This has never been a high-demand request, it affects a small minority of our users. Our goal with PT4 was to focus on issues that affect the majority of our users, not the minority.... thats not shocking, in fact in my opinion it would be shocking if Pokertracker 4 was developed not using this strategy. Adjusted time is an issue that can be addressed as an afterthought, it is not a high priority for pre-beta development. I know this affects you and this must be disappointing to see that this feature which you wanted was not included - but given time we will add a solution to address this problem if needed. I say if needed because the proper way to address this issue is by working with the network to find a solution in their hand history - which is our intention.

We have over 40 alpha testers who have been using PT4 since the summer, and over 300 beta-preview testers. The vast majority of bugs were already fixed during the beta preview, we are tying up the loose ends now before the full public beta will be released. During the public beta we will be adding new features, documentation, and addressing any undiscovered bugs. All in all, its a safe guess to assume that PokerTracker 4 will be available for sale before April - but that is only a guess. We will not commit to any sales dates until we are done with the beta process.

For what its worth, I can assure you that the beta preview is VERY stable... and in fact most testers have commented how it was more stable that PT3 or any of it's competitors when they went commercial. We are rather proud of that fact!

I am not sure, I asked Derek to respond to your question.

Looking forward to proving you wrong then! Just of our beta preview users, the positive feedback has been tremendous.

Although I predict we are looking at close to 3 months for commercial release, the truth is we will not rush to achieve this stage. Slow and steady wins the race, please be patient until we achieve that goal. In the meantime, you get to use PokerTracer 4 for free... that is a pretty good tradeoff IMO.

- TT

I'm glad to see the different stats, although of course it's easy enough to create homemade stats for such things (as I've personally done). I just wanna mention some considerations about the discussion of diference between the stats.

I liked the fact that you took the time to give reasoning behind the initial discussion, and to suggest that people might be looking at too small a sample size or skewing the results in some other way. Just gonna put forward the other side's arguments though. Rather than look at stats, there are logical reasons for why these stats can be useful to at least some degree.

The stats given: are you looking at two distinct stats here, or is there overlap? It should be "BB fold vs CO" compared to "BB fold vs BTN", not "fold vs LP" vs "BB fold vs BTN".

Having said that, more difference might be observed from the SB. From the BB, you can often call with a reasonable hand that you can't profitably 3bet - neither of which is a fold - whereas from SB people tend to call a lot less, so hand that aren't 3bet are more likely to become a fold, and adjust this stat. So just looking at the BB is flawed, I think.

Also bear in mind that it does depend on the games analysed. Difference in stakes, PLO, NLHE, CAP, etc, all change the dynamics. In CAP, for example, some players tend to 3bet or fold from the BB in addition to the SB, and so the fold %ages are a more direct reflection of the opener's RFI% in those games (and therefore more affected by BTN or CO differences).

Any set or subset of games where people have a larger difference between BTN and CO open should show more different results - in some games, the difference will be minimal, but in others it could be a lot more important. So looking at large, general samples may not show any useful information.

Anyway, I do agree that having the different stats is useful, so good work on that... sorry if this post is going off-topic somewhat but I felt it was worth saying. :-)

Can you make this available?

Will PT4 have relationships with third party developers who can have add-ons such as real-time stats, e.g., SPR, pot odds, M, number of big blinds (adjusted for antes), number of outs?

I'd really be interested in hearing your take on the pros/cons of each.

where? how? where do i sign up?
One of the developers updated the post just now, he said that PT4 does take care of time adjust. That's a good news for me.

One feature that neither PT or HEM has, and I will gladly go with the one that implements this is the following..............

Allow for manual entry of sessions/results for hands played live or on sites that are not uspported. This would allow for the program to be a full record of your total bankroll/results. As it is now I have a ton of hands, each with thorough session records, that I have to maintain on a seperate spreadsheet and compare to my d-base when looking at my historical results.

there would be no actual hands imported, but you could incorporate the session results into eveything else from a reporting/graphing perspective. All you would need the user to enter is:

Site/date/game/stakes/#hands/results.

