If You've Just Bought PioSolver, Watch This.

[@fernandolaserra514]

Great content Neuron, really helpful!

[@RuMpLe4234]

I don't get what you are supposed to put in the bet size/raise size fields. Do you get that info from the hand? Can you explain a bit more on that thanks

[@DRDR3ADSA]

Really good video!

[@user-xi2fw2rj9b]

How is it possible that I've entered the same inputs in my pio but the bet% of individual hands is different say for eg for ATs my pio is showing to check 30% of times but yours is 35$!

[@neuron123]

Depends on how long you ran the sim for. I ran it down to 0.825% of the pot exploitability, you may have ran the sim down to a different level.

[@ilavenilarumugam7392]

Good one! Thanks man.

[@ChristofferBrandsborg]

Didnt know you had your own YT channel :) Im MrEsprectro from RYE

[@neuron123]

It's still a work in progress :P

[@matijaperovic2573]

I have run with same numbers and my result on the flop for the OOP player is check 94.49 % Am I making a mistake somewhere ?

[@Jumppis89]

Hello and thanks for the nice video. I ran the same sim as you did on the video, and results I got, where quite whacky. In my sim, check was chosen around 83 percent of the time.At first I thought I had made some error in building the tree, so I built the tree again(couple of times actually, and following the video), and I got the same results.Then I started wondering if the fact that I purchased my Pio(pro version, with 2 activations) with my friend, could have anything to with the results I got. What I mean by that, is that I have a feeling I once red somewhere that the folks at Pio had some kinds of anti-license-sharing-measurements, and purposefully messing up results of the sims was one of them. So I would like to know if you, or anyone in the comment section knows if this indeed is the case.Again, thanks for the great video!

[@neuron123]

Hey, you shouldn't have issues if you have bought Pio legitmately. If you've run the sim multiple times and followed exactly what I did, then you should have the same results if you ran it down to the same exploitability %.

[@FlippersTF2]

did you put in the right stack sizes and sizings?

[@mushroomka5917]

good video, but can you tell how exactly use this numbers, for example at 7:15 A3s of spade , so we should check about 36% times, bet 20 in 26% and 12 in 36% but how we can bet with this frequency in reality? using some sort of random ?

[@neuron123]

In reality, it's usually not important to get the exact frequency, there are often better exploitative options. What I do is I used a random number generator when for these situations.

[@rickjamez4987]

Besides the 5 blocking the straight, why is K5 and A5s the best bluffs?

[@XxMr1XxX]

Exactly for that reason. You want to pick hands which have the highest possible fold equity to bluff with. & those hands which block some strong combinations are exactly those bluff hands since your opponnet has less combinations to call with.

[@XxMr1XxX]

@@BenGilmore93 usually A2s-A5s are the best bluff hands. You block Ax combinations. If you get called you still have decent equity since you can draw to a flush or a straight and you still have some equity with the Ace as a high card. Basically A2s-A5s are the most flexible hands in Poker. You can call with them, you can raise with them and you can 4bet shove with them. Another example if you raise early with A5s and you face a 3bet. Then you have a 4bet range which includes AA, KK, sometimes AK, sometimes QQ. & to be unexploitable you mix that range up with some bluff hands. Those are A2s-A5s, because if your 4bet shove gets called its 50% less likely that your opponet has Aces and at the same time you still have a decent equity against for example KK, AK etc. Besides that you always try to use the lowest end of your range as your bluff range to increase the value of those hands and to not lose value of higher value hands. In this exact spot A5 is a little bit better than A4 as a bluffhand for one reason. Your opponet has less 4s in his range than 5s. Op has 55, 54, 65 and at the same time only 44, 45. So A5 blocks a little more of his value combinations than A4 would. But its close.

[@Trias805]

3:02 I'm not sure this is entirely accurate, as you would probably want to 4bet bluff with hands like A5s from time to time. So you should add some weight to it in the calling range, like maybe 0.75.

[@gratler]

5:15 am i crazy or are his fans noticably reving up after he starts the solver? :D:D

[@neuron123]

These things take a lot of power :)

[@Trias805]

@@neuron123 Can I run it on my ancient 2-core, 4GB RAM PC?

[@neuron123]

@@Trias805 You probably won't be able to build a tree with many bet sizes and it'd take a while to load.

[@dazt66]

Hi are you on twitch?

[@Subaruiz1]

why is AAnorKK with a spade bette rcalls than without ? the fatct that w block his flushdraws doesnt it make his range more valueheavy ? or is it because he thenhas lessequity with his flushdraw as we have one o his out.

[@neuron123]

In practice, the solver is usually trying to bluff when it doesn't block our folding ranges and we design our calls based around that. So solver won't be bluffing when it blocks our flush draws so calling with flush draw blockers isn't that bad.

[@yi-tzaistoyreview4576]

Pls do mak mor of these pio

[@85bezzer]

is this rory mcilroy?

[@valuablesandwich8516]

Rory moonlights as a good reg

[@dhtnpoker5318]

is this piocolver basic or piosolver pro? because of the option bet12 instead of 20? you just got this option, when you buy piosolver pro? oO

[@neuron123]

that's just because I allowed 2 flop bet sizes when building my game tree

[@dhtnpoker5318]

@@neuron123 thx for your quick answer :)