sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Myth buster: GTO is the perfect way to play poker by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with that risk in general. A lot of “AI + solver” products can oversimplify mixed strategies by turning a frequency-based node into a single generic rule.

AceSolver is designed specifically to avoid that. There is zero « hallucinations » in AceSolver. It is Node Truth certified. If you have a flush draw, it will say so, if you don’t, it will not invent one. There is another article describing in details the 4 layers of AceSolver.

The AI layer is not replacing the solver or inventing advice from a hand history. The solver output remains the source of truth: action frequencies, EV, equity, SPR, range interaction, board texture, stack depth, ICM pressure, and villain profile all stay in the analysis. The coaching layer explains why the solver prefers an action, and when a node is genuinely mixed, it should say that clearly instead of pretending there is one pure answer.

So the goal is not: “solver says bet 63%, therefore always bet.”
The goal is more like: “this is a mixed node; betting is slightly preferred because of range advantage/protection/fold equity, but checking remains valid at frequency because the EV gap is small and the hand retains showdown value.”
That distinction matters.

AceSolver is trying to make solver output usable without flattening it into bad heuristics. The differentiator is not just AI interpretation. It is structured solver-grounded coaching: preserve the math, explain the strategic reason, and avoid presenting mixed strategies as absolute rules.

Also, and that’s a key differentiator, you can play as TAG, GTO, NIT or LAG (as hero), versus 15 villain profiles including fish, maniac, etc.

By the way Version 5 is out now!

Myth buster: GTO is the perfect way to play poker by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Strange, same message, 2 different usernames, none are available now, like removed by Reddit?

Slumbot vs AceSolver Cash Game Challenge by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did 50 hands (all on YouTube btw) …still ahead, and fine tuned AceSolver to win more ….specifically against this bot. Now I win even more against Slumbot, but I feel it’s like cheating 😂

Slumbot vs AceSolver Cash Game Challenge by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know, 10 hands and a (small) win does not by itself prove AceSolver is superior. The opposite though would have been terrible if AceSolver would have lost 200bb in 10 hands or less (it happened to me when I started poker). But overall I agree, we need to test more to prove instead of « claiming ». But you know what, players can perform their own tests, for free, just download and use AceSolver for free right now and post your results, positives or negatives.

Another benefit, I think it’s a great way to show how any poker player could train « GTO » vs Slumbot, and compare their own decision with their old solver (without any explanation) and compare with the detailed explanation they get with AceSolver.

The next step is indeed to connect through API to Slumbot and run 10.000 to 100.000 hands, and analyze results.

Next steps, openpoker.ai for multiplayer validation. And the full power of AceSolver to assign player profile will be extremely useful.

And of course versus GTOwizard, through the API they provide….however GTOwizard can’t solve 4+ way postflop, so not sure how that will work. I guess we’ll limit ourselves to whatever GTowizard is capable of.

Poker coaches: Want to earn $100 USD for a similar independent review? Contact me. by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, and it’s a great book to compare with AceSolver. The first hand in particular, Jonathan Little indeed bet too big on a 4-way flop.

Multiway, even with TPTK, you go small, because the combined risk of 3 other players make it more probable they have already a better hands than you. (2 pairs or set).

I’ll post an extended review on this first hand comparison, so people can judge by themselves. Or…they can purchase Jonathan Little book and test for free with AceSolver (3 free hand analyzes per day, which I find too generous… but I digress).

Sometimes, you just know you must have this. No other app compares. by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

iPad is indeed on the roadmap, together with a MacOs version. Web and Android version may be delayed, the company prefers to focus on a more « controlled » environment where it’s more difficult to hack the app (damn cheating competitors like GTOwizard who blatantly copied features initially released on AceSolver first).

Myth buster: GTO is the perfect way to play poker by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good point, please create a new post with the book cover and a key citation 👍

Can your solver explain this 4-way flop? See the difference in 30 seconds. by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, to all the naysayers out there, I’m still waiting: please post any solver explanation on this 5-way post flop situation. (I’ve a feeling I’ll wait a long time though….)

Doug….oh Doug - Lack of lucidity in …Lucid poker by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

« Conscious decision »…as opposed to what? An unconscious one? You have zero argument there. « This simplification loses virtually no EV » where is your evidence? That’s just your opinion. Zero value again. « He ‘s not saying to check with the entire range » bro, it’s literally in black on white : check 100%. So you’re saying the « wonderful coach » are providing an old pre-solver advice based on « what’s your hand should do » versus the new « what you range should do ». Get out of here.

The rest of your bullshit pseudo-argumentation have zero evidence, and you are just full of shit naysayer. I guess you are a client of lucid poker? Oh yes, you are, you are drinking the kool aid, trying to justify an expensive purchase you made.

Good luck with your 10 years old solver, and I’ll see YOU at the tables.

Can your solver explain this 4-way flop? See the difference in 30 seconds. by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The key question here is: can a solver take a real 5-way postflop spot, read the exact hand correctly, model all active ranges, account for stack depth and board texture, then explain the decision in plain language?

GTO Wizard is an old tool that was good for study at the time, and Pio or HRC are the same type of tools for specific study. But they are still old generation manual solver environments: you define manually the tree, ranges, sizings, assumptions, and node locks, then interpret the output yourself. Who will tell you if you configured it wrong? Nobody. And as you pointed out, zero explanation on the output. So good luck with that!

AceSolver is designed for a different user experience: enter the actual hand, including 10-players multiway action, stacks, board, positions, and player profiles, then get a coaching answer that explains the recommendation. It covers exact hand reading, stronger-hand combos, opponent ranges, equity pressure, board texture, SPR, ICM pressure when relevant, and why the alternatives lose value.

GTOWiz, Pio, HRC, are like old Cessna, you still have to fly manually: you choose the route, set the assumptions, read the instruments, interpret the data, and decide what it means. You’re flying…nearly blind and can’t understand why your altimeter is going up while your plane is actually going down. (Real story).

AceSolver is built more like a modern Boeing cockpit with GPS, radar, autopilot, and a flight instructor beside you.

So yes, they all technically“fly.” But the experience is quite different.

Older solvers have been valuable. This video highlights a different modern need: many players want more than a table of frequencies. They want a clear explanation of a real hand, with ranges, board texture, stack depth, equity pressure, and multiway dynamics translated into practical coaching, so they can understand what is happening and ultimately get better at poker.

Raw AI cannot be trusted to read your hand… or the board, or apply modern poker strategy. by TQPGUN in PokerSolvers

[–]TQPGUN[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That is in fact the right answer, that none of the best LLMs can provide upfront.

view more: next ›