Being able to import from a spreadsheet would be even better since that would be much quicker.

as a quick solution, you might want to look to write an XLT to transform your sheet into format that PT already understands. though i agree that to be able to export/import from at minimum CVS format, maybe a good idea.

We kindly request that comparisons are not made until PokerTracker 4 leaves beta because we are still in development, what you see today will change by the time we release commercially. We thank you for your understanding.

As long as the time zone is specified in the hand history both your and your friend's hands would be converted to GMT when imported. Thus if you looked at the two hands in the same database the times should line up properly. But many networks do not include time zone information - at which point we do not have a solution. It all depends on the data made available by the network in the hand history.

We try not to concern ourselves with what features HEM does or does not have - our focus is on providing features that our customers need regardless of what the competition does. With that said, I can confirm that we are looking into a manual entry solution, but this is not a guarantee that it will be implemented, and we do not expect this to be added before commercial release. Manual entry is a very complicated issue because if not done properly it will break the functionality of the PokerTracker data model, but we have some ideas that may work out.

We do not advise using this method, as it may cause inaccurate results during post game data analysis, spikes in winnings graphs when measured per hand, and many other issues. For example, when making a manual entry hand histories do not exist - leaving gaping holes in your data set. A similar issue occurs for bonuses or rakeback, and the issue become more complicated when accurately measuring bonus and rakeback earnings across both cash and tournaments. Given time PokerTracker will provide it's own solution, the best advice we can give is to wait for us to reach that goal.

very good point. In this case, it's easy to add a dialog asking user to supply the TZ that HH has. That info and accuracy will be user's responsibility.

A common theme in PT4 is the removal of esoteric preferences where possible, often this is a result of improved hand history formats provided by networks. We are slowly addressing these issues by lobbying the developers at the networks. The more complete the information set provided in the hand history, the easier the user experience is for PokerTracker users.

I would completely disagree with the approach - "slowly addressing" is just that - "slowly". I'm not sure why would i put my user's experience with _my_ product in direct relation to the desire of data provider to make system wide changes?
anyway it's OT. sorry.

We support over 20 networks, the lack of accurate time affect only a few of them, and in all cases this is a problem caused by the poker client, not PokerTracker.

Awesome to hear you are considering a manual tracking feature. I will def be trying out the public beta when available.

Since i play on Microgaming i was a litle disappointed to see the PT4, like PT3, don't work on Anonymous tables.

Why the decision to not support this tables? HM1/2 have this feature and apparently they are allowed to use by the network.

We have a very good working relationship with Microgaming, this good relationship helps us provide the tools players need while playing on Microgaming skins. Microgaming staff have asked us not to allow HUDs on their anonymous tables, to assure our relationship stays in good standing we complied with their request. I do not know why HEM allows Microgaming anonymous tables, we cannot speak for them, I was not aware that they supported anonymous tables until your post.

I just sent an email to Microgaming management to bring this topic up with them again in the hopes that their position has changed. If it has, then we will likely add support as soon as development resources become available. Thanks for asking!

I will not make it available. The reason I made the post was simply to point out that the reasons stated by PokerTracker aren't actually reasons at all. The only reason overlapping windows or moving window to another point on the screen is if your doing something like print screen to get an image of the table. Those types of problems are easily avoided since there are better ways of getting an image of the poker table and dont in themselves represent a problem.

There are however other problems. Depending on what info you are trying to get from the window and what part of the window you are "looking" at and how you are doing it, the program might break if you resize the window or if you change skins and so on. These thing are not a problem for me since I always play choosing only between a few different layouts and I dont change them. Under those conditions my approach works fine and is fairly easy to code and low maintainance but as a generic solution I think it would be terrible and a huge amount of work. This is also the reason it will never be a commercial or public app.

Mvh
Inga

Will you be able to use the new tournament tools for anything other than push fold?

Would be nice to have an easy way to calculate shoves over opens and things like that.

Would definitely lead to my use of PT4 over SNG wiz. Its something SNG wiz is severely lacking and I'm not really sure why.

