I agree, this is reality unfortunately, where people make up their own (wrong) facts with zero due diligence and try to use mislead tactics to try to cause a change they're interested in.

I wasn't irritated by your color-code-cells suggestion, in fact I love getting suggestions as many suggestions over the years on 2p2 have improved this program in all its versions. See the PokerCruncher threads and the full consideration I give each suggestion, including yours.

What I was irritated by was at the end of your suggestion when you said:

>>> pokerranger have it, and it's great

Then I did due diligence on my side and looked at PokerRanger's online docs and screenshots (I don't have Windows-PC) and saw that it doesn't have this feature as far as I can see (o.w. I've asked you multiple times to show to me that it does have it; no response from you on this). I also asked you if it has %age weights in ranges; no response from you on this.

You said "it's great". To me when people say something's "great" e.g. "that restaurant's apple pie is great", it means you've tried the apple pie. Or if you haven't, you are very darn sure that it's great that you're willing to put your word on it. In contrast, you have never run PokerRanger, you told us later.

Your wrong facts and misrepresentation looked like mislead tactics to me which put a credibility question mark in my mind regarding you. So we got off on the wrong foot and are prob. still there.

Yes, never used pokerstove or equilab or flopzilla or anything. Nothing ive found works for mac but this and even if it did ive been hesitant to spend ~30-~60 until now cause wasnt sure how much i wanted to grind. I'll watch the tutorial and then if I like it i'll buy on mac, and figure out how to use. Probably will ask tons of dumb questions here if I buy it. How big is it to download? Also, is it intensive on CPU to run? I'm only on a 2013 Macbook Air, and it doesn't have a ton of processing power.

>>> How big is it to download?

Look in Mac App Store on your Mac, tells you there, 2.0MB. Pretty compact by today's bloated standards.

>>> Also, is it intensive on CPU to run?

No. Unless you're running continuous infinite Monte Carlo simulations. Most calcs take just a few seconds to converge.

>>> I'm only on a 2013 Macbook Air, and it doesn't have a ton of processing power.

Should be fine. You need macOS 10.9 or later.

So you did your due dilligence and I did mine. I've asked PokerRanger users if it is possible to color code, and I've received the answer back yesterday from two users that it is possible. I also provided information yesterday that it also appears possible in Power Equilab, also information given to me by a user, which I asked someone to confirm. I have used neither program myself, as I don't have a pc. What I did manage to get a hold of is a screenshot from Power Equilab, where you can see the color coding of a range. This is just information that I put out there in case you would be interested in checking, since these programs seem to be in the same realm as to what PokerCruncher is doing.

You seem to make it a point though that I was trying to mislead you purpously, which I was not. I told you in my second or third post that it was an assumption I made. That's on me, and I've admitted as much.
On multiple occasions, I've complimented you for being open to dialogue etc..
This is now your fourth or fifth post where you clearly show your sarcasm/irritation about what I wrote. I thought the whole point was to offer suggestions, and talk about it back and forth?
Look, this is a forum, people or trying to have a conversation through a medium which allows for plenty of interpretation. I'm about 99,99% sure that if we would have talked face to face it wouldn't have been nearly as a big of a deal as what you're making of this.

Now here's the thing, I've tried to contribute to the discussion by offering a suggestion. And tried to follow up with providing additional info, by asking around. What you do with that is up to you.

So when you're implying that I'm making up my own wrong facts with zero due dilligence and tyring to use mislead tactics to try to cause a change that I'm interested in, you couldn't be further from the truth.
To me it seems like you're going out of your way to try to discredit me, and blowing things way out of proportion, and thereby missing the message, but that's just my point of view.

>>> So you did your due dilligence and I did mine.

Well, initially you did zero due diligence and used false made up facts and mislead tactics to try to push your suggestion through ("PokerRanger have it, it's great"). Now you're getting better and are asking around about what these other programs do instead of just guessing / making stuff up yourself, it's an improvement. But you still haven't told me e.g. if these other programs have %age weights in ranges like PokerCruncher-Expert does. This feature affects your color-code-cells suggestion.

