I purchased this product during the middle of the poker boom. It does not work with any of the recent Windows versions and the company is out of business. I was just wondering if there are any software products similar to it that are available. That product was awesome both for educational and recreational purposes. Thanks.

I don't have the answer to your question but that program was badly underappreciated on this forum for LHE analysis. There was a schism of sorts between rec.gambling.poker and 2+2 centering around it and its proponent Abdul Jalib.

Is that some sort of poker bot you play against? If so then poker snowie is what you want today.

It was a software you could use to set up of a table of 10 or fewer players from a list player styles (loose, aggressive, tight etc...). You could then practice against that table or run simulations to determine the best possible play in certain situations over the long term.

brilliant product......

stupid computer question but can some techie come up with a solution for you? i.e. re-port or whatever expression is..... my guess is no, not easily.

here's an idea although they've probably looked at it... maybe someone like 2p2 can buy distribution rights..

i think the product could still sell some, especially when games are so hard to access and to win now i.e. people may want to just electronically practice for B&M opportunities........ i guess not enough or it would still be in business

i know this isn't what OP asked, but is that no limit poker program set up by university of alberta - darse billings etc. - still for sale........ it was marginally ok if i recall. felt like the rules were too straight-forward, which isn't so much an issue in limit but is in NL - i think.

simulations were briliant feature...

master poker might be worth a look. it does simulations and analysis

I had a copy of this and it was terrible.

Hi Poncheezied:

I agree completely, and we communicated our dislike for the product directly back to Mr. Wilson.

Years ago, I was sent a complementary copy (of the limit hold 'em software) and David Sklansky came over to my house to watch it run.

As a test, I set it up so that all the players were of the tight profiles. We then watched it routinely call three bets with hands like Q9o and over call on the river when there was a four flush on board after a bet and a raise when the over caller held something like a five of the appropriate suit.

After perhaps 15 minutes of this we shut it down and never looked at it again. But I did tell Mr. Wilson that he didn't know enough about how this poker game was played to be putting out a product like this.

Over the years, and this thread is another example, I have read rave reviews about this product, and never could understand why.

Best wishes,
Mason

i had wilson software too and the no limit version was laughable too

have you ever looked at master poker? my own experience is the free demo which was only version 1 but it seemed far superior to wilson at least

It seems I liked it more than some, not as much as others. I learned how to play on Wilson CDs and would appreciate if anyone who had a Win10 solution could provide it.

I still occasionally use the tournament version on an old PC. Do opponents donk it up sometimes? Sure. But after all these years I still like setting up a 5000-player tourney and having at it.

I'm currently trying out Advanced Poker Training. It's a lot like Wilson's product, but with only Texas Hold'em, and lacks watching the hand play out (huge negative).

I still use Wilson's TTH TO TS via a Virtual Machine.

11:36 PM CST

I just noticed Mason's slam of the software (gee shocking, more NIHS?); and wonder why he didn't take the time to actually figure out why the software didn't play as he demanded. Too much effort? Or too arrogant? Why didn't you adjust the players? I did.

Not quite. I contacted Wilson and he told me there was a flaw in the version I had and he then sent me the next version which had just come out. It played just as bad. This was all communicated to Wilson. But thanks for the insult.

Mason

It is true that the software opposition was horrible. However, ten years ago it performed exactly like 95% of the real opposition that I encountered in every live 3/6 limit and 4/8 limit holdem game I played in. As a result, I was well prepared for what I would experience when I first played in a casino.

Remember this, used to use it for practicing sit n gos and MTTs. Yeah the players were terribad but hey, at the time it came out, so was most of the poker world.

Hi NoSurprises:

I think this was probably a mistake. When we looked at it we only used profiles for the "tight players" who then played incredibly loose. I can only wonder how loose the loose profiles must have played, and we would of been reluctant to to use it for anything from practice to analyzing relative hand values. And at that time we tried to communicate this to Wilson, but he didn't want to listen to me.

Best wishes,
Mason

It was a good software. The profiles were ahead of time and remained so for many years thanks to Malmuth.

The way the profiles played was not too loose, but just about right. If u know what kind of tight play Malmuth adviced like heads up lhe, u will see the point, and that was when this software was there and Caros heads up articles. Abdul had material out about lhe that came out of this software. All that was top material.

One can also later point to the 2+2 stox lhe book. There also are equity softwares, and all good players play better than what is printed in books even today, though the preflop is mainly covered in books also, but it took years to get there, and ur free to look into this software and see it correlated heavily with the right strategy, already in early 2000.

The profiles one can always work better. I could also point that in 2002 Ongame published the ev stats for preflop play, correlating with this software.

It could be compared to nlh gto play, that would be like this software, and the old school thinking that it is crap, when math shows otherwise, that is funny considering Sklansky and Malmuth, where i like only agree with their practical advice. They have been more silent about it this time and Mason is excited or so about the new concepts book it seems of Janda, and they did publish his first book, with a practical warning.

The bottom line to me is that Malmuth saw the bad plays, that this software has, and was good to point that out, but what matters the most, is the overall line, not so the bad plays, but Mason was/is thinking that its strategy is too loose. The latter part is mostly his mistake.

Just so you know, while Wilson Software was in business, we never publicly commented on any of his products.

As for our thinking that it played too loose, as I remember it, the software came with many different profiles that you could put into a simulated game. So according to the software you could put in loose players, tight players, aggressive players, and so on, all these profiles existed. And when we looked at it we only put the tight players in and it played incredibly loose.

MM

Mason, thx for the excellent comments...

the software was sold for a long time......... is it possible you saw it very early when it still had many problems, including perhaps some of the developers not being keen poker observers?

i bot the software post-moneymaker and found that the tight profiles played sufficiently tight. in fact, if anything i'd say the players played tighter than their profiles.

anyway, i loved the program........

the no-limit product i purchased that was associated with University of Alberta's poker research efforts was very easy to fool/game. of course it was NL which i assume is much harder to model.

Hi river:

Everything you're saying may be true, and it would be nice to think that Wilson listened to us after all.

Best wishes,
Mason

Thank you.

I lost Poker Academy Pro in a recent reformat and have been looking for a replacement.

I saw this recently - https://www.pokerteam.com/wilson-sof...ker-games.html
Is it the same?
Would be cool to practice Omaha 8, Stud and Stud 8.
Anybody had experience with those?