The solver convo has been really interesting, but another thing I'm taking out of this is a chance to reflect on
one of my life leaks: Spending too much time defending a position that I'm not really passionate about. (I guess I'm actually passionate that you shouldn't make belittling comments toward people who are investigating tools to improve their game.)
Anyway, this comparison came to mind:
I enjoy learning mixed games. Poker in my state is
run by complete nincompoops, so I have access to draw games maybe one week a year, but I find them lots of fun. If I were maximizing earn, I'd concentrate on NLHE and/or PLO. And I'd probably have 2x the bankroll and play bigger, but would I be as happy?
It's more fun to be a fox, but it makes more money to be a slightly flexible hedgehog.
(You can always wait to learn a new game until you see your specialty drying up.)
Here's another example, more related to solvers. One of these days I want to dig deeper into
The Mathematics of Poker. Some of the more basic chapters are useful at any stakes (why do we bluff the best of our bad hands?) but some of the advanced ones are of dubious application to my games. Still.... it's fascinating stuff.
For me buying a solver would be like spending lots of time in that book, or lots of time working on triple draw. I might do it for fun, but I can't claim an ROI.