Making Money at $.10/$.25 NL

[holyfield5]

maybe i should read the thread before i say this, but isnt PTBB per table big bets, not poker tracker big bets?!?!?!?

[kazana]

[ QUOTE ]
No dispute here. But 'Merkuns don't like change unless they initiated it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeap.

One day, we will fly... oh wait, wrong thread. Let me retry.

One day, we'll see GW Bush III declare war on metric-system-terrorist Europe with the pommies riding alongside him.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
maybe i should read the thread before i say this, but isnt PTBB per table big bets, not poker tracker big bets?!?!?!?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but you've really reinforced my point that PTBB is confusing.

What on earth is a "big bet" in a $1-2 blinds no-limit game with $200 stacks? $50 into a pot of $30 would be a pretty big bet. Pushing for your last $200 into a pot of $150 isn't that big a bet.

Big bet is a meaningful term in standard fixed-limit betting structures, where there are only two bet sizes. NL, not so much.

[AKQJ10]

Turns out this is ptracker pat's response:

[ QUOTE ]


In NL, there is no such thing as a big bet since there is no structure to the betting, you bet what you want. Lacking a big bet, PT takes the big blind amount times 2 and uses that as a "big bet" amount. It's been like this for 4 years and I've had no one other than you suggest it be changed. The NL players I know of are more likely to care more about their win rate/hour than the number of big blinds they won.



[/ QUOTE ]

And my reponse (in case it gets deleted there):

[ QUOTE ]
I love Poker Tracker.

[ QUOTE ]
The "BB" used in NL games is 2x the big blind. This is stated in the help file and I'm not going to change it now, it's been this way forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

But I'm profoundly disappointed at such an adversarial attitude and lack of basic customer service skills.

This would be a small modification and should be ESSENTIAL to make your product appropriate for no-limit use. No-limit poker obviously doesn't have any fixed "big bet" size, so you're really just asking the real world to adapt to your kludge instead of constantly adapting your product to the real world.

This is a good example of the attitude of 1980's IBM. "We're Big Blue. Everyone else should adapt to us."

And no, OP isn't the first to propose this. How profoundly disappointing that you would be so flippant about a legitimate request to improve your product, Pat.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if you agree with me, register over there and tell Pat he's full of it.

[Quester]

I don't quite see the driving point here. If you are saying that 2xBB is arbitrary and useless, then 1xBB is fairly arbitrary and useless as well. I think he makes a good point that win rate/hour or per 100 is more important than BB or PTBB per 100. It only takes some basic math to convert between them anyway.

[keikiwai]

[ QUOTE ]
Turns out this is ptracker pat's response:

[ QUOTE ]


In NL, there is no such thing as a big bet since there is no structure to the betting, you bet what you want. Lacking a big bet, PT takes the big blind amount times 2 and uses that as a "big bet" amount. It's been like this for 4 years and I've had no one other than you suggest it be changed. The NL players I know of are more likely to care more about their win rate/hour than the number of big blinds they won.



[/ QUOTE ]

And my reponse (in case it gets deleted there):

[ QUOTE ]
I love Poker Tracker.

[ QUOTE ]
The "BB" used in NL games is 2x the big blind. This is stated in the help file and I'm not going to change it now, it's been this way forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

But I'm profoundly disappointed at such an adversarial attitude and lack of basic customer service skills.

This would be a small modification and should be ESSENTIAL to make your product appropriate for no-limit use. No-limit poker obviously doesn't have any fixed "big bet" size, so you're really just asking the real world to adapt to your kludge instead of constantly adapting your product to the real world.

This is a good example of the attitude of 1980's IBM. "We're Big Blue. Everyone else should adapt to us."

And no, OP isn't the first to propose this. How profoundly disappointing that you would be so flippant about a legitimate request to improve your product, Pat.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if you agree with me, register over there and tell Pat he's full of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

lolo it'd be MORE confusing to change it now

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
I think he makes a good point that win rate/hour or per 100 is more important than BB or PTBB per 100.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, you mean in dollars? That'd be grand if he'd present dollars / 100 hands, but he doesn't.

Everyone here talks about PTBB, not $/hr. I tend to look at both.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]

lolo it'd be MORE confusing to change it now

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. You just display stats in either BBL/100 or PTBB/100.

You have beginners asking "What's a PTBB?" every time they use it, so how is the status quo not confusing?

I didn't think it was appropriate to get into it there, but as I branch out to Omaha and/or Stud, I will definitely consider writing my own app rather paying more to people who are so dismissive of user requests.

[Splitrig]

Is there a good book, or resource, on Poker Tracker?

[LearningCurve]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a good book, or resource, on Poker Tracker?

[/ QUOTE ]
Linky[/url] http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...&PHPSESSID=