New GTOx Solver Service (3 Viewers)

[Legend5555]

As easy as this makes a solver to use, I still don't get to play often enough to justify paying money for one, even for this sweet new service.

Just keep making people better at poker people. I REALLY appreciate it.

 

[waddadonk]

Nice interface and visuals.

Does anyone here have a good understanding of the calculations being done, and what assumptions are being made by the solver and by the program user. For example, should people be going with the suggested ranges, or is it better to "tune" the ranges? Can you ELI5?

Processing on the cloud is smart - I'm sure the programmer is going to be flooded with free data.

 

[Legend5555]

Nice interface and visuals.

Does anyone here have a good understanding of the calculations being done, and what assumptions are being made by the solver and by the program user. For example, should people be going with the suggested ranges, or is it better to "tune" the ranges? Can you ELI5?

Processing on the cloud is smart - I'm sure the programmer is going to be flooded with free data.

No answers to those questions yet, but I assume it makes some blanket assumptions of pfr and defense ranges. And you can probably change those like you can with other solvers. But from a macro level, newer users aren't going to want to get bogged down in adjusting ranges and weights anyway.

I've never used a solver, but I come from a strong math background. So getting through a solver isn't that tough for me. Though, laying out the levels of granularity is a very useful guide, even for me, on how to start going about the analysis.

 

[Kain8]

Just keep making people better at poker people. I REALLY appreciate it.

You know, I just had a little epiphany with your statement there. The edges of playing NLH have of course shrunken over the past 15+ years to the point of getting blood from a stone. And yet, NLH still remains the most popular game despite all this. It comes down to the point that if NLH just disappeared from the world, how many poker players would still be around to play other games? I think that the poker economy keeps getting more and more precarious as these solvers keep increasing in sophistication because the weaker players will get diced up at even faster rates.

Savvier players of course either incorporate other games into their repertoire or avoid NLH altogether just so that games remain healthier, i.e. games have less disparity in winners and losers and the amounts thereof. (Unless you're @Rhodeman77 or @Anthony Martino in PLO, but I digress!)

 

[Legend5555]

You know, I just had a little epiphany with your statement there. The edges of playing NLH have of course shrunken over the past 15+ years to the point of getting blood from a stone. And yet, NLH still remains the most popular game despite all this. It comes down to the point that if NLH just disappeared from the world, how many poker players would still be around to play other games? I think that the poker economy keeps getting more and more precarious as these solvers keep increasing in sophistication because the weaker players will get diced up at even faster rates.

Savvier players of course either incorporate other games into their repertoire or avoid NLH altogether just so that games remain healthier, i.e. games have less disparity in winners and losers and the amounts thereof. (Unless you're @Rhodeman77 or @Anthony Martino in PLO, but I digress!)

Luckily, I learned how to play most of the standard stud, omaha, and draw games early on. When given the choice, I'd rather play those limit games over NLHE. Though NLHE is still probably my best game.

But PLO... sigh. Not a fan.

 

[Rhodeman77]

A good poker friend of mine and writer keeps telling that being a high stakes pro as living is dying. His opinion is exactly like you are saying, that the gap has shrunk so much that unless there are rich business people that want to take a shot it is a bunch of tough players trading money.

Look how many Pro players don’t play anymore. They coach or do podcasts/YouTube/Vlog etc. Or they get out of it altogether like Vanessa Selbst.

The big players went to Macau years ago to chase the rich business guys there and they don’t play hold’em. The business guys want higher variance games to decrease the edge of the Pros.

 

[Jimulacrum]

You know, I just had a little epiphany with your statement there. The edges of playing NLH have of course shrunken over the past 15+ years to the point of getting blood from a stone. And yet, NLH still remains the most popular game despite all this. It comes down to the point that if NLH just disappeared from the world, how many poker players would still be around to play other games? I think that the poker economy keeps getting more and more precarious as these solvers keep increasing in sophistication because the weaker players will get diced up at even faster rates.

I agree with this analysis. What has happened with NLHE over the past 20-ish years has made the game a lot less appealing than it used to be, for recreational players and pros alike. It's being studied to death.

 

[FDLmold]

Mixed game poker for the win!

 

[boltonguy]

Interesting. I started using flopzilla to think about range vs range and hand vs range equities and how ranges interact with flops and have mostly moved to PokerSnowie to think about actions and frequencies. I can also load hand histories and get hand by hand GTO analysis of my play. I also pay for Pokertracker4. I can’t bring myself to pony up for a solver - generally they seem to run $200+ and honestly I’m not convinced that I’m good enough to benefit from one nor do I think the player pool I’m up against at 25NL online or 1/3 live is using solvers. I also think that exploitative play in these games is more profitable than GTO. Many of the “blunders” that Snowie picks up are exploitative plays that win pots. What do you guys think - how relevant are solvers at lower stakes. Plus they don’t explain the decisions made in their output. You’re left to figure out why the solver chooses to check this combo but blast the other and at my level that can be non-obvious.

 

[Legend5555]

Interesting. I started using flopzilla to think about range vs range and hand vs range equities and how ranges interact with flops and have mostly moved to PokerSnowie to think about actions and frequencies. I can also load hand histories and get hand by hand GTO analysis of my play. I also pay for Pokertracker4. I can’t bring myself to pony up for a solver - generally they seem to run $200+ and honestly I’m not convinced that I’m good enough to benefit from one nor do I think the player pool I’m up against at 25NL online or 1/3 live is using solvers. I also think that exploitative play in these games is more profitable than GTO. Many of the “blunders” that Snowie picks up are exploitative plays that win pots. What do you guys think - how relevant are solvers at lower stakes. Plus they don’t explain the decisions made in their output. You’re left to figure out why the solver chooses to check this combo but blast the other and at my level that can be non-obvious.

I think solvers have a lot of benefit in low stakes at the macro level. Mostly to understand range vs range, spots where you should bet or check whole range, and barreling opportunities. I wouldn't play pure GTO against bad players because they aren't paying attention. But I think it has decent benefit for baseline play.

 

[K-A]

Hi every body,

Is this solver is avaible?
I use different solver for playîng in online poker.

Thx

 

[LaBestiole]

I do not think GTOx is available yet. Shoud come up soon though.

 

[K-A]

Up, aviable or not?

 

[boltonguy]

no I have been waiting for this - looks good. He has youtube videos under username "Finding Equilibrium."
GTOx | Poker GTO Analysis

 

[mashoo]

The big players went to Macau years ago to chase the rich business guys there and they don’t play hold’em. The business guys want higher variance games to decrease the edge of the Pros.

Short deck is by far my favorite variant of poker.

 

[johnnyesper]

I think solvers have a lot of benefit in low stakes at the macro level. Mostly to understand range vs range, spots where you should bet or check whole range, and barreling opportunities. I wouldn't play pure GTO against bad players because they aren't paying attention. But I think it has decent benefit for baseline play.

I would agree with this. Most low stakes players are not paying attention at all. I'm not good enough to be a crusher at low stakes but I used some solved situations to help me to be exploitive. It has its place to help you be more fundamentally aggressive and not spewy.