Hey MasterLJ, I'm just now seeing this. I have a question, if you're mid session, and the table becomes too short handed (IE you're playing FR and it gets down to 5 handed and the table is breaking down) is there an option to close the table and open a new one?

I apologize in advance if this has been asked/discussed already, thread is a lil tl;dr for me at the moment lol, will read it tomorrow. Very interested and thanks for your work on this.

Not yet, but it's something I've definitely kept in mind.

The problem is that there are too many directions to take a program like this. I have to nail down a core set of features and roll with it if I'm ever to release a beta.

I can manually get on a waitlist without having to wait until the scan is over? That would be good as often when a seat is made available at a table that has no-one on the waiting list there is a fight over who gets it first.

But auto waitlistlisting before a scan is finished would be even better, imo, even if it is only tables where the waitlist is zero.

Fair enough, understandable. Looking forward to the program

what is the eta for this?

Honestly, you should just turn this into a full scale Table Selection software and read our databases

I'm not sure I fully understand the question, but I'm going to take a crack anyway.

When you are waitlisted and the seat becomes available, it's yours 100% of the time you can respond within the given minute.

You can manually waitlist at any time although at this stage in the development I'd have to recommend against touching the lobby too much while the program is scanning or opening. The program is also only going to be able to detect which tables you've waitlisted based on the ones it waitlisted for you. Currently there is no ability to see which tables are waitlisted just by scanning the lobby.

Programs that control other programs are often the most difficult to create because your access to information is so limited. Often people have to resort to mimicing the state of the program that they are trying to control. For the majority of functions, this is what I'm doing.

Thanks. It is a great idea. Btw, just out of curiosity, what stats are important to you that would make you want to leave a table? Obviously, the number of players is important, but what else?

Probably going to be a few weeks to get a polished project. Beta should come reasonably soon.

It currently doesn't get any information about who is sitting at what table. If anything I'd go the other direction and include some of the functionality of the now defunct table of interest and other table management software.

I haven't tried to get data of the players sitting at the table yet, but the only way I can think of doing it (and I haven't spent much time thinking about it) would involve taking about a second per table in the scanning process. Right now I can scan 200 tables in 3ish seconds, maybe even less if I didn't care about being as precise as possible. Jumping to 3+ minute is unacceptable.

Certainly if I can come up with a better way to scan for players at the table I would gladly include it and of course link it to your databases etc. For now that's a future feature.

I just want a softare that will open tables and stuff like that; just throwing out ideas since the software is growing

For sure. I appreciate all the feedback from everyone!

Other than number of tables, 1 or more of the following would be useful.

Avg pot size - When this goes down game tends to suck
Table vpip - Sorta a long the same reasons as "avg pot size"
Avg stack size of the other players - Games suck when the table is full of a bunch of 50 bb stacks (40-100 blind tables for example)

Those are the key things I look for in table selection. And thats usually how I determine whether to stay at a table or close it/open a new one. Also, I'd happily pay/donate for a good piece of software like this.

I agree with those, but in practice there are some issues. I don't think you always want to instantly get up from a table just because VPIP momentarily dips. Also, there are those who play at stakes that don't have that many tables running as well.

But I guess having the option could never hurt.

I'll see what I can do to put that feature in this week.

Sorry, I meant the tables at the bottom of the filtered tab that are being added while the timer is running. Can we get on the waitlist for those automatically or manually if we choose, before the timer finishes?

The reason I ask this is because I can envision a situation where a table is displayed at the bottom of that tab and there is no-one on the waitlist and after 15 seconds someone leaves and 5 seconds later someone else has sat in. It is a constant annoyance to open a table that according to the lobby has 8 players and then find that I've been beaten to the seat. It happens all the time.

Whether you sit at the table or you waitlist is decided at opening time, not at scanning time. In fact, I don't even check the table information at all when I go to open the table. If you've selected a table to be "opened" it will either be opened or waitlisted.

And in any case the annoyances caused by the situation you describe would be taken care of by the program.

bump

Auto kill is huge. Do you have it set to only kill tables sitting out at? Also nice to kill ones we aren't at (sometimes table opens and gets stuck in stack without joining). Same with ones we try to start that no one joins. Eg I start session and start a 400nl table but once I get to 23 other tables with no one joining the hu one I will wantto close it and open a full game. One solution is to kill unused tables via hotkey or timer in addition to auto closing sat out ones.

is there going to be an PLO filter, or will it fall under "PL" on the filters?

Putting this project on the back burner for a while.

To be honest, I DLed the trial version of Table Scanner and it was lacking in a ton of areas. I've recently seen the full version and it's pretty legit as a table scanner and opener. I do think I'm taking my program in some different directions than TS, but the market seems pretty small (shortstackers really) and it's going to take a decent chunk of time to get everything polished and to add the new features I'd want to add to make it an essential tool alongside other scanners and TableNinja.

The problem is I have other projects going on at the same time so I have to ration my time in what makes the most sense. Right now it seems that to get this thing to market with useful features I'd be working for minimum wage.

If someone is dying to have this program PM me and we can chat, but I the costs will most likely be prohibitive for most. That said, I think it will be worth it for those who 14+ table at reasonable stakes.

I'd also entertain offers from other developers looking to use this code in their project. I'm really not that thrilled to go that route, but would be willing to talk.

This project was intended to be a starter project for me to move on to a bigger, better project and I figured there was a market for it. I'm not looking to make a ton, but was hoping to offset the time sunk, which was a lot of time.

I will definitely reconsider if there is strong enough interest/outcry. Demonstrations in the form of parades, preferably with circus animals and acrobats, will get extra points.

Thanks for all the support, check back here from time to time for updates.

;_;

i have so many similar thoughts regarding my program StackAndTile. i think its a great thing that you've come to your conclusion. i wish i could make a definitive decision for myself..

Your conclusion seems a bit premature IMHO. It's been exactly one month since you made this public and nobody has even used it yet. What you need is people to use it and then to talk about it. When my software was one month old, my prospects looked very dim. I also figured minimum wage was where I would be stuck. For me, it's been 4 months now and things continue improving. From a financial standpoint, it hasn't exactly been a windfall but I look at it more like a hobby and I am always psyched that people enjoy my invention. I'm very happy I stuck through the tough beginning - even if just for the experience I am gaining throughout all this.

In a lot of ways I completely agree with you SretiCent.

I know that people will find my program useful if I can get it into their hands, but it's going to take me large chunks of time to do that.

I'm pretty sure that down the road when I do have more free time I will be back to working on it just for the fun of it, but for now there are a few more pressing items.

tbh 100% honest, I feel like I've already coded and completed 95%+ of the difficult things for this project, which makes me kinda bored with it. I know that's odd, but I like to be challenged.

Thanks everyone for the advice.

A LOT of programmers are like this. Not too odd imo

Hehe yep, pretty much describes all of my projects started over a 10 year span, bar 2 or 3.

The last 20% will take 80% of total time, and it's all crappy mundane work, not the fun initial dev stuff. If you get a solid working demo in 1 week expect 2 months to ship it.

Most don't have that real desire to give it the big push.

haha exactly me too. I figure that's why a lot of us got in to coding, for me it's entirely the initial problem solving and going from idea can this even be done to proof-of-concept that is the fun part.

That happened to me a few times when I was younger. In fact, even with my recent software I started feeling that way and said to myself screw it, I'll make it beta now instead of when it's actually ready. Probably not a good idea but it worked out since people saying "WTF is this" re-sparked my motivation.