PAHUD not working on UB?
 

It is saying I have reached the maximum number of hand histories right away. This just began this morning. Anybody else?

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

Same here with Gametime+

I'm not really sure what to make of this. They actually managed to make a bad hand history system worse with this update.

For sure I'll stop playing at UB eventually if I can't keep tracks of my hands. Let's hope that either someone comes up with a workaround or UB fixes this ASAP.

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

I think Ultimate History is causing problems, in addition to PAHUD not working properly. UGGGGG

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

yep...bye bye UB until they change it back or until there is a workaround.

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

I just emailed support with this. Let's see what/if they respond:

[ QUOTE ]
Der Sir or Madam,

With the recent update I can no longer conveniently get my hand histories while playing because after 5 requests I have to close and re-open the hand history window.


It is very important for me to save my hand histories in order to review my plays and find where I am making mistakes.


I understand that there are possibilities of abuse by requesting many hand histories (e.g. data mining). Prevention of such abuses, however, should not be made in a way that is to the detriment of players just whishing to save the hands they have played.


If abuse possibilities are indeed your motivation behind the change I would suggest that you implement a system where one can only receive hand histories of games that he played hands in and remove the 5 hand limit.


As much as I like UB (especially the well-working software) the ability to review my plays and learn from my mistakes is really a crucial part of my poker experience and I cannot imagine playing on a site that prevents me from doing this.


I'm asking you to please reconsider this measure in its current form.



Sincerely,

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just emailed support with this. Let's see what/if they respond:

[ QUOTE ]
Der Sir or Madam,

With the recent update I can no longer conveniently get my hand histories while playing because after 5 requests I have to close and re-open the hand history window.


It is very important for me to save my hand histories in order to review my plays and find where I am making mistakes.


I understand that there are possibilities of abuse by requesting many hand histories (e.g. data mining). Prevention of such abuses, however, should not be made in a way that is to the detriment of players just whishing to save the hands they have played.


If abuse possibilities are indeed your motivation behind the change I would suggest that you implement a system where one can only receive hand histories of games that he played hands in and remove the 5 hand limit.


As much as I like UB (especially the well-working software) the ability to review my plays and learn from my mistakes is really a crucial part of my poker experience and I cannot imagine playing on a site that prevents me from doing this.


I'm asking you to please reconsider this measure in its current form.



Sincerely,

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

looking forward to see what their response is.

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just emailed support with this. Let's see what/if they respond:

[ QUOTE ]
Der Sir or Madam,

With the recent update I can no longer conveniently get my hand histories while playing because after 5 requests I have to close and re-open the hand history window.


It is very important for me to save my hand histories in order to review my plays and find where I am making mistakes.


I understand that there are possibilities of abuse by requesting many hand histories (e.g. data mining). Prevention of such abuses, however, should not be made in a way that is to the detriment of players just whishing to save the hands they have played.


If abuse possibilities are indeed your motivation behind the change I would suggest that you implement a system where one can only receive hand histories of games that he played hands in and remove the 5 hand limit.


As much as I like UB (especially the well-working software) the ability to review my plays and learn from my mistakes is really a crucial part of my poker experience and I cannot imagine playing on a site that prevents me from doing this.


I'm asking you to please reconsider this measure in its current form.



Sincerely,

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
I included that I use PT and an automated hand history utility to capture my hands for review and tax purposes. I asked them to not count hands the logged in player was in for the purposes of getting 5 hands or to finally just start saving any hand we were dealt in saved to our HD. They may not care much about the review option, but I am hoping the tax tracking reason has some weight. I intend to write them tonight asking them for all my hands each day ~1K like we used to have to do. They can send them by e-mail to me every day.

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

Sent them this e-mail
Dear Sir or Madam,

I am very disheartened to see the recent changes to the hand history system. I play poker for a living, and as such, I need a very detailed record of my hands for tax purposes. The system before the update was already a hassle, but it worked pretty well. However, the update makes it all but impossible to play and download data to my computer. I understand that the system allowed for abuses from people that are not sitting at the table. I think the logical fix to this is to only allow players who have been dealt cards to receive hand histories for that table.

I enjoy playing at UB. The software is the fastest on the net and the games and bonuses are always good. However, if this current hand history system is a permanent "fix", I may have to take my business elsewhere.

Thank you,

Hope to see a solid response.

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

just sent a similar email...hope all goes well

Re: PAHUD not working on UB?
 

god this sucks. UB wants to stop datamining? sure, but let us import our own f'in hands

I would be willing to pay some $$$ for a workaround, like $500