I forgot about this thread but now, thanks to swc123 I see you quoted some of my statements with some skeptical remarks. For example this one:
Quote:
A few posters, such as punter11235, claimed that there is better software available on the market for solving endgames given ranges for both players (perhaps software that fully accounts for card removal). I once looked into this and my understanding was that the best tool assumed just one bet size for all situations. While this may work very well for post-mortem analysis of human poker play, it's pretty clear that an agent that assumed just one bet size was available for the opponent would get creamed playing against humans of this caliber.
I don't know, I've just checked and solving rivers with 7x pot size stack, 6 bet sizes and 4 raise sizes takes 5 seconds on my solver (not with default settings which are geared towards flop cases but the mechanism to change them is available). That is to about 0.2% of the pot.
We also don't do any multithreading on the river because it was never needed so those are results from one core.
Obviously having 32 cores for that and it being a vital part of bot performance it should be trivial to get it below 1 second and way better accuracy.
It goes without saying that there is no abstraction, lossy bucketting and blockers are taken into account. I don't consider anything else "solving".
I will leave rest of the claims for now but all my statements in this thread stand and tbh aren't a revelation for anyone involved in serious poker programming.
Last edited by punter11235; 06-08-2015 at 04:32 AM.