08-29-2013 , 11:06 AM
Hi again,

alright, we have looked into your questions and suggestions. Thanks for the patience!

Tschinga-Tschanga:
1. With the use of schemas, you can build own trees of hand strengths. For example, you might put up something like:

Flushdraw
- Pair

, so that you can get the conditional probability of a Pair under the assumption that it is a flushdraw, or in other words: How probable is it that the hand is a pair, when it is a flushdraw. Also, you can create custom combodraws or create a narrowed down schema, which computes faster than the basic schema. Of course, not many users need this but it is a possibility to customize your software.

2. The update archive content is supposed to be pasted into the current PokerRanger folder, so that all changed files are overwritten, as it is only an update and no standalone application archive. However, we think about changing this.

czGLoRy:
Personally, I do not use the cost of call concept but another system: In the case that we win, we will gain 25 + 100 = 125; in the case that not, we will lose 17.5 + 82.5 = 100. This leads to the formula: 63.43% * 125 - 36.57% * 100 = 42.72 (not 42.73 because PokerRanger calculates with higher precision internally).

So, I am afraid that I can only refer you to this formula and not correct your one. However, if you like this format, you might hover over the color fields like EV P1 and EV P2. For each line, you will get a hover with all the maths behind.

KelvinKe:
At the moment, it is not. But it seems implementable, so we might look into this, I have noted it.

i love my cat:
I am afraid, this exceeds the possible functions PokerRanger offers, as the reaction to the reaction (Player2's fold in this case) is fixed as fold or call. However, you could turn the actions around: You could use Player1 as first action player and let him ship. Then, you can define, what ranges Player2 will fold or call. Of course, this limits the action because Player1 will always bet.

More cascaded actions are planned for the future, which will probably lead to a tree solution like offered in CardrunnersEV.

We apologize again and are going to look into this forum more often manually, without any notification message.

Thanks for your interest and if you have follow-up questions, do not hesitate to contact us here, in our official support forum or via mail or skype.

Have a nice day,
Eisflamme
09-04-2013 , 04:14 AM
I can't understand what I'm doing wrong. I want to choose the range anyFD+all 2pairs+all gutshots or better (including all OESD), but when I put "select'' the PokerRanger doesn't react.

09-04-2013 , 05:48 AM
Hi iSkyNick,

I think, the misunderstanding here is that all of the three areas are combined. So, you are currently trying to select all hands that are "anyFD+all 2pairs+all gutshots or better (including all OESD)" at the same time, so each hand has to be a FD, a 2pair and a gutshot or better simultaneously. However, this condition is not true for any hand on that board.

So, I would recommend changing "Overwrite" to "Add" and subsequently use select with the following options:
1) FD
2) 2Pair
3) All gutshots or better (including all OESDs)

while each of the other areas (stressed by you via red boxes) keep their basic values "-". That way, your end result will contain all of the hands which I suppose you wish to select.

Thank you very much for your question and best regards,
Eisflamme
09-04-2013 , 12:12 PM
So I follow the first step but the program adds some strange hands that weren't in the main range.
09-04-2013 , 05:07 PM
Hi again,

the selectors make a completely new selection. If you only want to include hands that are in the selected range, I recommend creating a group by clicking on the box on the upper right corner with the number 1. Then, the selectors' output is restricted to the parent range or main range.

Thank you again and best regards!
Eisflamme
09-11-2013 , 04:34 PM
Hi, Eisflamme!
Can you help me better understand the tab "EV/FE Calculations"? The main problem is that I do not always understand when I have to fill numbers in the fields "Deadmoney". So I'm afraid of making a mistake when I'm trying to analyze some spots.

1. 3-bet/fold line
40bb player does an openraise 2.5bb (22+,ATs+,KJs+,QJs,JTs,T9s,AJo+,KQo), I 3-bet him 6.5bb (AKo) and he makes 4-bet against me with all his stack (JJ+,AKs,AKo) and folds the other hands. We both are out of blinds.

So,
Pot Before First action - 4bb (2.5bb openraise + 1.5bb)
Stacksize P1 - 93.5bb (100bb - 6.5bb after 3-bet)
Stacksize P2 - 37.5bb (40bb - 2.5bb after openraise)
P1's Post Size - 0.00
P2's Post Size - 2.5bb (his openraise)
3-Betsize To 6.5bb
4-Betsize To 40 bb (so all villain's s stack is in the pot)

2. The 4-bet line but the villain is on BB. I have 40bb stack and the villain has 39bb stack after posting BB. So I make an openraise 2.5bb (AKo), he 3-bet me 6.5bb (TT+,AQs+,KQs,AQo+). I do 4.bet with my AKo for all villain's stack and he calls me with (TT+,AKs,AKo) and folds the other hands (AQs,KQs,AQo).

