New Software Announcement - SIXTH SENSE

[SixthSense]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I never noticed before - perhaps it's a "new" bug, but the fish score of users for which I won't have any data is 2.1 ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Clear your stat cache (from under Menu/Advanced), and do a Refresh, does it still show that?

-Ben

[SixthSense]

[ QUOTE ]
SS has suddenly gotten very slow for me. My last update over 2 levels (2/4 2/6 6max limit Party) has taken 47:35 minutes which makes it pretty useless as most of the players have gone again.

Any idea how I can solve this? I compact my PT database before I start playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

We didn't change the queries with this new release to make it any slower. How big is your database? How many tables & players are you scoring?

A big factor is how many Party tables you have open. With their now "Monster" graphics Party takes up all your CPU. Try closing all the tables till the scoring is done. Or use a "De-monster" script, some are on these boards.

-Ben

[rhizome]

Downloaded, Installed, Selected Poker Database, Tested Connection, Got "Test Connection Succeeded", but get "Error: Class not registered" when I hit refresh.

Help?

[SixthSense]

[ QUOTE ]
Downloaded, Installed, Selected Poker Database, Tested Connection, Got "Test Connection Succeeded", but get "Error: Class not registered" when I hit refresh.

Help?

[/ QUOTE ]

Does it give any more info than that, like an error address, or more error text?

Also, make sure you have ADO installed on your system. Just to be sure install MDAC from:

MDAC Download

-Ben

[CASSHERN]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I never noticed before - perhaps it's a "new" bug, but the fish score of users for which I won't have any data is 2.1 ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to clear the cache and refresh as you suggested, and it still does the same thing ...

PS.: will you have amessage board of your onw at some point ? That would be great ...

[SixthSense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I never noticed before - perhaps it's a "new" bug, but the fish score of users for which I won't have any data is 2.1 ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to clear the cache and refresh as you suggested, and it still does the same thing ...

PS.: will you have amessage board of your onw at some point ? That would be great ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Please email me a screen shot of this. (bziegler@radix.net)

[SixthSense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I never noticed before - perhaps it's a "new" bug, but the fish score of users for which I won't have any data is 2.1 ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to clear the cache and refresh as you suggested, and it still does the same thing ...

PS.: will you have amessage board of your onw at some point ? That would be great ...

[/ QUOTE ]

By the way - we do have a forum [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] the link is on the website. You may use that for your tech support needs from now on if you like [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[rhizome]

[ QUOTE ]

Does it give any more info than that, like an error address, or more error text?

Also, make sure you have ADO installed on your system. Just to be sure install MDAC from:

MDAC Download

-Ben

[/ QUOTE ]

That is the only message given. Unfortunately, I cannot download from Microsoft due to their Genuine Windows Validation. Guess I'm screwed.

[Azalin]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't seen a new version in a while, and now that I've had time to play around with SS a bit, I'm going to give you the top 5 most important features / improvements you should implement...at the risk of sounding a little arrogant, I consider myself to be pretty well versed in datamining and table selection, and while some of the suggestions in this thread (e.g. "Hey, add support for site XYZ right now!!!") would be useful to some extent, I think the below 5 are "must-have" features that will improve your product immeasurably...most of them are mentioned somewhere throughout this thread, but I wanted to put them in front of your eyes all in one place to underscore their importance.

1) Is the "data aggregation" tool that you've referenced before almost finished? Because I still think that SS doesn't deal with multiple DBs very well...e.g. in an ideal world it should treat all the data across all of your DBs as though it's all part of one giant DB...but it sometimes has difficulty displaying things as aggregates, e.g. the problem with it showing 1 hand played for player X, when X has only 1 hand played in the default DB, but several thousand in the multiple DBs (from which SS draws, but which aren't selected as defaults)

2) The ability to exclude a player from contributing to the table averages if he doesn't have a minimum number of hands played. This is probably the most frustrating imperfection in SS for me...I can't count the number of times I've gotten wide-eyed in anticipation for a table with a 34 VPIP average, only to open it up and find that it's actually all TAGs...then I go back to SS to see why it had such a high average VPIP, and I see it's because there were 3 players with VPIPs between 50 and 100, but it was only on account of having played 10 or fewer hands. A player that only has 1 hand played in one's DB will contribute a VPIP of 100 to the table average, throwing everything into chaos. Simply allow the user to select the number of hands a player must have played (across all DBs) in order to contribute to the table averages.

