[OFFICIAL Support Thread] HoldemResources Calculator

Hi, sorry for the late reply.

You can simply remove the existing Java Runtime installations using the Windows Control Panel / Software. Then manually install the Java Runtime from here:
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/jre8-downloads-2133155.html

Use either the jre-8u**-windows-i586.exe (32 bit) or jre-8u**-windows-x64.exe (64 bit). Keep in mind that the architecture needs to match the HRC version (ie both 32bit/64bit, not mixed). It's also fine to simply install both Java Runtimes.

-

Hi! Playing with HRM I found this

Why are the small numbers different and what do they mean in the 2 different charts?

Ah, interesting that this didn't come up before. This is just a display issue. The right version (incorrectly) shows the Diffs as % of total chips, the left version correctly shows them as fraction of a BB.

So e.g. left chart AA +4.18 means 4.18bb, right chart means +10.9% of chips in play.

From the Outline we have rougly 1.6+6.6+1.6+5.6+2.0+1.3+11.8+7.7 = 38.2bb in play, 4.18bb / 38.2bb = 10.94%.

This should only happen for ChipEV calculations, I'll try to get this fixed asap.

Thank you very much!

One more thing: in this situation, it shows my calling range (Fr0z3nByt3) as not including QJo. On the right, in the chart it shows it's slightly profitable thou, so why doesn't it count it?

Any chance you used the "Linear Nash" initialization option when creating the hand? This produces less accurate approximations for the Nash ranges and will result in +EV hands missed and/or -EV hands included in the ranges. Regardless of the reason, if you spot something like that you can simply improve the Nash approximation by running additional Fictitious Play iterations (Green button in the toolbar).

The Beta version also includes an Exploit% display in the "Outline" area, which shows how close the current ranges are to a full Nash Equilibrium.

Beta installation instructions:
http://www.holdemresources.net/h/products/hrc/beta-repository.html

Hi, I'm a professional poker player, coach and HUD developer, I love using HRC for analysing HH, something I think would be great is the possibility of adding "dead money" to the pot, so maybe you can add another box to the section the binds and antes are added for dead money so we can account for players that might have called a bet but we know they are folding and so we don't want them to be part of the calculations but but still include the money they added to the pot, this feature might also help for accounting for KOs and PSKOs.

Thanks in advanse!

Hi. I replied to your identical post in the 2p2 thread, probably best if we keep the discussion on one place.

Hello ,
I am just start using your tool after 2 years of using ICMizer.Actually I like it but I would like to ask why it is working so slowly.I mean when I make a calculation in a spot for example Vilain1 raise ,Vilain2 call ,what we can shove here it takes too long time to calculate the spot depends on ICMizer where it takes 2 secs.So I would like to ask from depends the performance of your tool ,from Internet or from PC or from both?

Hi,

The performance depends on your local PC, mostly on the CPU.

Note that what takes long is only the Nash calculation at the beginning of the hand, which i believe is not done automatically in ICMizer. Try to select "Initialize with Linear Nash" in the Basic Hand setup, this will speed things up very considerably.

Hello,
what is the approach when choosing fgs depth calculation (regardless cpu and ram)? Is it the more the better or will some exact fgs depth produce the most correct outcome in a given situation depending on the number of players left and/or stack depth?

The general recommendation is to use the maximum depth that still results in acceptable runtime on your hardware. Basically "the more the better", yes.

Hello,

After the recent update my HRC doesn't import hands when I copy a hand from HM2.
I play on PKR.
How can I solve it?

Please send a few HH examples that don't import correctly to support@holdemresources.net, we'll try to get them supported asap.

Hi,

would you please explain why hyperturbo 6-max 65/35

situation 1: BU 16 SB 30 BB 2954 has SB push 100% and

situation 2: BU 16 SB 28 BB 2956 has SB push 6.6%?

Can you post the hands via "Hand: Share Hand" please? I'm not sure what blinds/antes/equity model you were using.

I´m sorry for not sharing these details recently.

The hands are made up. So I share them here:

http://hands.holdemresources.net/?id=14bg232tkloir

http://hands.holdemresources.net/?id=s8m217j79w2n

When I tried Malmuth-Harville ICM and M-Weitzmann too - situation 1 has SB push 100% and situation 2 - 90.3%.

It´s closer to each other. So what should I use please and why?

The additional 2 chips make a huge difference.

With 28 chips, if SB folds he is all-in by posting the ante next hand and will finish 3rd unless he wins the 3-way pot. So when folding SB finishes 1st/2nd less than 33% of the time.
With 30 chips, if SB folds he can also fold next hand with 2 left and BU will be auto-allin against BB next hand. So folding gives us a 1st/2nd finish more than 50% of the time.

Thank you. I see your reasoning.

But what I can not comprihend are the following situations:

1 http://hands.holdemresources.net/?id=1njztimlwku1k
2 http://hands.holdemresources.net/?id=bu75etfunz6t

Why are calling range SB and overcalling range BB so different in these spots, please?