Pot Before First action - 9.5bb (2.5bb openraise + 5.5bb 3-bet + 1.5bb)
Stacksize P1 - 37.5bb (40bb - 2.5bb after openraise)
Stacksize P2 - 33.5bb (40bb - 1bb after posting BB - 5.5bb after 3-bet)
P1's Post Size - 2.5 (my openraise)
P2's Post Size - 5.5bb (his 3-bet)
4-Betsize To 39 bb

Did I any mistakes in these calculations?
09-12-2013 , 07:33 AM
Hi iSkyNick,

I suppose you mean "pot before first action" by deadmoney. And yeah, it is sometimes confusing, I'm afraid. This position holds the currently active deadmoney, i.e. the passive deadmoney (for example the previous street's pot) plus the sizes of the investments of the players prior to the currently analyzed action. That means:

If we are at the flop and preflop has ended with a final pot of, let's say, 1.5+7+7 = 15.5 BB (e.g. UTG raises to 3, MP 3-bets to 7, SB/BB fold, UTG calls).

If we want to analyze a bet action at the flop, "pot before first action" is simply 15.5 bb. If we want to analyze a raise, "pot before first action" is 15.5 + betsize (bet is active deadmoney from the view of the action "raise"). And if we want to analyze a 3-bet, "pot before first action" is 15.5 + betsize + raise size and so on. First action simply refers to the action below the grey bar with the label "First Action".

1. almost correct

You only have to subtract the investments prior to the "first action" from the stack sizes (you can also hover over the input fields for that information). The first action is "3-bet" here, so Player1's stack size is simply 100bb. However, as P2's raise size is the limiting factor, this does not affect your result in this case.

All other variables are perfectly fine.

2.
Pot Before First Action: correct
Stacksize P1: correct
Stacksize P2: correct
P1's Raise Size: correct
P2's Raise Size: this is a raise to not by, so it's 6.5bb
4b Size: this is also a raise to and therefore 40bb; villain has 39bb after his posting, but this is considered by PokerRanger, all post/bet/raise/x-bet sizes are always "to". Of course, in your case it was capped to 39bb because of the 3bet size of 5.5bb instead of 6.5bb.

You can always double-check: The 4-bet size spinbox is capped by the maximum. Of course, in your scenario it was capped to 39 because with a 3bet size of 5.5bb and a rest stack of 33.5, the complete stack size of player2 would have been 39bb instead of 40bb.

I understand that this might be confusing. There is some significant simplifications planned for the future. However, you have done nearly anything perfectly.

Hopefully, I could help you. If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to continue asking!

Thanks a lot for your interest and have a nice day,
Eisflamme
09-12-2013 , 07:25 PM
Thank you for a such detailed and friendly answer

But I have another question about the second situation where the villain is on BB. I choose the same spots from my DB and import it to your program and look what I've found:

Hand

The same hand imported to your programm

Pay attention to the rest of the villain's stack after our openraise. Your program and HM show different values. Could this fact change the value of our EQ and our FE, so EV of our line too? Or it doesn't matter and HM and PR show the same situation by different ways?

Thank you!
09-13-2013 , 03:23 AM
Hi again,

this indeed seems to be incorrect, although it should change nearly nothing about the EV (Equity stays unchanged, anyway).

It this case, it seems that the BB is not taken into account. Some hand history formats do not show this, so that PR cannot use it.

My guess is that you use the "txt" button from HEM to export? This leads to an uncomplete hand history. I would suggest that you use the hand history list, right-click on a hand there and click "copy to clipboard (without stats)". This way, all the relevant information should be exported.

If that still does not work, it would be great if you could send your hand history to us, so that we could check what the issue might be.

Thank you very much and all the best,
Eisflamme
09-13-2013 , 03:53 AM
Hi, again!

I use the "copy to clipboard" button.

I think it is the same "copy to clipboard (without stats)", am I right?

Here you can download the hand history.
09-13-2013 , 04:08 AM
Hi again,

thanks for the hand history, my import shows the same, although the BB is recognized, so that it really seems to be a bug.

Hopefully, this does not impair your experience with PokerRanger too much. It seems to be a blind-related issue and, even then, does not occur with every hand history. Also, it only seems to influence the stack sizes, so it does not matter at all, if there are no all-ins involved (or the mistaken-stack-size player has the bigger stack anyways).

We have noted this and will correct it with future updates, thank you a lot!

Best regards,
Eisflamme
09-17-2013 , 04:39 PM
Hi, Eisflamme! It's me again

I would like to express two wishes regarding the use of your program.

1. When I try to use the other variant in the hands analysis, the program resizes the window far beyond the monitor. I noted this in the screenshot. This is very inconvenient. I think this is due to the fact that program records the all hands instead of shorthand notation like 22 +; AQo +, A2s+ and so on.

2. When I import the hand that came to the showdown on the river, I'm trying to set the villain's range on the turn, but the program specifies the range according to the whole board. I hope I'm clearly described. This is also seen in the screenshot. This is inconvenient because I have to remove the river card then set the range and after that fill the river card again although I noted that analyze the hand on the turn.

Best regards,
iSkyNick
09-18-2013 , 04:06 AM
Hi iSkyNick, good to hear from you

1. oh yes, this is indeed inconvenient, noted!
2. Noted, as well. I think, a solution for this might be to offer check boxes for the board cards in the hand selection dialog. That way, when unchecking cards, they will be ignored for the selection process.