>>> That's on me, and I've admitted as much.

Good, progress here, looks like you're taking responsibility for your initial made up facts.

>>> Now here's the thing, I've tried to contribute to the discussion by offering a suggestion. And tried to follow up with providing additional info, by asking around. What you do with that is up to you.

I've done an awful lot with your suggestion already. I've pointed out pros and cons of it in great detail, see my posts #181, #190. In these posts I explained why your suggestion isn't a general enough solution for subranges in general, due to e.g. hand combos spread across multiple subranges, and also because of the %age weights in ranges feature. I also argued why it isn't great aesthetically i.e. color overload and kaleidoscopic effect when go over 10+ colors or even 5+ colors. I'm tired of repeating myself for you.

Now if these other programs you're talking about don't have %age weights in hand ranges for individual cells like PokerCruncher-Expert does, then maybe color-code-cells is a tenable feature in those programs. But it would't be in PokerCruncher-Expert. But all such programs have hand combos, so I can't see it working well in those programs on the flop/turn/river where suits and combos get involved due to flushes and flush draws. I've explained this before in my previous posts.

>>> So when you're implying that I'm making up my own wrong facts with zero due dilligence and tyring to use mislead tactics to try to cause a change that I'm interested in, you couldn't be further from the truth.

This is more misdirection from you. I am stating the facts; you used false made up facts with zero due diligence in your original post on this and mislead tactics ("it's great" - when you said this you had never even run that program).

Many dozens of people on 2p2 have made suggestions on PokerCruncher over the years on these threads. You're the first person I've run into credibility issues with, and feel that I can't "work well with".

I think a good solution for you, if you really like the color code cells feature, is to switch to one of those programs.

In PokerCruncher-Expert, I've already explained why the current solution is better and more general (save into the 100 quick-slots). And as I've already said there's a more complex potential layering approach I'll think about in the future.

this is my last post to this cause this is getting ridiculous

I said in my originial post that the color coding feature was great, because that is what I was looking for, and that programs like PokerRanger have it. As it turns out they do have it. So I didn't make up anything there. I didn't just grab this out of thin air, it was based on my training site. I never said I used the program myself.
YOU deducted that from my statement.
For the ... time, I asked about color coding, because I didn't know any other way that was handy to check ranges IN game. I understand that equity calculations are done off table after you play. And that therefore these two features may not be compatible in one program. That's all good. I even asked if someone knew of another program that maybe had this feature, which is when your first sarcastic comment started.

Fyi for this feature I have found another tool, called Range Manager, which does just this, and nothing more.
I came into this discussion with a constructive attitude. I haven't asked about the %age weight feature in these other programs, and quite frankly I won't, because I'm sick and tired of your condescending tone on here. You keep making statements about me that I make stuff up, that I'm trying to mislead etc... You know nothing about me, and you base all of that on one little sentence. Talk about not doing your due diligence....
Get over it.

You've built a good program, but your communication skills with your customers need some work

Goodbye.
Good luck.

App improvements continue, version 10.5.1 released today:

1) Range Heat Map: Add the ability to set a custom value for Breakeven Equity.
2) Filter Hand Range operation: Add the ability to filter a hand range on equity.

1) was suggested to me recently in email offline (thanks M.K.). His point was that on the river sometimes we have really good odds on the final call e.g. 3:1 odds so all we need is 25% equity to make the call (that's our breakeven equity). But, say it's heads up, the range heat map defaults to 50% as breakeven equity (or to 33% if it's 3-way), so the range heat map's colors (red -> yellow -> green) are skewed too far "right". This change lets us adjust the breakeven equity freely. I don't want this program to get too much into pot odds, implied odds, etc. as that's a whole extra complex decision layer on top, and this is an equity calculator, but this addition looked compact and clean enough.

