PDA

View Full Version : retarded effective stacks filter



professorpain
09-16-2010, 12:45 PM
I filter for effective stacks >50bb and the first hand that comes up is me in the Button with 100bb and the SB has 20bb and the BB has 100bb.

HOW IN THE EFFING WORLD IS THAT >50bb effective stacks?

Do the creators of HEM not know what the word effective stacks means? it means that all stacks or all remaining stacks in the hand have more than >50bb...

thus for it to be > 50bb effective stacks...

button, sb, bb all need more than > 50bb

Is there anyway that I can create a custom report or filter so that every player has more/less/equal to a certain amount of bb's?

netsrak
09-17-2010, 03:52 AM
Which HM Version are you using?

Can you please post a screenshot of your filter settings and attach the hand which is filtered wrong?

professorpain
09-18-2010, 09:59 AM
Are you serious dude? I came here a year ago and they told me it was on the to do list...

u seriously need an example?

level?

professorpain
09-18-2010, 10:03 AM
go into YOUR hem database and filter for effective stacks.. then take a look at the hand histories and you will find that all you see is god damn short stacks everywhere you look.

professorpain
09-18-2010, 10:11 AM
. i will post screencaps soon

professorpain
09-18-2010, 10:37 AM
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/3373/54878024.jpg

http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/9959/68268825.jpg

professorpain
09-18-2010, 10:49 PM
???

The Minder
09-18-2010, 11:24 PM
Feel your pain, Pain.

If you go into Cash Games > vs Players and try and filter for just Omaha or just HE see what you get. Well, I'll tell you anyway, you get all game types. The filter doesn't work. I reported this months ago and it still isn't fixed. Makes you wonder what the developers do with their time.

professorpain
09-19-2010, 01:27 PM
anyone who works here can give me an update on this issue?

netsrak
09-20-2010, 03:02 AM
I forwarded this threat to B-Money but he is offline until wednesday at least.

professorpain
10-01-2010, 01:23 PM
any update?

professorpain
10-08-2010, 07:00 PM
???????????

B-Money
10-09-2010, 12:52 AM
Hi,

Sorry for the delay. I have this on the todo list. I even got a nice small 13 hand sample where coders can see what's going on quickly. When will it be fixed? Hard to say. I'd be lying if I promised it in a week or two. Seems like we're always putting out small fires everywhere and we have to dedicated resources on issues that are effecting the most customers. Best case is a couple weeks but a few site updates are sure to come causing other issues to delay general development.

Rest assured it's documented and in queue.

GL,
-B

professorpain
10-10-2010, 05:29 AM
thanks

professorpain
12-30-2010, 11:06 PM
Any Update?

morny
12-31-2010, 12:19 AM
Yeah we actually looked into this and had an internal meeting about it, on first glance it does look like a bug and was submitted as such but we thought about the implications.

Its quite subjective but personally i like it the way it is for one main reason, if you have it ignore the hands where there is a shortstack in it then giving how many shortstacks there are around you would dilute the total hands returned a lot. I don't want to filter out a hand where i was in a pot with a big stack because there happened to be a shortstack at the table still involved in the hand.

We might have a monster battle and the shortie folds and i would never see this hand. Technically it is a fine line though, the effective stacks between me and BB is 100bb but the shortie complicates it, is the effective stack 20bb or 100bb or both. Its both really when your in a multiway pot, if you think the effective stack is 20bb and thus should be discounted does this mean you would play the hand like you had 20bb?, i know i wouldnt so i think the real definition of "effective stacks" is applicable to a HU situation. Just like its quite difficult to tell someone how to play a hand in that scenario, the normal rules that would apply change as its a multiway pot.

Anyway after consulting several people within our team we feel its more useful to keep it as it is, we believe changing it will upset a lot more people but we do value your opinion and understand that you do have a valid concern its just we have to make a call on which is more relevant and at this time we feel its more relevant to leave it unchanged although we do accept it isn't a perfect solution for a complicated scenario.