|
|
#1
11-15-06, 04:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Winning/losing players' PT stats...
With some people recently posting their and wondering how they look (and we've done this many times before), I was thinking... why not take a look at the biggest winners in our databases and see what their stats look like? This will probably vary from limit to limit, of course, and by no means does the person who has won the most money have to be the best player out there, but it's certainly a good starting point. Optimal PT numbers will likely change a bit between limits too, so hopefully more people than just me will contribute to this thread. I have a lot of hands datamined for 3/6 and 5/10 NL, so I'll post those. If someone wants to post numbers for lower (or higher) limits, that would be great.
OK, so here's what I'm doing: 1. Open PT 2. Preferences/All Dates/Select Limit(s) 3. Summary Tab - sort by $ Won 4. Doubleclick on name 5. Take screenshot of stats from General Info Tab (Alt-Print Screen, then open photo software, Paste, Crop and upload here using "Manage Attachments") And that's it. I suspect even looking at ONE very successful player's winnings would be useful, but if we get a handful of these posted, I'm thinking the optimal numbers will become clear. BTW... try to use guys with at least 10k hands played. Here are the screenshots for the biggest 3/6 and 5/10 NL 6 max winners that I have numbers for. For the biggest 5/10 winner, I am fascinated to see that he is a LOSER over 10k hands at 3/6, even though his numbers are almost identical to his 5/10 numbers. I guess that just goes to show that 10k hands is NOT a significant sample size... that, or that there is a significant difference between how these two games play and his style that works very well in one doesn't work nearly as well in the other. My money is on the former being the case. You know, come to think of it, maybe we should just have JD/Boobie post ALL of their stats from all of the limits that play. That's probably just as good as this idea of mine, if not better. 
Last edited by Talking Poker; 11-15-06 at 04:50 PM. |
|
#2
11-15-06, 04:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Just for kicks, here are the biggest losers that I have numbers for...
|
|
#3
11-15-06, 04:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I get an invalid attachment error for the attatchments in the first post.
__________________
If aces didn't get cracked they would be writing books about me! |
|
#4
11-15-06, 04:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
You probably clicked just as I was editing. Refresh and try it again.
|
|
#5
11-15-06, 04:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Fine now, thanks.
__________________
If aces didn't get cracked they would be writing books about me! |
|
#6
11-15-06, 05:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Looking these numbers over and comparing them to my own is very interesting. I think more than anything, the small sample sizes are the problems here (variance is a bitch)... but I also think that is is possible to be a big winner with fairly different numbers than another big winner may have. I don't think there is a right or wrong VPIP, for example. What matters is the combination of all of your numbers and how that style works for you. PT can't show how good you are at changing gears to take advantage of your image and so on and so forth. PT can't show how easily you tilt or if you are able to keep control of your emotions.
In other words, I think doing stuff like this is a good exercise and definitely hgas value if any of your numbers are WAY different than the winners, but I don't think you have to try to shoot for these exact same figures. This is just a starting point... |
|
#7
11-15-06, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm sure if I datamined more there would be better numbers for others. So, these are my #s over the past month or so (since Bodog has been semi-compatible with PokerTracker).
winner.jpg Ah man, this next screen makes me happy. This guy is an asshole. loser.jpg |
|
#8
11-15-06, 05:14 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The first thing that jumps out at me is that the losers are more aggressive on the turn and river.
__________________
"Animals die, friends die, and I shall die. But the one thing that will never die is the reputation I leave behind." Old Norse adage |
|
#9
11-15-06, 05:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
As is covered in the Sklansky NLHE book, winners make mistakes in small pots, and losers make mistakes in big pots. Or something to that effect. Basically, they argue that it is technically an error to openraise 85s. However, a good aggressive player is more liberally aggressive early in the hand, when it costs him less money. He makes smart decisions late in hands, and he comes out on top. He can exploit players who only notice "raises with bad hands." Bad aggressive players tend to miss this important distinction, and they can lose a lot of money. |
|
#10
11-15-06, 05:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
This is EXACTLY the case, IMO. There are some guys who are HUGE losers, and their numbers don't look THAT bad, at a glance... Their VPIP/PRF numbers are reasonable, meaning they understand the value of starting hands. Their problem is that their postflop play is horrendous, and they will all too easily bluff off their entire stack when it's obvious their opponent is holding the nuts.
|
|
#11
11-15-06, 09:28 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I thought you said you ran well at 3/6 and not so good at 5/10. This chart seems to show very much otherwise.
|
|
#12
11-15-06, 09:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
That comment was for that one particular day.
|
|
#13
11-16-06, 05:22 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Any other PT dataminers want to add to this thread?
|
|
#14
11-16-06, 06:26 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
only 4k hands of 3/6 on my new DB or would add mine.
when i play 10 tables im like 20/17/3.5 when i play 4 or less i play alot more hands
__________________
"Suffer the pain of discipline or suffer the pain of regret" "Rome wasn't built in a day" |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
