Seek counts Omaha hands as Hold'em?

Hey NCEdge!
HM 9.82 for obvious reasons :)


Since I am currently playing Hold'em and Omaha tables at the same time, I suddenly ran into the problem that I cannot work properly with definitions intended for Omaha, since Seek perceives Omaha hands as hold'em hands. Testing definitions for Omaha is almost impossible without this tool.

For example, I created a test base with only Omaha hands, and am trying to test the definition for Omaha. Def. game type (I specifically chose all types except NL Holdem):

https://i.imgur.com/ZqOQL2Q.png

Seek show nothing.

Then i change to:


https://i.imgur.com/zh5oBBJ.png

Result:
https://i.imgur.com/dfzGjZr.png

If this problem has not been fixed in the latest versions after 9.82, then I must say that it makes it impossible to test the definitions in the "Game Type" which are Omaha.
Of course, I can "cheat" by placing NL Hold'em as "Game type" when testing Definition - but not when the base consists of a mixture of Hold'em and Omaha hands, because Seek will show Holdem hands.
Quite a serious problem.

Ty.

Things are much worse, as it turned out - the problem is not limited to Seek. For the definitions to work for Omaha hands, their "Game Type" must be Holdem! One thing is not clear - no one uses NC for Omaha? Because it is impossible not to notice such a problem.

NCEdge disappeared somewhere. He was the only one who connected users with developers :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FALOs

Things are much worse, as it turned out - the problem is not limited to Seek. For the definitions to work for Omaha hands, their "Game Type" must be Holdem! One thing is not clear - no one uses NC for Omaha? Because it is impossible not to notice such a problem.

NCEdge disappeared somewhere. He was the only one who connected users with developers :(

---

Hi FALOs,

I apologize, I've been out sick. I'll get caught up on this issue and the others soon :)

I thought you were just tired of our complaints :) Hopefully it's better now. I wish you a speedy recovery!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FALOs

Things are much worse, as it turned out - the problem is not limited to Seek. For the definitions to work for Omaha hands, their "Game Type" must be Holdem! One thing is not clear - no one uses NC for Omaha? Because it is impossible not to notice such a problem.

NCEdge disappeared somewhere. He was the only one who connected users with developers :(

---

Hi FALOs,

I'm not sure if this is intentional or not. I loaded my old NCE PLO package, which I'm sure had filters for only Omaha in the past, but the game types were removed from its definitions after it was loaded into NC. It seems like maybe it was intentional.

NC will automatically separate notes for Holdem and Omaha in your HUD/Popups. So if you're playing at a Omaha table, you shouldn't see Holdem notes there. If you were not aware of this, does it relieve the worries about this issue?

Hey NCE! :)

I'm not sure if this is intentional or not.
So if you're playing at a Omaha table, you shouldn't see Holdem notes there. If you were not aware of this, does it relieve the worries about this issue?


I have a big request to clarify the matter with the developers.
Because if so, I need to look for workarounds. So far, 2 problems are most obvious to me:

1) Many definitions for Hold'em will work for Omaha as well, but they will only get in the way. A simple example: Definitions for hold'em defining the preflop sizing range 2x, 2,5x, 3x, 4x, or 3Betting size etc. will work for Omaha, but Omaha needs definitions to determine the size of the raise in relation to the pot. Thus, the computer will do unnecessary work + I will need to think about how not to display these definitions at the same time - create different HUDs, Popups, use different badges, etc.

2) People often play hold'em tables, but open an Omaha tournament, or open both Hold'em and Omaha tables at the same time. The problem is that in this case, when the user works with the definition and tests it using Seek, he sees only HOLDEM hands in Seek. Thus, I cannot properly test definitions in mixed bases.

Second problem can be solved quite elegantly if you really abandoned the types of games - if somewhere in the program settings you give the user to choose for which types of games to use SEEK. By default - for any games, but if necessary, the user should be able to choose, for example, Hold'em or Omaha.

Now I have to create separate databases for testing only OMAHA definitions, because if Hold'em hands get into the database, then only they go first to Seek.
This is a serious inconvenience when working actively with definitions.

Thus, if it is really intentional, it creates a number of fairly significant inconvenience.

Ty.

Hi FALOs,

It looks like this is working properly in the HM3 NoteCaddy.

I created a definition, set the game type to Omaha https://i.imgur.com/tzNOMEz.png, and it would only bring up Omaha hands in the Seek. I then tried switching it to Holdem and it would only bring up Holdem hands in the Seek.

You screenshot before shows the old game type selector. Was that screenshot taken from the HM2 NoteCaddy, or the HM3 NoteCaddy?

Hi NCEdge,

I created a definition, set the game type to Omaha https://i.imgur.com/tzNOMEz.png, and it would only bring up Omaha hands in the Seek. I then tried switching it to Holdem and it would only bring up Holdem hands in the Seek.

You screenshot before shows the old game type selector. Was that screenshot taken from the HM2 NoteCaddy, or the HM3 NoteCaddy?

HM2, bro, I work in it because HM3 does not work well with the site I play on, unlike HM2.

Judging by what you wrote about HM3, in HM2 this was not done on purpose - this is a bug.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FALOs

Hi NCEdge,

I created a definition, set the game type to Omaha https://i.imgur.com/tzNOMEz.png, and it would only bring up Omaha hands in the Seek. I then tried switching it to Holdem and it would only bring up Holdem hands in the Seek.

You screenshot before shows the old game type selector. Was that screenshot taken from the HM2 NoteCaddy, or the HM3 NoteCaddy?

HM2, bro, I work in it because HM3 does not work well with the site I play on, unlike HM2.

Judging by what you wrote about HM3, in HM2 this was not done on purpose - this is a bug.

---

Hi FALOs,

Ah, my apologies, I saw a post in one of your threads that said something about finally making the switch from HM2, and my brain connected it to you, although it was a different person.

I will write up a ticket for it. Thank you for reporting it. I'll update here once I hear back.