Quote:
This is inconvenient because I have to remove the river card then set the range and after that fill the river card again although I noted that analyze the hand on the turn.
I see but this way, the range given the river card on the board will only "hide" the discounted combinations in range hovers or combination calculations, they are still in the range but just not used for calculations. If you remove the river card again, the discounted hands will be there again.

Just mentioning this, so that you know that your current workaround is working.

And please do not think that PokerRanger is in sleep mode because of the lower update frequency. Some refactoring work is still ongoing which changes major parts of the backend. This takes some time, but all the suggestions here are neatly written down.

Thank you again for your great feedback and have a nice day!
Eisflamme
09-23-2013 , 01:06 PM
Hi, Eisflamme! How are you doing?

I can't understand what exactly "highcard" means? Can you describe this hand strength?

09-23-2013 , 01:45 PM
Hi iSkyNick,

I'm fine, I hope you are, too?

Highcards are simply all the hands which have no other hand strength. So, everythin below pair is highcards, even if it yields a draw or something. That way, each hand of a range can be found in some category in the "made hands" area, although high cards are not really made hands. This position could also be seen as the "remainder" position for all non-made-hands.

Hopefully, that helped you to figure this hand strength out.

Thanks a lot for your interest and best regards,
Eisflamme
09-23-2013 , 09:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSkyNick
I can't understand what exactly "highcard" means? Can you describe this hand strength?
iSkyNick, think of hands like JTo on a 632 rainbow board. All you have is J high.
10-18-2013 , 05:23 AM
Hi,

just wanted to announce that there are free public coachings in German (October 22nd) and English (October 20th) at PokerStrategy.com. I cannot link to them but more information can be found in the news of their homepage.

We would be very glad to welcome a lot of you there!
Have a nice day,
Eisflamme
10-24-2013 , 04:53 PM
Those videos are online now, too, on PokerStrategy.com

Best regards,
Eisflamme
11-10-2013 , 08:24 AM
Purchased the software and like it so far. Little help please...

I am trying to use the "Only Best" in the Equity Tables. In Player 1 I put all the hands, and in Player 2 I put in all the hands. I then put 0 in the first "Only Best" field and then 10% in the second "Only Best" field. The resulting range is 114 combinations and 8.60% of range. Why does this not give me a 10% range? What range does it actually give me? It can't be the top 10% of the 169 unique hands as it returns 18 distinct hands (which is not 10% ldo). What I am looking for is the top 10% of hands by combination count. Is there anyway to do this?
11-10-2013 , 11:43 AM
Hi D. Andrew,

glad that you like the software!

This is a known precision issue. PokerRanger only takes into account the packed hands (like AKo/AKs) for the "best x %" function. Because of that, the percentage function is not very precise at the moment. We are working on this.

I am afraid, there is no more precise technique to narrow down the range by equity at the moment. We will fix this with one of the next updates.

Thank you very much for your interest and best regards!
Eisflamme
11-15-2013 , 12:17 PM
Hi,

there is a new major update out now! It contains new features, a ton of bug fixes and a changes user interface, which uses new colors, new card icons and a lot more.

We definitely recommend you to check it out!

Have a lot of fun with this update and a nice day,
Eisflamme
11-15-2013 , 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eisflamme

2. The update archive content is supposed to be pasted into the current PokerRanger folder, so that all changed files are overwritten, as it is only an update and no standalone application archive. However, we think about changing this.
I still dont know how to update this.
When I click 'OK' when asked to update, I get the "couldnt write in update.zip" message. When I want to update by runnig the pokerrangerupdater.exe , it goes to ~80% and freezing out.
11-15-2013 , 06:53 PM
Hi,

normally, you can just paste the content of Update.zip to your PokerRanger directory and overwrite all files if asked to. If this does not work, you can just get the new archive and paste it there. No data will be lost that way.

Apart from that your errors sound like a permission problem. It is important that the updater is run as administrator. What Windows do you use? Also, your directory should only contain Latin characters (a Cyrillic path might lead to trouble, for example).

Please let us know if any of our suggestions work for you. If not, we could also establish a Skype/Teamviewer session to solve your issues.

Best regards,
Eisflamme

Last edited by Eisflamme; 11-15-2013 at 07:17 PM.
11-15-2013 , 08:04 PM
thanks it worked. I still use xp

Btw after update I lost my license and needed to use the license file again. is that normal?
11-15-2013 , 08:07 PM
Hi again,

glad that it worked. I am still not sure what the problem with the update is. I have tested it on a Windows XP system and Windows asks for an admin username and password. If I do not convey this user data, I will get the same errors, so it seems to be some kind of a permission problem.

But the other way seems to work, anyway.

And yes, it is normal that PokerRanger asks for your license key again. The reason for this is that we exchanged a framework, so that the license system works another way now. That necessitates that the serial key is provided again, we are afraid. However, this should not be an issue, as PokerRanger will memorize it from this time onwards.

Thanks again for your feedback!
Best regards,
Eisflamme

m