|
|
#1
07-03-06, 11:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
critique these numbers....
Ok, so I recently started playing again after a two-month break. Before the break I was a winning player (limit and NL) at a rate and level I was happy with. After the break this has continued, although this time around I dropped to $25NL and $11 SNGs-didn’t provide myself with a large bankroll and I don’t have enough time to give to the 6-max limit grind (this is my favorite game, but for me it requires lots of time to grind it and built a large enough sample to smooth out some of the variance).
Here are the stats for 6-max $25NL day 1 (approx 1200 hands small sample, I know) W$SF is 39.4% W$SD is 46.9% SD is 9.4% VP$IP is 28.6% PFR is 14.2%, AF is 2.17. VP$IP is a little high for me. It could be due to small sample or I might be a little loose, I will look into that. Usually I run around 22-25% for NL 6-max. AF is a little low for me, usually I run around 2.8-3.1. What concerns me is the W$SD. That seems way too low for me and could be a real leak. It tells me is that I am not giving enough credit when players stick around. Solution 1 would be to crank up the aggression a little and then release if anyone sticks, or solution 2 would be to continue as I am but to keep in mind this potential leak. Any other comments? And I know that this is a small sample size, but these numbers are trending pretty close to normal except where noted. edit-to correct the grammer mistakes I noticed, can you find more? Last edited by melioris; 07-03-06 at 11:13 PM. |
|
#4
07-03-06, 11:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
nothing to do with this post, but i just played 200 hands of 2/4 after it some guy told my me AF was 18.4 . thats a big high. I was $220 up though. So....who knows! Those numbers look ok to me, but im not an expert |
|
#5
07-03-06, 11:44 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
200 is a pretty small sample size right?
__________________
"Some things you just can't question. Like you can't question why two plus two is four... it was put in my head that two plus two is four. So certain things happen. Why does it rain? Why am I sexy? I don't know." |
|
#7
07-04-06, 01:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You are getting too worked up about the won at showdown % if you only have 1200 hands. Many of those pokertracker stats aren't even negligible until about 20,000 hands.
|
|
#8
07-04-06, 01:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Also, I don't really think won at showdown % is that that great of a stat. Everyone I have over 5K hands has one around 47-54. If it is below that, you are probably just running bad.
|
|
#9
07-04-06, 10:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Because a lot of the time a +EV call on the river in NL could have a W$SD around 25-33% (in the most simple situation of just calling a bet on the river), or do you have some other reason why you don't like this stat?
|
|
#10
07-04-06, 12:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Personally, I think went to showdown % is a better statistic than won at showndown %. I suppose there is some merit in both stats, but they don't really materialize until you have far more hands than you currently do now.
|
|
#11
07-05-06, 02:50 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Right...
Take a limit poker hand, for example: If you're getting 10:1 on a river call and you are winning 30% of these showdowns, that is HUGE +EV. Sure, you could start folding a lot more to increase your W$SD number, but that woud be killing much more important numbers, namely your BB/100. The same is true for NL, as you suggested. |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
