HEM2 not recording EV in omaha cash hand

For the following hand, HEM2 gives my EV diff as 0. Pic (last column is $EV Diff):

Attachment 162791

However, in the replayer it says that when Hero goes AI on the flop, his equity is 55%. So how can this be EV 0? I guess it has to do with the fact that the other players are not AI, but this seems like a bug. Thanks.

***** Hand History for Game 17375334115 *****
$500 USD PL Omaha - Tuesday, June 05, 14:18:30 BST 2018
Table Dubai (Real Money)
Seat 1 is the button
Total number of players : 6/6
Seat 6: Player6 ( $1,255.59 USD )
Seat 2: Player2 ( $534.11 USD )
Seat 4: Player4 ( $639.32 USD )
Seat 5: Player5 ( $751.87 USD )
Seat 3: Player3 ( $1,232.45 USD )
Seat 1: onthestoop ( $138.85 USD )
Player2 posts small blind [$2 USD].
Player3 posts big blind [$5 USD].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to onthestoop [ Js Ah 9d Ac ]
Player4 calls [$5 USD]
Player5 raises [$22 USD]
Player6 calls [$22 USD]
onthestoop raises [$100 USD]
Player2 folds
Player3 folds
Player4 folds
Player5 calls [$78 USD]
Player6 calls [$78 USD]
** Dealing Flop ** [ 4c, Qs, 3s ]
Player5 checks
Player6 checks
onthestoop is all-In [$38.85 USD]
Player5 calls [$38.85 USD]
Player6 calls [$38.85 USD]
** Dealing Turn ** [ 9s ]
Player5 checks
Player6 checks
** Dealing River ** [ 8s ]
Player5 checks
Player6 checks
Player5 shows [ Th, 2d, Kd, Ks ]a pair of Kings.
Player6 shows [ 9c, 8c, 5d, 7d ]two pairs, Nines and Eights.
onthestoop doesn't show [ Js, Ah, 9d, Ac ]a pair of Aces.
Player6 wins $425.55 USD from the main pot with two pairs, Nines and Eights.

It is a limitation of All-in EV.

Watch this video - FAQ - Hold'em Manager (HM1) Poker Tracking Software :: EV Explained

**CASH EV**

What EV can do / how it can be used:
Any allin situation, before the river, where a player has at least one "out" results in a EV $ Diff.
$Won + EV $ Diff = $USD EV
(AA vs KK is the most fun example... AK vs QQ is the most common "coinflip")

The "problem" what some people don't understand:
A: If a player has 0 outs, or
B: the allin situation takes place on the river there is NO EV DIFFERENCE.
C: If a shortstack goes allin preflop, and is called by two bigstacks. And the two bigstacks continue to bet on the flop, turn or river, this situation is treated as situation B. (EV = 0)
Fozzy : "You can't calculate all-in equity if you don't know the hands you are up against."
D: If you commit 80% of your stack with the best hand, but your last 20% goes allin with the worst hand, the $EV Difference will be calculated by your entire stack.

Why "EV by street" (which people who often see situation D want) is a bad thing:
Best explanation here - http://forums.holdemmanager.com/3rd-...er-sect-7.html

Summary of that thread:
Example:
- you have AA, you raise to 80% of your stack, donkey calls, flop comes K83 rainbow.
- you then go all-in, no matter the flop, because you're committed.
- out of 100 times, 88 times donkey folds.
- 12 times donkeys calls with a set (33/88/KK).
What shall EV by street bogusly do? It shall do no computations for the 88 times where donkey folded--> "no more calculation".
What shall EV by street do the 12 times where donkey calls with a set? "Show that donkey sucked out and that you got unlucky".

So although you ran obviously uber-good by having donkey folding 88 times out of 100. EV by street focuses on the 12 times where donkey hit his set and tells that you're running below EV.
This is a well-known gambler fallacy. And this is why "EV by street" is completely bogus and should not be implemented.

Note: Tristanblue writes "it's precisely because EV by street does nothing to your adjusted-graph on these cases where the opponent folded that it is completely bogus."
But what if your opponent never folds? Suppose there are two players A and B.
Player A has AA, B has KK. (both have $100 stacks). They commit half their stack preflop and the flop comes AK6. Player B (KK has 1 "out") to win the hand.
If I would play this hand I would always make sure I'm allin on the turn.
However Player X always commits the rest of his stack on the flop and turn *except for one dollar*. And he commits on the river.
Of course, 4% of the time, the rivercard is the case King. Player X's EV Diff is always 0.
My EV Diff is -$4 (96 out of 100 times) and +$96 (4 out of 100 times)
So our EV graph actually looks the same after 100 of these hands.

**TOURNEY EV**

*Single Table Tournaments only (includes: Double or Nothings, Headsup, etc.... excludes: single table satellites!)
*cEV Diff (chip EV difference)....: this works exactly the same as the $EV Won for cashgames.
*$EV Diff (dollar EV difference)
*$Won + SUM $EV Diff = $EV Won
*The same "why EV per street is bad" applies for tourneys too.

-->Confusion: $EV Won vs $USD EV vs EV $ Diff vs $EV Diff vs cEV Diff vs $Won vs Luck Adjusted Winnings vs All-in EV (do we need eight different terms for three different things?)

*In addition: the $EV Won can be confusing when it's negative and a larger number than the actual buyin, or positive and a larger number than the actual first price money.
You have some extreme situations (often in Double or Nothing and in SUPER TURBO SNGs)

Extreme examples:
$169 buyin SUPER TURBO, $Won = $720 (1th place)---> $EV Won = -$196 (a negative value, that is higher than the actual buyin)
$5.20 buyin DoN, $Won = $10---> $EV Won = $11.35 (more than you can actually win)

So EV becomes quite a meaningless number if you focus on one game (or in the "case King hits the river" AA vs KK example on that one hand)
The more you play, the more accurate it gives a representation of your overall "luck".

And it doesn't take into account coolers. There was a program called set-o-meter (worked with PT2) where you could see how often you'd hit a set.
EV doesn't take into account how often (and how much) you win/lose with an overpair against a set (and vice versa).

http://forums.holdemmanager.com/mana...ion-wrong.html

Ok, thanks for that. If I understand the problem, it's that HEM can't calculate my flop EV when there are still players to act who might fold later in the hand (in which case my equity would change) - is that right?

Yes, it's a limitation to the all-in EV method. In the last ten years or so, there have been many better ways to judge play that leave the method behind.