Improving FILTERS (A LOT !)

[dissection]

Picture will explain. This will allow us for example to filter only those cases where was 1 limper + 1 raiser and we can add more filters like "could 3 bet". Everything depends only on your imagination.

filters.png

[udbrky]

The could 3bet is already in advanced filters.

[dissection]

Yes I know My point is somewhere else. Lets say you want to find specific situations, where you could 3 bet + there was 1 limper AND 1 raiser.

So far you can only make a filter, where you could 3bet + there was 1 limper OR 1 raiser.

You see what I mean ?

[udbrky]

Yes, I didn't say the OR wasn't a possibility, but if you use the filter could 3bet = true, it will return the hands that you want.

[dissection]

Yes, I didn't say the OR wasn't a possibility, but if you use the filter could 3bet = true, it will return the hands that you want.

So you're saying that there is "hidden" operator, which always does 'AND' ?

[udbrky]

I don't understand what you mean. I did not say that it wasn't a possibility that we could add the OR function at some point.

Did you try using the Could 3bet filter? It will show all hands opened before it gets to you, whether the PFR isolated a limper or raised first in.

[dissection]

Did you try using the Could 3bet filter? It will show all hands opened before it gets to you, whether the PFR isolated a limper or raised first in.

)))) Exactly ! It will show you both situations where there was a 1) limper and somebody raised him and you were able to 3bet + 2) where there was NO limper and somebody opened and you were able to 3bet.

It is just like you said.

So we can say there is "hidden operator" which is working as OR.



So if you're saying you could add the 'OR' function is lacking logic. If anything, you could say "we could add 'AND' function at some point"

You got my point ? Or should I draw you a picture ?

[dissection]

So ?

[udbrky]

We have been discussing it, and there is no decision on whether we will add it.

My point was, the situation you wanted to filter for already exists.

[dissection]

We have been discussing it, and there is no decision on whether we will add it.

My point was, the situation you wanted to filter for already exists.

Yes it is possible to filter it ... but you can't filter it without other situations (see my OP). Thats my point