Equal stacks of CSI 10. No ICM. According to this

http://www.holdemresources.net/hr/sn...=5000&s10=5000

we can push

UTG 6.3%, JJ+ ATs+ AJo+ KJs+ into 9 players, but only

UTG+1 5.9%, TT+ ATs+ AQo+ KJs+ into 8 players.

This has to be mistake/bug right?

maybe cause future game simulation is considered? utg has to pay blinds next, so his fold equity is less then when considering in a vacuum?

I don't think this online tool takes the imminent blinds into account.

I suspect this is maybe caused due to the underlying algorithm not quite stabilizing within the allotted iterations, but I don't really know it could be a bug.

I have used HRC and this gets very slightly different results but more as expected.
http://hands.holdemresources.net/?id=9fiexjcphn67
I did try reducing the amount of iterations but it didn't seem to matter using this tool.

I did set HRC to FGS and I got:
http://hands.holdemresources.net/?id=8dobellu7hgy
quite interesting that with FGS it gives the early position players a slightly tighter range, I didn't expect this.
[edit]Oops, the utg isn't tighter but all the others except Btn are - basically FGS seems to play it tighter.)[/edit]

It's not a bug, but the web-calculator uses a faster (less accurate) implementation. It constructs ranges by using handrankings and doesn't allow mixed strategies, this speeds up the calculations considerably but also reduces the accuracy. This mode is roughly equivalent to the "linear Nash" calculation mode in the downloadable tool.

As mentioned above, the downloadable version will provide more accurate results when running with the default "unrestricted Nash" setting where the ranges are not restricted.

Roughly speaking, you can expect the players who are hitting the blinds within the calculation scope to play looser when using FGS, and the remaining players to tighten. So with FGS-1 only UTG would loosen up, with FGS-2 it's UTG and UTG+1, etc.

Interesting and many thanks for the reply, cheers.