategies to converge, and so on.
And so while I believe that "Advanced ICM=off" and holdemresrouces should generate similar results, they're bound to differ in spots... and you've found such a spot.
Is one wrong and one right? Well, really, they're both wrong. Which one is *more right*? Its pretty hard to say... and trying to figure it out probably a waste of time...
Because...
If you turn Advanced ICM *on*, then you are calculating what is certainly a better NE approximation than anything else. (Still an approximation of course, but as I described a few posts ago, one based on a better mathematical premise).
Honestly, the "Advanced ICM" mode is sorta the whole point of SnG Solver. To not use it means missing out on all the magic.
In fact I only included the "off" switch as an academic curiosity... not something to be used for real strategy analysis.