Winnings hands calculation.

# Thread: Winnings hands calculation.

1. ## Winnings hands calculation.

Hi!

Does this checkbox:

mean "Didn't lose" or does it still "won"?

Because now the result of the definition with this checkbox is the hands that the player really won and the hands that he folded preflop while not sitting on the blinds.
So, formula is looks like: Won Hands = Total Hands - Lost hands. Either I don't understand something, or this is a mistake.

For example for guy on which i have 30 hands, def. show me that he won 17 times, BUT he won only 7 times, fold on preflop 10 times, and lost 13 times.

When i set this checkbox to "Lost Hand" it showed me 23 for this guy. This is 13 real losses + 10 preflop folds.

So, totally he won 17 times and lost 23 times. 17 + 23 = 40.

Please clarify the situation.

P.S.
In any case, I can now somehow calculate the real winnings and losses hands number using Notcaddy def, without using HM stat "Won hand%" ?
I didn't find anything suitable in the definition filters.

2. Hi FALOs,

Thanks for reporting this. I was able to replicate the issue, and you are right, it seems like a bug.

I've reported it to the developers, with a high priority on the ticket, so it should get resolved soon.

Thanks for the quick response!

While we await a fix for this issue, please help me with the definition logic.

Since we found out that hands that the player just folded preflop are mistakenly added to winning hands, I decided to exclude these type of hands from the calculation by definition. My attempt at doing it looked like this:
PREFLOP sequences:

As a result, Seek did not find a single hand in the database with matching criteria. Test also gives no information as to why the correct hand not suitable - only shows me: "net xx bb".

Is there a logical error in my terms in the definition?

Perhaps it will be more convenient for you, I will attach my definition:

IDN_9_000.02_WINNING_HANDS_AMOUNT_COUNTING.xml

Ty.

4. Originally Posted by FALOs

Thanks for the quick response!

While we await a fix for this issue, please help me with the definition logic.

Since we found out that hands that the player just folded preflop are mistakenly added to winning hands, I decided to exclude these type of hands from the calculation by definition. My attempt at doing it looked like this:
PREFLOP sequences:

Ty.
Hi FALOs,

I think this is a creative idea, but I don't think this logic would work with NoteCaddy. NC is looking for something that a player needed to do, but there is only an action that had to NOT happen.

To do it a different way that may work is to instead put the Preflop actions that could happen for the note recipient. Using this type of logic, the player would win the hand after either making a limp, raise, or 3bet for example.

Like this:

U5uuI9v.png

5. To do it a different way that may work is to instead put the Preflop actions that could happen for the note recipient. Using this type of logic, the player would win the hand after either making a limp, raise, or 3bet for example.

Like this:

Yes, I also went this way yesterday - Limp, Call PR, Raise, Reraise, Post BB. The shortest path did not work out - a limitation in the NC logic. The processor will have to sweat a little more, checking all these conditions.

BUT, there is one caveat, I would like to clarify it:

Look at the preflop player with a nickname A2922397
He post "dead" blind.
This is not a Limp, Call PR, Raise, Reraise, Post BB. What is it, NC can somehow account for this type of hand?

PokerStars Hand #281677971990: Hold'em No Limit (\$500/\$1000 USD) - 2020/11/05 18:42:03 UTC
Table 'PKDOM_IDNP_TXH28167' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: B178EE04 (\$47454 in chips)
Seat 2: CACA_1717 (\$7777 in chips)
Seat 3: A2922397 (\$25710 in chips)
Seat 4: SUPRIADIT (\$37070 in chips)
Seat 6: F4KCR0T05 (\$37960 in chips)
# {"gt":"NLTHP","tn":"PKDOM_IDNP_TXH28167","tid":281 67,"pn":{"0":"B178EE04","1":"CACA_1717","2":"A2922 397","3":"SUPRIADIT","5":"F4KCR0T05"},"pids":{"0": 498708505,"1":470416293,"2":438497549,"3":82541303 1,"5":824834138},"room":"Idnp"}
SUPRIADIT: posts small blind \$500
F4KCR0T05: posts big blind \$1000
A2922397: posts big blind \$1000
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to B178EE04 [As Ts]
B178EE04: calls \$1000
A2922397: checks
F4KCR0T05: checks
*** FLOP *** [3d 5h 6d]
F4KCR0T05: checks
B178EE04: checks
A2922397: bets \$1000
F4KCR0T05: calls \$1000
B178EE04: folds
*** TURN *** [3d 5h 6d] [7s]
F4KCR0T05: folds
A2922397: raises \$1000 to \$2000
*** RIVER *** [3d 5h 6d 7s] [Ah]
A2922397: bets \$4549
Uncalled bet (\$4549) returned to A2922397
A2922397 collected \$10670 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot \$11000 | Rake \$330
Board [3d 5h 6d 7s Ah]
Seat 1: B178EE04 folded on the Flop
Seat 2: CACA_1717 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: A2922397 (button) collected (\$10670)
Seat 4: SUPRIADIT (small blind) folded on the River
Seat 6: F4KCR0T05 (big blind) folded on the Turn

How can I correctly designate this type of action using Preflop sequences?

6. Originally Posted by FALOs
[COLOR="#0000FF"]

BUT, there is one caveat, I would like to clarify it:

Look at the preflop player with a nickname A2922397
He post "dead" blind.
This is not a Limp, Call PR, Raise, Reraise, Post BB. What is it, NC can somehow account for this type of hand?
I don't think you can specify the dead blind post with NC.

In my opinion I think you would just want to cover all bases that you can, and not worry about the dead blind posts because it doesn't happen too often (and when it does it's by a fish who will likely not be around too often).

7. In my opinion I think you would just want to cover all bases that you can, and not worry about the dead blind posts because it doesn't happen too often (and when it does it's by a fish who will likely not be around too often).
In general, you are right. It's just that I was trying to achieve statistical "cleanliness", and besides, where I play the fish is quite impatient and usually does not wait for the BB to enter, so this is a rather significant part of the hands. By the way, you’re an NC veteran? It seems to me about 5-6 years ago there was "Post Dead" in NC after sreticentv introduced Action Sequences instead of Actions, maybe he removed it?
If so, then in vain he considered it superfluous. If any hands are lost, that is a disadvantage.

But, in any case, it's better than nothing

8. Hi!

NotecaddyEdge, and yet I would like to ask you to consider the possibility return the ability to properly handle situations with the Dead blind. For example, i am now convinced that this is a very common phenomenon in the game room in which i play. Sometimes several players do it at the same time, for the simple reason that there is no such thing as "waiting for BB" in this room.

If technically it is not very difficult, please handle this event.

Ty.

9. Originally Posted by FALOs
Hi!

NotecaddyEdge, and yet I would like to ask you to consider the possibility return the ability to properly handle situations with the Dead blind. For example, i am now convinced that this is a very common phenomenon in the game room in which i play. Sometimes several players do it at the same time, for the simple reason that there is no such thing as "waiting for BB" in this room.

Ty.
Hi FALOs,

I will create a ticket to see if they will consider adding it.

Thanks for bringing it up.

10. The Won Hand issue for including times when a player folded preflop is resolved now in NC v2.9.79.0 for HM3 and PT4.

There isn't an update for the HM2 NoteCaddy yet though. I've asked if there will be an update for the HM2 NC, or if it is end of life now. I'll update when I hear.

Edit: I just heard that a NC update for HM2 is scheduled for today.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•