I dont know how to pay it as I dont have moneybookers or nothing like that . only neteller.

isnt there like an account on stars or maybe neteller wich I can send it to

or how do I buy it with the neteller credit card

Unfortunately Stars does not allow p2p transfers for non-gaming purposes.
And I can't accept neteller because that is a personal account.

You cán however purchase with the neteller credit card, which, in the end, is simply a credit card. For that, use the "credit card/ideal/bankwire/other" link under the payment options on the register page.

Great, I didnt know about this. Ill try it out.

Another problem I am having though is that on a KQJT board, for example, I can not find a way to make the program differentiate between a straight were you hold the A and a straight were you hold the 9. Both cases are grouped together as "1 card straights". This is a pretty big deal because you probably want to take completely different actions depending on whether you have the A or the 9.

So, in the blue Postflop conditions menu, I think there should be an option to choose between Nut Straight, 2nd Straight and 3rd Straight. IMHO this choice should be located in the right most column, below the choice of number of hole cards.
I also think that the choice between Nut flush, 2nd flush and so on should be moved to that location.

I have done some semi exhaustive research to ensure that there can never be more than 3 tiers of straights.

Examples of the different straights tiers:
Nut straight, KQ on JT9, Q9 on JT865, any A on KQJT, KQ on JT987
2nd Straight, Q8 on JT9, 97 on JT865, any 9 on KQJT, any Q on JT987, T7 on Q9865
3rd Straight, 87 on JT9, 74 on JT865, any 7 on Q9865

You need to be able to choose both the tier and the number of hole cards in order to define how good your straight really is. One or the other is not enough.

More examples (with number of hole cards):
2 card nut, KQ on JT9, KJ on AQT, KJ on QT9, Q9 on JT865
1 card nut, A on KQJT, J on AKQT
2 card 2nd, Q8 on JT9, 97 on JT865
1 card 2nd, Q on JT98, J on QT98
2 card 3rd, 87 on JT9, 64 on J875
1 card 3rd, 7 on JT98, 8 on JT976
0 card nut, AKQJT
0 card 2nd, KQJT9 (any A is the nut straight)
0 card 3rd, QJT98 (AK is the nut and any K is the 2nd straight)

This looks really messy but it really isnt. You just first choose the number of holecards and then the tier of the straight. Exactly as you do with flushes.

Do you think something like this could be added?

You could just say that the player's holecards are Ax (use the text input in the holecards section). It's usually possible to define what you want with some creativity.

I like the idea of moving such subsets into separate columns (with the exception of top pair, middle pair, overpair and pocket>2nd pair).

Let's give this a bit more thought first.

Wouldn't it make more sense to create 3 types of straights:
- strong and "hidden"
- strong and obvious
- weak


So, some examples:

Board: T987
QJ is strong and hidden, Jx is strong+obvious, 6 is weak

Board: ATJ23
KQ and 45 are both strong+hidden straights

Board: T986
QJ is strong and hidden, J7 is strong and hidden, 7x is weak


So, strong and hidden straights are two card straights that are not beaten by some one card straight.

Strong and obvious straights are one card straights that are not beaten by any other 1 card straight.

Weak straights are straights that are beaten by a one card straight.


Please feel free to poke holes in the above .
I can imagine I missed some category.

Absolutely.

I think that the name "hidden" could be misleading here because straights on this board are not really hidden.

With your system both of these straights have the properties [Strong, Hidden, 2 card straights] so it would be impossible to make a condition in the tree that, for example, calls an all in with the nut straight (KQ) and folds to an all in with 54. This was my initial problem with the current version of the program.

In the system i propsed, on this board, KQ would be the Nut straight and 45 the 2nd straight (there would be no 3rd straight on this board). So now I could make a condition that calls an all in with the nut straight and folds with 54 because in this system these two cases are not grouped together.
And if I want to make a descision also based on how hidden the straight is I would use the "number of hole cards used" option.

Again, I would not be able to tell QJ and J7 apart becasue they are both strong and hidden type of straights.
In the other system J7 would be a "Nut straight", J7 would be a "2nd straight" and 7x a "3rd straight".
Also, QJ and J7 would obviously be "2 cards used" straights and 7x would be a "1 card used" straight. So if I want to filter for that ill just click those options.


