Preflop Hand Range PPL Generator

[cosmo27]

Well it's been a while since I've given back to the botting community (for free) so here is my good deed for the day. After starting to make some new profiles I forgot what a pain in the butt it is to create preflop hand ranges so I created a preflop hand range generator to do it for you. Just specify the individual hand ranges you wish to have and BOOM! Instant ppl code you can copy and paste into your text file. Pretty self explainatory but ask questions if you have any. I think I protected the Google Sheet version well enough that people can't jack it up but just in case please copy and save your own version!

Google Sheets Version
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_v5w0ClJ16bizXyMmgRKLlFLCwJGhECt5HUj0JepktQ/edit?usp=sharing

Excel Version
http://www.mediafire.com/download/oy27h64slgly7bk/Hand_Range_Generator_%28PPL%29.xlsx

[cosmo27]

Google sheets version is unlocked and excel version is uploaded. If you don't have excel and need a google sheet version just email me 

[ykcip75]

Nice work but you can still improve it by adding some simplification rules in your code for example 22+ = pairinhand A2+ = A
if you have common hands between suited and unsuited hands just write the hand without the suited.
for example : A5s+,ATo+ -> hand = AK or hand = AQ or hand = AJ or hand = AT or hand = A9 suited or hand = A8 suited or hand = A7 suited or hand = A6 suited or hand = A5 suited.

There is also the not simplification but I don't like it for hand ranges

example : for 44+ , I prefer (hand = AA or hand = KK .... until hand = 44) than (pairinhand and not (hand = 22 or hand = 33))

[cosmo27]

Agreed, the simpler the better. Will see what I can do for the next update.

[botfan12]

i start with my first profile tweaking today and I just can say thank you so much man ;)

you are a very fair person and also your KGB additional fee for new updates is absolutley ok ;)

Thx 

[johngr]

Nice work but you can still improve it by adding some simplification rules in your code for example 22+ = pairinhand A2+ = A
if you have common hands between suited and unsuited hands just write the hand without the suited.
for example : A5s+,ATo+ -> hand = AK or hand = AQ or hand = AJ or hand = AT or hand = A9 suited or hand = A8 suited or hand = A7 suited or hand = A6 suited or hand = A5 suited.

There is also the not simplification but I don't like it for hand ranges

example : for 44+ , I prefer (hand = AA or hand = KK .... until hand = 44) than (pairinhand and not (hand = 22 or hand = 33))

The "NOT" method is far more elegant, readable and easier to determine if you're missing something after you get down to the 6s or 7s pairs or side cards.

[ykcip75]

The "NOT" method is far more elegant, readable and easier to determine if you're missing something after you get down to the 6s or 7s pairs or side cards.

I agree with you but only when it's well used.
Misused and without real gain it's terrible !

[johngr]

I agree with you but only when it's well used.
Misused and without real gain it's terrible !

Appropos that, I have a question: would

WHEN HAND = A3 AND NOT (HAND = A2) OR HAND = KT RaiseMax Force

give the same result as,

WHEN (HAND = A3 AND NOT (HAND = A2)) OR HAND = KT RaiseMax Force

i. e., do I need the parentheses around the the aces or would it push only with A3+ and disregard the rest of the statement without them? I have my own Nash code/PPL generator, it excees Excel's formula length limitation, and paring down the NOT statements would save 100 or so characters (if the ()'s are superfluous).
[/quote]

[ykcip75]

Appropos that, I have a question: would

WHEN HAND = A3 AND NOT (HAND = A2) OR HAND = KT RaiseMax Force

give the same result as,

WHEN (HAND = A3 AND NOT (HAND = A2)) OR HAND = KT RaiseMax Force

i. e., do I need the parentheses around the the aces or would it push only with A3+ and disregard the rest of the statement without them? I have my own Nash code/PPL generator, it excees Excel's formula length limitation, and paring down the NOT statements would save 100 or so characters (if the ()'s are superfluous).

It's logically true but semantically false.
There is no universal priority rules for boolean expression like there are for numerical expressions and it depends on the application.
Unless you know how the operators priority are handled you cannot do such statements that's why parentheses are there to make sure that each expressions are separated.
You don't need the not hand = A2 here unless you play omaha.
Now you have exceeded the formula length limitation you should use excel macros.

[johngr]

That's okay, I have abandoned the "blast the Nash range text sequentially against every possible PPL statement" approach, which doesn't work to make it Excel-friendly even with cell references that have short range names for each Nash notation, in favour of parsing the Nash text within array lookups (which has its own problems  ). Thanks for the info, anyway though.

You don't need the not hand = A2 here unless you play omaha.

I mixed up Nash notation and PPL there -- meant to write, "HAND = A"

[Sleeper]

Precedence for ppl
User Guide:

3.2.2 Operators:

‘Not’ and ‘And’ and ‘Or’ have their standard meanings. ‘Not’ has a higher precedence than ‘And’ which has a higher precedence than ‘Or’.

Nonetheless, brackets do clarify things.

[20beebeeperhundo]

Sweet I will use this

[miukumauku]

How does that work?  Could someone teach?

[Egor]

just always bracket 'not' conditions and 'or' conditions, its a good habit.

This is how I would write that line:

WHEN HAND = A3 AND NOT (HAND = A2 OR HAND = KT) RaiseMax Force

...of course I would never write that exact line because it doesn't make sense, and I would use lower case personally, but that's the style.

[BOTANIK]

good job, thank you !!!!!