In order to measure performance, please look at the average EV value below the table in OOP's very first decision in the tree. Performance can not be measured in any other decision, given that this decision may be reached with different frequencies and ranges.



If you only want to look at those 4 flops, then you can delete the other flops with CTRL+right-click.

I am curious what am I missing here -




OOPs EV iz 7,57;
IPs EV is 6.11;

yet total pot is 15.5.

How come the two EVs don't add up to the pot size?

First node, first decision of the hand.

Is the situation perhaps not zero sum?
For example, is rake being used, or is it a tournament?

Rake is indeed being used. I had that thought pop into my head, but didn't realize how big of an impact it has. Wow, that's expensive!

I had another idea, about Training mode (Playing against the solution).
Training mode works very smoothly and I like using it.

Equilibriums strategies commonly involve a lot of mixing.
The strategies and actions which are usually "bad" are nowadays at times described as "low frequency" plays.
Right now, the software accepts any of the plays that are played at equilibrium as "Optimal" (which they, of course, are).

Is it possible to make it so that frequencies below x% are marked as "low frequency" in the Hand history on the right hand side once we selected them?
Right now we either have to check the frequencies before we click, ourselves (with Ctrl), or click around quite a bit around the Hand history to verify.

Similarly, if there are two or more options of varying frequencies, parhaps it would be useful to have the software point out whenever we pick the one that is played Y times (or Y percentage points) less often than the other.

Or, at some very advanced levels, connecting those decisions to the RNG could prove functional.


And, is it possible to practice only the flop cbet option (and/or only flop reaction to cbet option; in short, flop play) somehow, skipping turns and rivers?
"Drill current decision" enables us to start at turns (and at specific cards, from what I managed to set up), but I cannot seem to make the software just throw cbetting at me.

I wanted to check the GTO freqs vs my own overall freqs on PT4. I'm guessing that, by looking at only those 4 flops would give me a biased view of how GTO freqs looks like in the spot forcing me to filter by flop texture on PT4. Also, wouldn't it mess up with the weights, thus giving less trustworthy results?

I thought that your original question was how you could only see the average for those flops.
Did I misunderstand your request?

Ok, I will consider it for future releases.

Press F1 to restart a new hand from the starting position.

Well, I thought that as the aggregate freqs GTO+ displays are close to optimal, therefore I could compare them to my own on PT4, say "Raise F Cbet" on BTN call vs SB 3bet, in order to find possible leaks in my game. Problem is, when I start applying some simplifications, like not raising IP on certain flop textures, my overall freq for this line should change and if I just remove those flops from my sim the weights on the subset would get all messed up giving my incorrect freqs.

Unfortunately I still don't really understand what you're trying to accomplish. That being said, if your frequencies deviate from GTO, it doesn't necessarily mean that you're playing incorrectly. It's entirely possible that your play is appropriate for your games, and that you're correctly deviating from GTO and exploiting your opponent's leaks. GTO play is more intended versus stronger players, in spots where it's not clear how to play.

Probably asked before but couldn't find it: is it possible to check the solution while the solver is running?

It would be useful when running a sim with multiple sizes but we see before the dEV getting to very low numbers that one or more of these sizes is almost never used

It's not possible, but it wouldn't really work for this anyway. I wanted to do the same thing to remove useless sizings and re-solve faster, so I experimented a bit. Picking sizes in mixed strategies is what the solver does last.
Until low dEV the solver will use a mix of all sizes, it's only when you reach low dEV that the solver starts to actually prefer some sizes over others. From my experience, you need dEV<0.2% to be confident that you can eliminate some sizings, and in most cases, at this point, it's not worth the time to stop the solve, remove the unused sizings, and re-solve.

In one of his most recent videos on the DNegs Challenge (if I'm not mistaken), Doulg Polk said that freqs are more important than precise combo selection. The same argument can be found in the book "Poker 1%" by Ed Miller.