I dont think this system solves the real problem of telling different strength of straights apart. Also I think the other system might be more intuitive because it is very similar to the system used for flushes.

I wrote these responses somewhat hastily because I have people coming over and have to clean the house. Im sorry if everything isnt clear enough. I gave the whole system alot of thought the past few days though so it should be somewhat sound. That said, discussion is always good. Im sure we both want the result to be as good as possible.

I realize the name isn't perfect and might need some improvement. I don't want to put a whole lot of thought into tiny details if I still might take things in a different direction.

I'm trying to look at the situation from a point of view of practical use. Even though 54 on that board is not literally the nuts, I can't imagine anyone playing KQ and 54 differently there. And even if they would, you can easily specify the difference by stating in the holecards section that one hand is Kx and the other one is 5x.

In the system you propose, if the board is unknown then it becomes a lot of work to actually tell if a straight has true value. Mine communicates a lot more clearly what the different types of straight offer. This will prevent incorrect input+undesired results.

On the other hand, if the board is known, then the discussion is almost trivial, since you can just enter the desired hands under the "holecards" section. There's no real need for a new system here.


If the board is known
The issue is trivial. You can just use the holecards section.

If the board is unknown
There's countless ways of making a mistake in a system where you need to specify the grade of the straight and the number of holecards. You need to take into account every possible way that the board has been altered and define the different straights for it. In my system however, it's very straightforward, since the program figures this out on the fly.

Ill just make a few quick comments.

I am only talking about unknown boards. On known boards I agree with you that the whole thing is trivial.

This was a bad board to make my point on because the KQ and 54 would almost always play the same.

Im not sure if this is clear but you dont have to choose both a straight tier and the number of hole cards. You either choose a tier or "number of holecards" or both. Just like you do with a flush in the current version.
If you are talking about how CPU intensive the two different systems will be for the program then it is hard for me to comment because i dont know how the straight calculations are done.

Ill give this whole thing some more thought and see if I can come up with some good examples tomorrow. Gotta go now.

I don't have a clue how CPU intensive either system will be.
I'll find out as I go I suppose

Ok, please see if you can find a practical example where my suggested system doesn't work. So far I can't think of any.

I had a rough day today. My SSD died on me, it contained all my data for the last year and also alot of my poker related programs and files. So I can no longer start CREV or Flopzilla but I will try to give some input to our discussion anyways.

I think the difference between our two systems mainly comes down to a debate between control and ease of use. I am sure that some will encounter scenarios were they would have liked more exact control over what hands go into what condition but I also think that your system is easier as it totally eliminates the choice of number of hole cards. And when I think about it most users probably would prefer your system.
One thing i think though is that you should name them [Strong, Medium, Weak] and have some sort of tool tip on them that explains exactly what each category means.
I also think that a 1 card nut straight like K on AQJT should count as the strongest type of straight (in your above definition of categories it would be classified as the second category "Strong and obvious").

The software has a hint system.
I'll just display a hint when the user mouses over these options.

I think I'll go with the Strong/strong and obvious/weak distribution and see how it works out.

Hi guys,

Just letting you know that beta v2.7.9 is up.

New compared to beta 2.7.8:
- Import for HEM2
- Import for PT3
- Import for PT4
- Completely new algorithm for unexploitable shoving; much faster.
- In the postflop menu, straights can now be classified as strong(2card),strong(1card),weak.
- In the postflop menu, flush strength has now been moved to the second column.
- Bugfixes, small changes, etc.

Go here for download: http://www.cardrunners-ev-calculator...henewbeta.html

Cheers,

Scylla

Much faster indeed. Gj

I'm trying to assign a range of Tc9c/55, but every time I add the 55, the Tc9c reverts to just T9s (including the other suits). I've tried text input, and using the grid but can't seem to get it to work. Am I missing something obvious?

In CardRunnersEV you can only select one specific hand (with suits), and otherwise a range. CardRunnersEV only lets you filter for suits after the flop has been dealt. It works like a real hand in that manner.

Scylla maybe you should consider some workaround for a situation when the analysis starts at the turn or river and certain suited combos from the range would have been dropped on flop/turn already.