***By the way, I just read through the entire SS thread again, and saw to my surprise that SS actually WEIGHTS player data in calculating the table average VPIPs. This is a big no-no. I was involved in a protracted discussion about this when Playerview was first being developed, and the issue popped up again with PAH. Bottom line: VPIPs should NOT be weighted in determining table averages. If player A has 3,000 hands with a 22% VPIP and player B has 150 hands with a 55% VPIP, a weighted calculation will show a table average VPIP of around 25%...when what the user would find much more helpful is seeing a 37% avg VPIP (weighting each player equally). Now the one complication is if a player has only 5 or so hands and therefore has a completely unreliable VPIP like 0% or 100%...but the way that problem is addressed is via my #2 suggestion above...having a user-defined minimum # of hands for a player's stats to even count in the table avg calculations. I typically set that number at 50 hands...

3) The second most-needed feature, after the above, is the ability for a user to set the min. # of players that must be seated at a table in order for SS to even scan it at all. Personally, I don't care much about tables that have 1-3 players at them...so I'd like to tell SS to completely ignore them for the purposes of the searches. (Players who DO want to search for tables that short-handed can set their minimum lower than I will). This seems like a pretty straight-forward and useful feature to implement, and will make searches much faster too!

4) Actually, I take back the above: I think this one is the most important feature you could implement, but may not be as straight-forward as #2 and #3 above. It would really, really help if SS filtered data based on # of players seated, like PAH does. Here's an example of the problem. I have one huge full-ring DB (with 8-10 players / hand), and one huge SH DB (with 4-7 players / hand). SS draws from both. Sometimes an SS search will show a full-ring table, for example, with a 33 average VPIP...so it looks quite juicy. But then I'll sit down and see that it's actually mostly TAGs, and the ACTUAL table avg VPIP is more like 22, which is what PAH displays BECAUSE PAH FILTERS THE DATA IT DISPLAYS FOR ONLY HANDS WITH 7-10 PLAYERS IN THEM, because that's the filter I set up in PAH options. In other words, the only reason the avg VPIP looked so high was because SS is unable to differentiate between stats from shorthanded games and stats from full games. If you could somehow add this functionality (PAH has it), it would be very, very, very useful. I mentioned this feature earlier in this thread, and baronzeus brought it up twice...but I haven't seen you address it...have we explained it clearly enough? I'd be happy to discuss it with you further if/when you want to implement it.

5) Sorry, I couldn't resist one more suggestion. I think you should allow users to save "search profiles"...what I mean is that I like to play both LHE and NL, and have separate PT DBs for each. But doing one mega-search for all the LHE and NL tables using all of my DBs can take 20-30 minutes...so I like to do the searches separately, but this involves the arduous process of going in and disabling / re-enabling the DBs in SS's DB selection window. First off, I made this suggesiton before, but a much better feature would be to allow users to just set up each DB ONCE, and then just enable/disable it with the check of a check-box instead of having to manually input all the SQL settings. But I digress...I would like to be able to somehow "save" the parameters of my LHE search, so that I can tell SS to only search the LHE tables and draw from my LHE PT DB(s), and then when I want to search for good NL games (and without having to change any settings) tell it to search NL tables drawing from my NL DB(s).

Whew, alright, I hope you put these near the top of your to-do list [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Great suggestions. Number 1 and 3 in particular should be on top of your to-do list IMHO.

[SixthSense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Does it give any more info than that, like an error address, or more error text?

Also, make sure you have ADO installed on your system. Just to be sure install MDAC from:

MDAC Download

-Ben

[/ QUOTE ]

That is the only message given. Unfortunately, I cannot download from Microsoft due to their Genuine Windows Validation. Guess I'm screwed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if you only use MS Access Databases, you could try to use ODBC to connect. Do you use PAHud? Did it need to be configured with an ADO Connection?

-Ben