ItalianStallion

Hello there,

I usually use Pio pro version and its "load script" feature to create multiple cfr files and use them for statistical analysis. Then, I'm considering using Amazon's EC2 for more solving speed. Anybody who has similar experience?
My questions are;

1. If I upgrade pro to edge version, can I activate my license on EC2?
2. If I stop or delete the instance of EC2, is the license available again?
3. I heard that there is no upper limit on the number of cores available for edge, but is there a clear speed difference between 8 cores and 16 cores, or 16 and 32?
4. If you know some recommended instance settings, please let me know:)

I suspect that most high stakes hold'em players use preflop solutions such as Monker. Whatever range an opponent has, we can hold fixed EV and learn easier postflop GTO strategy by imitating Sims.

However, preflop GTO is not completely solved. The main reason is that the game tree of hold'em is too huge, but from the perspective of solving Nash equilibrium, I think the bigger problem is multi-way possibility. Theoretically, we cannot solve any Nash equilibrium in multi-way situation.

For example, when you 3-bet from SB against BTN, there still remains a player(BB) behind you. So if you want to do some GTO stuff here, you have to assume that BB will fold to 3-bet 100% of the time. Then heads up with BTN and SB, now you can solve the Nash equilibrium. But, of course, this premise is unrealistic. Because nobody folds AA, KK, AK, or maybe KQs from BB against SB's 3-bet.

So my questions are;
Do Sims really have reasonable performance even in multi-way situations?
How are Sims made actually?

What do you guys think about this?
Thanks:)

Hi there,

I usually use nodelocking to force OOP to check especially on the flop. But as far as I know, you can't run a script at the same time you use nodelocking. What do you do when you run script and don't want OOP to donk bet? I guess the only way to do this is leaving flop bet size column of OOP blank. Yes, there is the "force OOP check/IP bet" checkbox , but this is not perfect because I don't want IP to bet 100% of the time. Leaving the column blank looks still working OK, but I’m worried about the effects on turn or river strategies.

So, my questions are:
1) When you usually run a script, how do you force OOP to check on the flop 100% of the time without using "force OOP check/IP bet" checkbox?
2)What do you think about the effects of a blank column on strategy or EV?

Thanks.

Hi there,

It is generally known that GTO strategy has a larger EV over the range with multiple bet sizing. Aggregation report allows us to determine which board is appropriate for each size. For example, LJ vs BB SRP: LJ can make a small size bet with whole range on K high boards, while LJ can make a bigger size bet or check on low pair boards. It's fine, imo.

So my question is, how do I get some aggregation reports of the post-turn strategy when using multiple bet-sizing on flop?

Aggregation reports of turn require specific one specific node of flop. For example, OOP checks, IP 30% pot size bets, OOP calls and then we see a turn card. But when we use multi-bet sizing on the flop, the nodes we select on the flop are different for each board. So we can not create the turn report properly over multiple boards which we use on the flop.

I was exhausted by looking into this issue, so I simplified my strategy in 3betPot flop by using one bet size. However, in the case of SRP, the EV loss is quite large when using one betsizing with whole range.

What do you guys think about this issue? I need some advice on this.