Thanks for taking a look and taking the time to reply.
I still don't understand however how this can be.

How is it that pio2 and pio1 running the exact same tree produce 2 different solutions?

I'm not 100% sure I completely understood what you were trying to explain but I think your point was that holding Ad is extremely good in this rare node because it blocks a lot of OOP calling range to a raise.
/ if that's the case then why isn't it ALWAY and ONLY bluff raisng? the solution suggest that calling has even higher EV.
Secondly I think you can tell something suspicious here just by looking at equities.
Even if there is some magic blocker effect which yields 99% of the pot to a given combo and therefor it has the EV of the pot, how can it have 97% eq vs the betting range?
that's just mathematically impossible and you can insert the ranges to any eq calculator and you would never see this results.


While writing this post I ran the same tree with pio2 but this time with the old algorithm:
https://gyazo.com/3690952a53dd7a518e6da7ba1bb99076

So it seems that all 3( pio1, pio2 new algo and pio2 with old ago) all produce 3 completely different results.

If there is some magic blocker effect then the betting range is almost exclusively bluffs (we block almost ALL value).
Against this bluff range we can easily have 99% equity.
EV of calling is higher than raising because we isolate ourselves against the 1% which has us beat.
So, from a conceptual POV I don't see what's wrong?

I don't know, it if shows the trees are solved and there are no errors it means it saves the files somewhere. Are you sure you are looking at the correct path. You can download fast file search app (Everything from voidtools) to look at *.cfr files on your computer (sort by date of modification to find the newest ones).
If that's not the problem then we will need some screenshot or maybe pm me on Discord (punter11235#1235) and we will sort it out.

They are not that different actually.
It's just that EVs against close to 0 range are not very reliable. If you tried to play your hands according to one or the other solution you would end up with almost identical result.

It's because the betting range (for this particular sizing) is close 0 and especially as vs Ad5h (as that removes most of the hands that bet).

Pio2 old is the same algorithm as pio1 with some optimizations making it much faster (on average 2x).
You seem to think those solutions are completely different but I see they are about the same. Ad5x doesn't go to that line (supposedly because betting turn has higher EV). Then if it somehow ends up there and the opponent makes a very rare action of betting 75 it has huge EV against that.
That's the case on all the screenshots you have pasted. Probably the more precise the solution the less frequent bet75 without Ad is (or it disappears altogether).

I've run it with yet another solver (Jesolver) which uses a different algorithm (more similar to PIO_CFR than to the old one but still a different one) and got this:
https://gyazo.com/50afaa6539afffe60b5d04c6b7293109

Again, this about never happens and Ad5x has huge EV in comparison to other A5o combos.
All 3 solutions want to bet Ad5x on the turn. All have bet 75 on the river by OOP with very low frequency with a range containing mainly Ad and all have huge EV for IP with Ad5x vs that range.

In general solvers that don't converge to exact 0s that well (Especially our old alg but also CFR+ based solvers that use averaging won't have this effect that pronounced because the range isn't that precise (it has a lot of noise with almost but not quite zeroed combos). New Pio converges to exact 0s and thus this effect on EV is stronger.

It seems to me that you are focusing on local EV (that is EV at this exact point assuming you got there) instead of EV multiplied by the probability of that line happening. Yes, it's a significant EV difference between the solution at this point but this point almost never happens and thus the local EV is very suspectible to small changes in the opponent range (when one combo goes from 0.001 to 0.000 may influence EV a lot). This of course doesn't matter in grand scheme of things as all the solvers/algorithm wants to do the exact same thing with the hand in question and the only difference is how exactly the opponents range is composed and how much you would make with a hand that shouldn't be in range at that point anyway.

Maybe one example that makes it more clear is this game:
-you can either pass or pay me 100$ and then I give you some money back

Solution A:
if you give me 100$, I pay you back 90$

Solution B:
if you give me 100$, I pay you back 25$

Both are GTO (you should pass and if you don't I give you some money back pocketing the difference). I can't improve by giving you back less (or more) because my EV won't change (cause you are passing 100% anyway) and EV difference if you decide to give me 100$ is huge!

I guess it's weird to me because I never saw such effects in the past even when browsing through very low freq nodes but I get your point so I'll leave it at that.
Thanks again punter

I created the save folder xxxxyyyy so PioSolver>Saves>xxxxyyy> it will have the script text doc in the folder, and no solved boards. Like right now the same script has been running for days, its solving etc. other times it will show 1 of 309 boards, 2 of 309 boards etc as it goes. This time its not. It does this half the time. no clue

It would be the best if you could make some screenshot and preferably send the whole job (use export and attach the .txt file) to support@piosolver.com

It's really difficult to guess from description what's going on. It seems the trees are not solved and it keeps trying to solve them. I will need to look at timeout and required accuracy and run it locally.

hi guys, I have problems with the program, it can't connect to the server anymore. I followed all the suggested steps but I still haven't solved the problem. Pio does not start, I tried to create exceptions to the antivirus, disable it, but nothing. Updated pc and framework but everything is the same. How can I fix it?

PIO_CFR combos are more pure, what are the benefits and disadvantages of it?
Humans are a bit more random than pio, so do we prefer to have more combos in there?