2) was suggested in this app's iPhone thread a long time ago by "AvoidMe?" but I had considered it a dangerous feature if it's not used right, so didn't add it. But I decided the Mac-Expert version of this app should have this feature, with a usage warning note in the program. Basically, I feel "filter range on equity" is appropriate only for e.g. range vs. range scenarios or for studying GTO play etc., and not for more real life situations like specific hand vs. range (where the existing "filter range on hand types (stats)" operation is more appropriate). But since this is the Expert version of this program, I decided to add "filter range on equity" for when we want to do more theoretical type range reductions in e.g. range vs. range scenarios.

I addressed the good suggestion above some months ago by adding an "Undo/Redo Hand Range Edit" menu command, but now I decided to implement something on a wider/bigger scale along these lines of remembering data ...

Today update V.10.6.1 went live with feature "Calc'ed Scenarios History".

* A history of the last 50 calc'ed scenarios is automatically saved app-internally.

* The "File" menu --> "Load Previous Calc'ed Scenario" and "Load Next Calc'ed Scenario" menu buttons let you navigate backwards and forwards in the scenario history.

* There are keyboard shortcuts for quick navigation:

Cmd-Option-LeftArrow ==> Load Previous Calc'ed Scenario (50 levels)
Cmd-Option-RightArrow ==> Load Next Calc'ed Scenario (50 levels)

So now a ton of scenario input data is auto-remembered, with a calc operation being the "save" trigger.

E.g. we can use this history feature to go backwards and forwards to different points/streets of a hand that we’re analyzing, or to different scenarios that we calc’ed a while ago.

Hey @rj999

I was messing around with the app then i thought about something that could be interesting.

The ability to have both "make hand" or "Hit hand" from Hero and Villain at the same time.

currently the UI is like this :



But it could be very cool if we could switch it to this :




EDIT:

Image link 2 : https://ibb.co/hKhiA5

Hello,

It's a good suggestion, to be able to see all players' stats and info at the same time so we can get a fully global view of the situation. "Rezzir" had asked about this too some months ago and I gave some workarounds, in post #140. I still feel because of screen space reasons and difficulty/practicality of a full implementation I don't think this will be achievable, and we will need to rely on the workarounds. Details below.

In general there isn't enough screen space even on a Mac to show the stats/info for all players (or even for just two players). In your proposed screenshot note that you've taken out the hand range view(s); some people will say they need to see this view too for both players at the same time so they can visually see their ranges. Or for 3, 4, etc. players if it's multi-way, and then it gets out of hand in terms of screen space. On large screen Mac's there's enough screen space for maybe two players, but the UI of this program is designed to also fit on small Mac's e.g. Mac Air's, and for small Mac's there's no extra space. We could enable this feature only on large screen Mac's, but then we still have difficulty/practicality of implementation issues.

So then the additional views for the other players would need to be popup views, but then this starts getting closer to the workarounds in post #140 in reply to "Rezzir":

1) Take a screenshot of the second player's stats using the Preview app.
2) Use Terminal command "open -n /Applications/PokerCruncher.app" to launch a second instance of the PokerCruncher app.

Post #140 has details including some trickiness with 2).

Another thing I do to compare two players is:

3) Use TAB and SHIFT-TAB to select each player in turn and quickly go back and forth to look at them and compare. Might be quicker than using the mouse to click to select.

Hopefully some of these workarounds will help in your usage?
Thanks for sending suggestions. I can't promise I can/will do all, but will consider/think fully on all suggestions. -RJ

Hey rj999,

I tried the second instance since you had already wrote to me about it, but one option could be to simply open the second players stats in a new window exactly like you have done with the Heatmap(hotness) "text" button.

What do you think ?

>>> simply open the second players stats in a new window

Yes that's exactly what I said in my last post, "So then the additional views for the other players would need to be popup views".

But I still don't like this suggestion for the same reasons given earlier.