Also, the UI for SNG wiz when inputting custom ranges seems to be a nightmare to me. Often if you want realistic ranges you have to go in and change the calling range, the overcalling range, the over over calling range,etc.

Every time individually.

SNG wiz is great, but I think if you guys do it right there is definitely room for improvement.

TT or whoever,

I took another look at PT4 today and it is missing some very key postflop stats. Others I talked to agreed and were pretty surprised they weren't in there already (esp about the first three stats). Here's a list:

Fold to Raise after Donk Bet - No idea why this isn't included, but it is a huge oversight. It should be further separated into 3+ bet and non 3+ bet pots. For flop/turn/river.

Fold to Raise after Probe Bet - Same as above. Should be 3+ bet and non 3+ bet pots and turn/river. Big oversight.

Fold to C/R after Float Bet - Same as the two above. Super useful stat. Dunno why it isn't there.

3-Bet Flop/Turn/River after C-Betting - There isn't any good stat for this. There is a 3-bet f/t/r and a 3-bet f/t/r after being check-raised, but these represent a lot of different situations and something more narrow is definitely needed as someone 3-betting a flop c/r of their cbet comes up quite a bit, but right now there is no good stat for it. As always, separating this into 3-bet and non 3-bet pots is best.

Fold to ReRaise after Raising CBet on F/T/R - Related to the above. How often someone will fold to a reraise after they raised a f/t/r cbet. Obviously way more relevant on the flop/turn, but can come up deep on the river. 3 bet and non 3 bet of course. Much more relevant in NLHE than other games.

The following stats are included, but for some reason aren't broken down into 3+ bet pots and non 3+ bet pots and there is often a big difference between the two:

Fold to Float Bet
Raise Float Bet
Float Bet
Fold to Probe Bet
Raise Probe Bet
Probe Bet


That's all I've noticed for now, but again I didn't take a very thorough look into the stats. I am 95% confident that none of those stats exist in the current build though.

I also didn't see an Open 4bet stat, but maybe I just missed it.

Good call, pretty much all of the "fold to raise after _____" stats are missing. I can only find fold to raise after cbetting. We definitely need same for floats, probes & donk bets.

Also, if you will be adding these, might as well add " 3bet/reraise to raise after ____" and "call raise after ______"

especially for flop donks.. some donk/call donk/raise or donk/fold.

Oh and one more thing. Regarding steal situations it is awesome that you guys are adding a "fold vs button steal" stat and "fold vs co steal stat", but there were a few more things missing.

Mostly, there is no good stat for how often someone folds to a 3-bet after stealing. Yes "fold to PF 3Bet after steal is there" but it isn't useful for situations where the CO steals (and to a lesser extent the BTN). It is lumping together folding to 3-bets from the BTN, SB, and BB vs a CO open and the SB and BB together after a BTN open. Especially Fold to BTN 3bet after CO open and Fold to BB 3bet after CO open are going to be way different in how often someone folds but it is impossible to have that show up in the HUD at the moment.

Such a super, super common PF spot that I'm surprised it isn't there. Even weirder by the fact I can find out how often someone 3-bets a CO open from the SB but I can't figure out how often someone folds their CO open after a SB 3bet.

I'm a hem user. For the hud stats on hem you have the ability to colour code the numbers in the hud stats between different values so you can assess if they are high or low quickly as we interpret shapes and colours quicker than we do numbers. I didn't use pt3 so I'm not sure if it had it, but I just thought it was a really cool, simple feature that added a lot to my experience of the product when playing multiple tables.

That option has always been in PT3, and is of course in PT4 as well. You can even colour stats based on the value of other stats, should you wish to (via the custom statistics mechanism).

--WhiteRider

How close is this to release?

How active are the devs at taking suggestions for improvements to the s/w currently for the upcoming version? (I'd like to see a few things like SPR, etc.)

How modable is the program?

How does PT3/PT4 compare to other programs on the market?

FWIW I grew up on PT2 and I'm a big fan of PT3, though I haven't used PT3 very much.

maybe change op to 11 years?