bug with pot size calculation

[navels]

Have seen this a handful of times now. The pot size reported at the end is 250 but it should be 224.50. Maybe something to do with Seat3 posting when there was a straddle on?

This is Pro v7.10.

Code: Select all

Hand #93311-166 - 2023-06-09 00:43:18
Game: PL Omaha (40 - 200) - Blinds 0.50/1 Ante 0.05
Site: *************
Table: Thursday Night Omaha!
Seat 1: Seat1 (337.85)
Seat 2: Seat2 (698.85)
Seat 3: Seat3 (1071.45)
Seat 5: Seat5 (162.75)
Seat 7: Seat7 (490.60)
Seat 8: Seat8 (200)
Seat5 has the dealer button
Seat1 posts ante 0.05
Seat2 posts ante 0.05
Seat3 posts ante 0.05
Seat5 posts ante 0.05
Seat7 posts ante 0.05
Seat8 posts ante 0.05
Seat7 posts small blind 0.50
Seat8 posts big blind 1
Seat1 posts straddle 2
Seat3 posts small & big blind 1.50
** Hole Cards ** [6 players]
Seat2 folds
Seat3 raises to 8.30
Seat5 calls 8.30
Seat7 calls 7.80
Seat8 folds
Seat8 adds 1.05 chips
Seat1 calls 6.30
** Flop ** [Jd 3h Kc]
Seat7 checks
Seat1 checks
Seat3 checks
Seat5 checks
** Turn ** [4s]
Seat7 checks
Seat1 checks
Seat3 bets 20
Seat5 calls 20
Seat7 calls 20
Seat1 folds
** River ** [Kd]
Seat7 checks
Seat3 bets 65
Seat5 calls 65
Seat7 folds
** Pot Show Down ** [Jd 3h Kc 4s Kd]
Seat3 shows [Kh Qc Jc 7c] (a Full House, Kings full of Jacks),
Seat5 shows [Ah 8c 2d Jh] (Two Pair, Kings and Jacks +A),
Seat3 wins Pot (225) with a Full House
Rake (0) Pot (225) Players (Seat1: 8.35, Seat2: 0.05, Seat3: 93.85, Seat5: 93.35, Seat7: 28.35, Seat8: 1.05)

[Kent Briggs]

Have seen this a handful of times now. The pot size reported at the end is 250 but it should be 224.50. Maybe something to do with Seat3 posting when there was a straddle on?

I think you meant 225, not 250. But yes it's over-reporting seat 3's contribution by 0.50. I'll look into it.

[Kent Briggs]

Nevermind, the 225 pot is correct. When a player posts both a SB and BB (because they were sitting out when the button passed them) that SB is a "dead" blind that goes directly to the pot. So Seat 3 put .50 SB directly in the pot and only had 1.00 from the BB in front of him. When he raised to 8.30 he added 7.30 more, not 6.80 more. That's where that "extra" .50 came from.

[navels]

Ahhhh, thanks!

[navels]

Similar situation, but different. Is this correct that the straddle is treated as a refund and not included in the pot size when the straddle gets a walk?

[navels]

Dangit, got the history a little wrong, this is it:

Code: Select all

Hand #93139-264 - 2023-06-07 01:29:32
Game: NL Hold'em (50 - 500) - Blinds 0.50/1 Ante 0.05
Seat 1: Seat1 (391.90)
Seat 3: Seat3 (557.30)
Seat 4: Seat4 (717.25)
Seat 7: Seat7 (643)
Seat3 has the dealer button
Seat1 posts ante 0.05
Seat3 posts ante 0.05
Seat4 posts ante 0.05
Seat7 posts ante 0.05
Seat4 posts small blind 0.50
Seat7 posts big blind 1
Seat1 posts straddle 2
** Hole Cards ** [4 players]
Seat3 folds
Seat4 folds
Seat7 folds
Seat1 refunded 1
Seat1 wins Pot (2.70)
Rake (0) Pot (2.70) Players (Seat1: 1.05, Seat3: 0.05, Seat4: 0.55, Seat7: 1.05)

[Kent Briggs]

Similar situation, but different. Is this correct that the straddle is treated as a refund and not included in the pot size when the straddle gets a walk?

Since everyone folded pre-flop, the blinds and straddle were not yet moved to the pot. So that uncalled portion of the straddle was refunded then the rest was moved to the pot and awarded to the straddle position player.

[navels]

Thanks. I think there is a bug with PT4, where they are calculating the pot size in this case as 3.70. Mavens and PT4 are consistent on this point when there isn't a straddle, but differ when there is. I'll follow up with PT4.

[navels]

Just following up here in case anyone else runs into this. I have confirmed through testing that PT4 calculates the pot size incorrectly when there is a player sitting out and there is a straddle, specifically:

Seat 1: SB $1
Seat 2: BB $2
Seat 3: Straddle $4
Seat 4: Sitting Out
Seat 5: Dealer
Action: Everyone folds
Error: PT4 expects pot size $7, Mavens correctly gives it as $5

However, they state that players who are sitting out should not be included in the OHH payload, which would fix the problem. They are considering a change to the OHH spec (and PT4) to allow players to be included who are not dealt in (via a flag of some kind).