>>> exactly like you have done with the Heatmap(hotness) "text" button

The only thing "exactly" here is that the new view is being opened in a new view/window i.e. popup view; everything else is different. Re. the "Txt" button, note that it's a modal popup view, so you can't do anything else while it's up, not too convenient. Anyway there's a key difference between the NextCardHeatMap "Txt" button and your proposal. The "Txt" button shows the heat map text for the *currently selected player*. You're requesting showing other players' stats info. How would we select which other player, this would have to be done in the popup view, and we would then have two selected payers, the primary selected player for the main UI and the secondary selected player for the popup view, getting complicated.

The notion of who is the currently selected/clicked player is very central to the operation of this program's entire UI. All parts of the UI depend on this, and show the info. for the currently selected player, and only that player. I think to show the info. for other players would be confusing and inconsistent. And where do we draw the line?, e.g. then we should have a popup view/window to show other players' range grids too, in addition to other players' stats. That may be even more useful than seeing other players' stats. E.g. if we could see and edit both Hero's and Villain's ranges at the same time that would be a big time saver and would help us understand both ranges better. That would be awesome actually, but we would need about 2x the screen space. And in designing a complex program we have to draw the line somewhere. In this program the line is drawn as: the player you click on is the currently selected player, and that's the player's info/stats/range etc. that you see in all the other views, and only that player. If you want to see a different player then click on that player to select him, or use the 1), 2), and even 3) alternatives I gave in my last post.

I think your suggestion is a good one overall; it's almost always more useful to see as much info. as possible. But I need to weigh against screen space, complexity of the program, practicality of implementation, etc.

In discussing design pros/cons of features in such detail on this forum with you guys I think I've walked into a catch-22. I want to give full consideration for each suggestion and explain my thinking, but that will leave me open to disappointing you guys when I decide 'no'. When I decide 'yes' I'll be liked, 'no' then I may not be. I could take the noncommittal approach of just saying "interesting suggestion, thanks, we'll consider in the future", but that's just not me, I like to say one way or the other what I'm thinking and I think you guys hopefully will also appreciate hearing my full thoughts.

So, it is a good suggestion you gave, but I'm still leaning 'no'. Thanks, -RJ

Will you in a near futur approach the idea of "imported Hand History" from PT4's clip board for example ?

This suggestion has come up in the past but it's still not a clear 'yes' to me.

A reason is that 90%+ of the data in a hand history doesn't apply in PokerCruncher (or in any pure equity calc program). E.g., stack sizes and positions of the players, HUD stats, and betting action street by street and pot size. The only things that apply are Hero's hole cards and the board cards, and it's not cumbersome to enter these into the program. And you need to enter these in pieces in the program as you move along in the hand street by street as you do your analysis, not everything at once which is what an import command would do. And anyway the major work and analysis in this program is building ranges for the villains, street by street.

So then would an "import hand history" command really buy us much? I think for an import feature between two programs to make good sense, most of the data in the import-text (or all of it) should be compatible with and used by both programs. O.w. it isn't an apples to apples import. This applies outside of poker too e.g. if you're importing financial data from one program to another.

However even for importing just the hole cards and board cards, I can see some value there and I'll consider it but won't promise yet. Just to make sure we're on the same page in terms of the text syntax, can you please send me an example of one of your hand histories "from PT4's clip board" (either here in this thread or in a PM).
Thanks, -RJ

That is precisely where you could make a huge leap forward and cut the grass beneath the feets of Flopzilla and Combonator.

Imagine that you can use that info, and now let's say V on turn bet 50% of the pot. PokerCruncher could tell us what is the minimum defence frequency we need and how it relate into our range in terms of combos, instantly.

It would be very nice.

Or another scenario, we bet pot on Turn, now Pokercruncher can tell us what is our bluff threshold % in terms of combos we need to not overbluff and how it relates to our range now.

Those could be very cool options.

Yes it's not that difficult to do this manually but how efficient would it be to have it all in the same software. I already build a excel sheet for that but i would much prefer to have it built in PokerCRuncher for example.

I got a question about Heat Map for the next card.

When we do it "to the Turn" i do understand that it tells us which cards in the 49 left are good or bad for our equity.