I guess what I'm trying to do is, given that the solver freqs are optiomal (or at least very close to), a good strategy should display freqs similar to the solver (of course excluding exploitative plays). I thought I could compare the solver's aggregate freqs to my own on PT4 in search for spots where I'm deviating from optimal play, focusing further studies on those spots.

If my reasoning is flawed, would you mind giving me any suggestions on how to extract value from DB Mode?

Looking at averages will not really work. If across two flops the average should be 50%, and one one flop you check 0% and on the other 100%, then the average will be 50%. But perhaps it should actually be 100% vs 0%. Or 25% vs 75%. So having the same average doesn't mean that the play is actually GTO. Other than that, even if your frequencies turn out to be non-GTO, then it doesn't necessarily mean that they are wrong for your games. If your opponents play poorly, then you should deviate from GTO and exploit their mistakes. GTO play is more something that should be used versus strong opponents, or in spots where you don't know how to play. In those cases you can use GTO simulations to figure out what to do in a certain spot.

Thanks for the tip and for the consideration!
The training function probably holds quite a bit of potential value.

I always liked your programs, I think they're amazing, and GTO+ is no different!

When going down a branch of the tree that is taken with 0% frequency, sometimes the solver shows a completely black matrix. Is it possible to at least see the response strategy that the solver generated that led to this branch being taken 0% of the time? It would be good to have more information on how to react to lines that are 0% frequency.

This isn't always possible, given that if villain has no range, it's not possible to perform any equity calculations.
There's all sorts of exceptions that apply when no range is present.
So we can consider it, but it would be a feature with a lot of potential for bugs.

Hi Scylla, I just opened GTO+ & it appears all my saved ranges have gone, any ideas what could of happened?

Sent from my G8441 using Tapatalk

Ranges are stored in /config/newdefs3.txt. Backups of this file are regularly stored in /config/backups. To restore to an earlier state, rename one of the files there to newdefs3.txt and store it in place of /config/newdefs3.txt.

Hi im new to solvers and a complete pc fish so sorry if my questions seem dumb.

Is it possible to play against all the solutions I have solved before at the same time? Or is it only possible to do it one by one? It seems like im only able to play against a single solution.
Also how do I import all my flops I solved into the database?
I must be doing something wrong because I just cant find how to do it

Hi scylla,
I know that i'm kind of nagging about improvement suggestions and I think that this subject has been offered already but do you think it's possible to add ev for combos that exist in the PF range but folded out in previous streets? back then you said that it's an information that available in the software engine but it's not presented because of interface considerations and my solution offer would be that the folded combos grids will be black but when hovering above them we will see on the left to the matrix just the ev for each action and for each combo without the colored strategy rectangle (because they folded out hence there is no strategy).
I can't explain how much important this information is for learning when we deviate from GTO play and by how much, personally I think it is even more important than nodelocking and I think that the other peoples who also offered this idea think that as well.
Hope this idea is applicable and that you value this missing information as much as I do, and as always thanks for replying.

Does your software automatically report crashes? I've been getting them frequently in 1.3.3. Could just be my system of course.

Are there particular spots where this happens?
Can you perhaps send a savefile to support?
Or is it perhaps in spots where your computer is (for example) nearly out of RAM?

This might be a bit tricky. For example, if there's 500 combos in the starting range, but only 12 combos are left, then it may be rather confusing to still display the 488 combos that are no longer present in the table.

You can play either versus a single tree, or versus a database.

Do you mean that you want to merge separate files into a single database?
For this, use the option MERGE.
See the last item here for an explanation: https://www.gtoplus.com/processingdatabase/

If you hover above the specific combo grid the combos list appears on the left just like any other hand, doing so with folded out combos doesn't sound confusing because it's not changing the interface. if this hand is folded out so there won't be any strategy rectangle near the specific combo and the matrix grid will be black like all the others. It's basically like pio but with the EV information for folded hands from the left to the matrix instead of inside the grid itself.
Sorry for paying so much attention for this, it's just sounds to me like too valuable information to give up about