En el pokerstove

Tiene que ver con el método que se usa para llevar a cabo la simulación. Aquí lo explican bastante bien:



"Enumerate All" vs. "Monte Carlo"



What PokerStove does is to run simulations. It doesn't calculate, it simulates. So when you run a simulation, it's going to pit the hands and ranges that you put in, on the board that you put in (if any), randomize all the unknown variables many times, and tell you how often on average the different players win. There are two ways it can do this:

"Enumerate all" goes through every possible combination, in some kind of order. For some scenarios, this is very fast since there aren't so many possible combinations. Most cases where you only have two players involved, for instance, doesn't take Poker Stove many fractions of a second to calculate. But when you have three or more players involved in a pot, the number of possible cases has grown exponentially, and it may take a long time for the program to run every single combination of possibilities. That's when using "Monte Carlo" comes in handy: It randomizes the simulations.

Basically, this means that instead of following a pattern and grinding its way through every possible holding, it's going to just randomly run simulation after simulation. Because computers are so fast these days, we're going to get a huge number of samples (millions) in just about a second. It's true that we've substituted precision for speed, but if you let Monte Carlo run for awhile it's going to pretty quickly stabilize towards the true value. Often, these approximations are good enough.

Una de las opciones te dice el resultado exacto, pero cuando tarda mucho en calcular la solución se puede elegir la opción de Montecarlo, que es un método númerico para aproximar la solución.