Hi, please send the following information to support@piosolver.com:

1)Some way to find your license (the best would be your key)
2)Screenshot from control panel->system->system containing full CPU name and Windows version name, as well as information about installed RAM
3)Description of what happens when you double click on PioSOLVER-pro.exe (assuming the pro version, the names are similar for basc/edge)

It's hard to say. It probably doesn't matter that much but it might be sometimes nice to look at the pure solution. Card removal effect is for once more pronounced (as the ranges are pure) and you can see if some actions are really 0%. Other than that the strategies produced by both algorithms are similar if you run them long enough so I would say the new one is better for simple trees and for solving to really good accuracies why the old one is better for quick "just get me practical solution in correct ballpark" kind of solving, especially on complex trees.

Any update on the links to upgrade from Pro V1 to Edge V2? When I enter my license number for the upgrade links it still only shows me an option to upgrade to Pro V2.

With regards to the GTO Trainer and the best option for mixed frequency spots, I have seen videos of other software that let you select the frequency with which you would undertake an action. There is scope for rounding strategies to 25% chunks, 33% chunks etc. It will also analyse afterwards your frequencies to tell you whether you are playing certain types of hand strength (e.g. OESD/gutshot/top pair/2nd pair etc) too often as a call/fold/raise, which would be extremely useful.

Thanks,

Mat

I've added them here:
https://piofiles.com/faq/#basic_faq__upgrading_to_2

I agree.
There are already several ideas how to include mixing in the trainer. One is adding a randomizer (so you get a random number in 0-100 and have to act accordingly) or assessing how you did in mixing overall after many hands (sadly on this one probably there will always be sample size issues).

There are many things we are fixing/working on now so it may take some time but the improvements to the trainer are in plans.

I'm having some difficulties trying to get the new node lock to work in piosolver 2.0.

Whenever I try to save all changes and close the nodelock menu, the browser shows a complete mess of random ranges and frequencies that are nothing like I tried to nodelock.

Making it raise all hands works, as is seen here.



I then try to make it fold the hands I want it to fold.



Which results in this.



Everytime same problem, end result is randomness instead of the % raising range I tried.

There were a few bugfixes/updates since your version.
Please run the updater to get them!
One of the fixed bugs was about node-locking in preflop trees (see the changelog.txt in your Pio folder available once you update or #announcements on our Discord).

Just started using version 2.0, I quite like the trainer so far but have 3 small feature requests:
1. Add an RNG to the trainer
2. In the hand histories window, it would be nice if it automatically highlighted the last action hero took. So here I cbet the flop and since that was the first action it's what is selected in the hand histories tab. But after I make a turn play it still has that first node selected, so if I want to see what the turn frequencies are I have to go into the window and click the node I'm interested in.
3. Show a hand for solver at the end (not a big deal but kind of satisfying and nice to sometimes get surprised by solver's play)

Good idea. Already on the list!

Good idea! Adding to the list.

Already available.
See tool->configuration->GTO Trainer

Ah ok, thanks. I'll now edit my 3rd suggestion to say "Show villain's hand at the end even when it doesn't go to showdown"

Just in case: it works just like that. I hope it makes more sense than just showing it at showdown.

Yep never mind was my mistake...thought I'd clicked the checkbox but maybe I hit cancel instead of ok or something. Working correctly now!

I played around with this software about 1.5 years ago, haven't been playing poker lately, so how do I get up to speed on latest way to use software (I just upgraded to latest version*.)? Still YT videos? Anything new in that time?

One question as I started looking at it again - when you select, for example, a preflop BB defending hand range vs BTN raise, is that defending range a function of raise size by BTN? Or IOW is a certain raise size assumed in the range?


* I guess I still have 1.10 - I did and Install/Update - thought it gave me latest version, but apparently not. What else do I need to do?

The application to run is PioViewer right?

?

There is not much for the new version as it's a very new release still.
One thing I can recommend is joining our Discord (you can find the link in Downloads&Help section on our website).

Those are just example ranges (with the exception of those in 125bb-HU and Cepheus folders which come from solving preflop).

Go back in the installer and choose 2 version on the product list.

I am sorry for a cryptic error message. The reason it fails is that Windows doesn't allow creating files in C:\
Choose a different installation Directory, for example default C:\PioSOLVER2.0

Thanks, that worked.

In the Installer , all I see is what's below. Am I to pay an upgrade fee to get version 2?

Install/Update your Piosolver 1 Basic

Hi, I'm having a small problem when trying to generate preflop solutions from a preflop solve. When I generate them to the correct path, and then try to open them within pio it freezes for a little bit and then nothing shows up?

The file is there and seems correct, everything appears as it should it just glitches and never actually loads within the program?

Thank you!

Hello,

i'm searching precompiled trees for Pio to run multiples script to solve specific scenarios.

ES.
I need a tree to set and learn a simply strat in 3bet pot SB vs BB. I already have ranges, but need best size and in particular line to solve and study a complete scenario. I need something already simplificated and solved to adapt a good strat with not too many size or line.

Could someone help me. Do you know some pokerschool o poker site that sell something?