When we do it from flop "to the River" is it the same principle except that it calculates every Turn possible match with every river possible from those Turn ?

Yes it's the same principle in both the 1 card to go case and in the 2 cards to go case.

I wouldn't have worded it exactly as you did i.e. "every Turn possible match with every river possible from those Turn", but I'm pretty sure I understand what you mean and that's correct, that's what it does.

The way I'd explain it is: say you have 3 flop cards entered. DealTo = River. So there are 2 (unknown) cards to go. To calculate the next card heat map, this feature will do 49 sub-calculations, one sub-calculation for each possible Turn card. In each sub-calculation, there will be 4 board cards assigned (up til the Turn), and 1 card to go (the River of course).

This is the way it has to work to do what the feature says it does, "This feature shows how each possible next board card (for the turn or river) changes the equity of the currently selected (clicked) player.".

You can verify this behavior yourself in the app by calc'ing the heat map for the 2 cards to go case, then save the heat map text offline. Then manually assign a Turn card, calculate, and compare the equity with the equity for this Turn card in the heat map text you saved offline.

Thanks for sending more feature suggestions. I appreciate the thinking and discussion, because every now and then I decide 'yes' and the program improves.

But I don't think your latest two suggestions are a good fit for this program (import a hand history, analyze betting actions). This program is an equity calculator, not a decision EV analysis program. The latter is a complex topic, it isn't a simple little add-on feature if you want to do it right. One reason is, importing a hand history isn't enough, we'll also need to be able to manually enter chip stacks, betting actions on each street, etc., which is a ton of new UI. To do this fully is out of the scope of this program, which is an equity calculator.

The other programs you mention also take this approach e.g. having one program that's an equity calculator, and another program that's a decision EV engine (e.g. CREV).

O.w. a program becomes an open-ended grab-bag of features that people will suggest over time. But I as a product designer have to draw lines to keep the features robust and on target for the mission of the program.

Re. "you could make a huge leap forward and cut the grass beneath the feets of Flopzilla and Combonator" -

I disagree. Adding more and more features that aren't in the original scope/vision of the program isn't making a leap forward, it's just adding more stuff in there. Imo a leap forward is if a program finds a way to do a basic thing that's in the original mission in a better way. E.g., and I'm just making stuff up here, 3-D ranges, instead of just 2-D. I have no idea what that means, it's just made up stuff, but that would be a leap forward imo because ranges and range editing are the original scope of this kind of program.

I do agree that your betting analysis feature suggestion is of course useful, and cool, but just isn't part of this program's original mission, and I have to draw lines.

Thanks for continuing to use this program and for sending suggestions, even though I may not implement all of the suggestions. -RJ

Hey,

Is there a way to only select a specific suit. Maybe i completely missed the train ont his one but when i just want Aces suited in spades for example, what i do is clicking 2 times on AXs and then remove the suits i dont want.

Is there a way to start by selecting the suit then clicking on the hand you want ?

Yes, this program already has a fast way to do this (all versions of this app do).

(1)
Say we're starting clean with an empty range.
SHIFT+click on a cell e.g. AKs (this selects the cell; note, just select, not add).
Click the SpadeSpade button in the 4x4 suits grid.

That's it, this adds just 1 combo AceSpadeKingSpade.

For your example "when i just want Aces suited in spades for example", *multi-select* a row/column/etc. of cells first:

(2)
Say we're starting clean with an empty range.
Hold down the SHIFT key and mouse-drag across the range of cells AKs .. A2s.
Click the SpadeSpade button in the 4x4 suits grid.

This adds all the Spade suited Aces in one shot. You can look at the range's text and # of combos (12) to confirm.

This section of the tutorial shows how to do this, iPhone screenshots but same idea.

Also see posts #144 and #145 in this thread.

Hey RJ,

When we enter range vs. range and look for hits on flop, then we select hit parts into our range to filter them is there a way to select, let's say [backdoor FD] then removing some hands from that selections ? As if i select [backdoor FD] it will select all the [backdoor FD] but let's say i just want [backdoor FD/Over cards] and removes all the rest.

