bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Questions and discussion about PokerTracker 4 for Windows

Moderators: WhiteRider, kraada, Flag_Hippo, morny, Moderators

bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby marvin » Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:27 pm

1) in PT4, title of "Dbet turn no 3bet pot" is like "Donk F (non-3B)" (F intead T)
2) definition of squeezed players in pt4 seems different from def of squeezed in PT3. look this action:
P4 limp, P3 raise, P2 Cold-Call, P1 e P0 fold, SB 3Bet, BB call, P4 fold, P3 fold, P2 fold.
in PT3 you said were squeezed 3 players: P4, P3, P2 (i asked it on my post a lot of time ago). Also the limper was squeezed and the call of BB didnt disactivate the squeeze.
reading the detalied descrition of squeeze defending (written in Raise PF squeze stat in PT4), in this action nobody is squeezed after the call of BB (why someone called the 3bet). in this new action:
P4 limp, P3 raise, P2 Cold-Call, P1 e P0 fold, SB 3Bet, BB fold, P4 fold, P3 fold, P2 fold. P4 is not squeezed why he is not the OR or the cold caller).
Is like i have understood (Pt4 definition is different from Pt3) or PT4 is like PT3 (and your description might be more accurate)?
3) in PT4, definition of raise River donk bet speaks about previous street agressor (then who raise the turn Cbettor is previous street agressor???). it is not like the definition of PT3 where we know the donk is applied only if cbet sequenze is called till the previous street. is your error in PT4 description or do you have changed definition
marvin
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:17 am

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby WhiteRider » Tue May 01, 2012 3:13 am

1) Thanks - I'll report this to the development team to be corrected.

2) Please attach the hand histories for these hands to a Support Ticket with a link to this thread and I'll confirm the requirements for a squeeze with the development team.

3) EDIT: I'm told that a donk does require a cbet on the previous street.
WhiteRider
Moderator
 
Posts: 54025
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:06 pm
Location: UK

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby marvin » Tue May 01, 2012 4:54 am

about squeeze definition i havent hh. my doubt are why we discussed a lot on squeeze (see https://www.pokertracker.com/forums/vie ... 18&t=30089.
and we had the conclusion that:
1) not necessary the call of the OR must be a cold call. (in pt4 definition is explicitated "cold call".
2) in action like : P4 limp, P3 raise, P2call, P1 3bet (squeze) then P4 is facing squeeze (why he had put money volunatry in the pot), P0 not faces squeeze why he was not entered in the pot before the 3bet.
if i misunderstood all that discussion, pls clarify now. if i understood correctly at that moment, is obvious that now in PT4 the things are described differently. pls can you tell if...
a) i misunderstood something about PT3?
b) I was ok on PT3 but now PT4 is different
c) PT4 is like PT3 (i was ok on PT3) and you need to be more clear about PT4.
in particular i wish know if in PT4
1) someone after the first caller of squeeze move is yet facing squeeze. i.e. P4 raise, (OR), P3 call, P2 squeeze, P4 (OR) call. now P3 is facing the squeeze? (in description of squeeze def in PT4 it seems no, but i dont think is correct.
2) P5 limp, P4 limp, P3 raise, P2call, P5 limp-3bet, this is a squeeze in PT4? (we said in past post about PT3 that limp-squeeze was possible). in this same action, if P5 3bet is a squeeze, P4 is facing squeeze? (why he put money in the pot, also if that money was only 1bb)
----
other questions:
in PT4 is there autorating?
n PT4 what stats is taken instead ROI of PT3?
marvin
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:17 am

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby marvin » Tue May 01, 2012 5:00 am

WhiteRider wrote:

3) EDIT: I'm told that a donk does require a cbet on the previous street.


i said that why i saw detailed description of PT4 stat "Call R Donk Bet": " bet out of position before the previous aggressor had a chance to act." generally previous agressor can be different from PFA
marvin
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:17 am

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby marvin » Tue May 01, 2012 5:19 am

how is considered EP, MP e LP flags in PT4 (changing the # of players at the table)? like it was in PT3 (ie: 4 players BTN = LP, CO = EP. 5 players BTN, CO = LP, P2 = EP)...or things are different?
marvin
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:17 am

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby marvin » Tue May 01, 2012 7:16 am

i post 3 message in row, but pls read them all and not only the last :mrgreen:
marvin
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:17 am

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby WhiteRider » Wed May 02, 2012 3:46 am

Auto rate has been removed from PT4, but we have a much more powerful replacement planned.
PT4 also has ROI - are you looking for something else?

marvin wrote:how is considered EP, MP e LP flags in PT4 (changing the # of players at the table)? like it was in PT3 (ie: 4 players BTN = LP, CO = EP. 5 players BTN, CO = LP, P2 = EP)...or things are different?

Up to 6 players there are separate positions: BB, SB, button, cutoff, MP, EP. EP is only used when there are 6 players or more, and MP only when there are 5 or more. For 7 or more players EP and MP will cover more than one position, but I don't have the exact groupings to hand.

I haven't had confirmation of the stat questions yet.
WhiteRider
Moderator
 
Posts: 54025
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:06 pm
Location: UK

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby marvin » Wed May 02, 2012 4:26 am

about roi i was searching in wrong place! (cash instead tourn). about squeeze def ill wait your news. about flag (grouping 7+ players) EP and MP i wish have detailed info if you can, ty.
marvin
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:17 am

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby kraada » Wed May 02, 2012 8:22 am

With 7 players there is 1 EP and 2MP positions, 8 players 2 of each, 9 players 3 EP 2 MP and 10 players 3 of each.
kraada
Moderator
 
Posts: 54430
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:32 am
Location: NY

Re: bugs on stats and doubt on definition

Postby marvin » Wed May 02, 2012 6:10 pm

tyvm, ill wait about squeeze.
can you explain pls how works this expression from "cnt_p_3bet_def_opp_when_open_raised_ip"?
sum(if[char_length(cash_hand_summary.str_aggressors_p) >= 3 and cash_hand_player_statistics.flg_p_3bet_def_opp AND cash_hand_player_statistics.flg_p_first_raise AND substring(cash_hand_summary.str_aggressors_p from 3 for 1)::int > cash_hand_player_statistics.position, 1, 0])
really i need explain only about
char_length(cash_hand_summary.str_aggressors_p) >= 3
and
substring(cash_hand_summary.str_aggressors_p from 3 for 1)::int >
why about other expression i know how them work.
marvin
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:17 am

Next

Return to PokerTracker 4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 118 guests