So you want the combination stat "BackdoorFlushDraw & TwoOvercards". This program does have about a dozen combination stats i.e. "FlushDraw & ..." and "Pair & ..." at the bottom of the Stats view, but your specific desired stat isn't one of them. There are many dozens of possible combinations of stats; I included what I thought would be the most common combination stats.

For your specific case I'd simply do the filter operation twice, first filter on the "Backdoor Flush Draw" stat, then calc and filter again on the "Two Overcards" stat. Then copy the resulting hand range text, and then you can paste the text (with a comma first) at the end of a previous subrange's text that you had generated and build your new subrange piece by piece in this way. I use the first 10 quick-save range slots for such subrange-building use so I can go back and forth to various points/iterations of my work.

Or instead of using the Filter button twice, for the second step you can just manually remove the cells/hands you don't want.

Also just fyi for the "Filter" button, note that SHIFT+<Filter> behaves in the opposite filter direction. The Filter "?" button has details; may help in the future. The quick-load and quick-save pulldown buttons also have e.g. SHIFT and CTRL modifier keys for use in range building work. The button tooltips and help screens have full info.

Hey RJ,

As always thanks for taking the time to answer my many questions. Your answer/work around is good but what i was really saying is this:

Take a look a the picture i provided. What if we could hove over a certain part of our range like 2-card backdoor flush draws, for example, and kind of "lock" the specific stats when we hove over then we could go into the hand matrix and deselect what we dont want to filter going to the next street. Would it be feasible ?


https://ibb.co/fsjs9F

I think this is a good suggestion for filtering/editing ranges; took a couple of days to think about what I can do here. I have a longer term plan and a shorter term plan.

(1)
Longer-term:
This is similar to the "range layering" idea I proposed some months ago to better handle subranges (I didn't like people's other suggestion for this: a separate color for each subrange, as I thought that would be color overkill and confusing and also not flexible enough a solution anyway due to hand combos resolution and weights).

In your example there's the main-layer which is the original range. Then there's a filter-layer where you're working on filtering the range, perhaps with some additional manual edits on top. When you're done with your filtering work, you can save the filter-layer as your final filtered range.

I think this is a full solution but it's complex, it's like in Photoshop where you can compose an image layer by layer, so I've had it on my to-do for more longer term thinking. I think this is still longer-term in my plans, because the current solution in the app, save each "layer" / subrange into one of the 100 range slots and do your work in the separate slots, works to handle both subranges and filtering, but it is a more heavyweight and not as slick a solution.

(2)
Shorter-term: (on the order of weeks timeframe)
I think with a couple of small improvements to how the range grid's cells are selected (selected = dimmed color), we can get most of the way there on your suggestion fairly easily/quickly:

a) When you're mousing-over a stat, that stat's cells turn to red color in the range grid (as shown in your good pic). A simple improvement is that when you move the mouse off of the stat, those red cells will all become selected cells (dimmed color). This will let us do further things on these cells (like remove some of them, with b) below, or edit their combos further using the 4x4 Suits grid).

b) In the range grid, currently SHIFT+click selects the cell you clicked on (dimmed color). The improvement will be to allow very general multi-cell selection: if you then SHIFT+OPT+click (note the OPT) on *another* cell, that cell will become selected too. It will behave as a toggle i.e. select and un-select. This will allow us to select an arbitrary group of cells, even if they're not right next to each other. For your example, after step a), we can then just SHIFT+OPT+click on the cells that we don't want to operate on e.g. AKs...A2s, etc. And then either use the "Remove" button to remove the remaining selected cells, or use the 4x4 Suits grid to click twice and remove specific combos on the remaining selected cells.

I know I wrote a lot of details here, but overall: good editing / filtering suggestion. I'll do something shorter-term to improve this. The longer-term range layering plan, that would be great but I won't promise it yet.
Thanks, -RJ