Poker With Software - PAHUD / GT+

[Aequitas58]

For those who play with overlaying software: PokerAceHUD or GameTime+ in conjunction with PT:

Background
After a recent reformat and upgrade to WinXP on my PC, I am beginning to re-build stats on my PartyPoker opponents. Obviously we can never have enough hands for someone, BUT...

Question 1
How many hands do you need on someone to feel that the stats are solid enough to rely on?

Question 2
How much "relying" do you do on these stats during your session?

[Robbie Robb]

At Party I feel that I get a pretty decent idea of their play with as few as 30 hands. Obviously, the more data I get, the better it is, but I don't see it changing TOO much. If they're 80/15 after 30, chances are they're going to be around 80/15 after 300 or more.

I use the information primarily preflop. I find it to be a good indicator of when someone is either a) playing a monster or b) making a huge, but rare, bluff.

[Aequitas58]

30 makes me laugh. I was looking over an opponent's stats today, and even after 1000 hands on him, I'm still wondering if that's enough for a read.

[Talking Poker]

I know I could use the information a lot more than I do, but here is how I typically use what is in front of me:

-Right away. If a guy only has 7 hands, but he's at 100% or 0%, that means a little something. Just be aware that his numbers can and will change. Once a guy is up to 25 hands or so, I find the numbers to be much more reliable.

-I honestly don't even look at the numbers much. Once in a while, I glance around the table to see what type of player is sitting where, and that's usually the extent of it. "Ok, maniac to my right, super tight guy 2 to my left" - that sort of thing.

-When it comes to decision making, I don't use it much, but there are times that I do. If I feel like a guy is making a play, I'll check his numbers. What's his postflop aggression? I'll also check a guy's Went to Showdown % before making a big bluff... I want to know if he's capable of folding or if he's a calling station.

Like I said, I'm sure I could use the numbers more, but for me, they are more of a backup than something I rely on. I mainly use them to stay on top of when people switch tables (not noticing a guy you had a read on is actually a new player now) and to identify the BIG maniacs (this is ideal for seat selection too).

[Talking Poker]

Well, you're being silly then.

I doubt his numbers moved more than 1% across the board from when you had him at 100 hands.

The numbers will never be EXACT, but you can tell mighty quick which guys fall into what categories.

[Robbie Robb]

lol. Some of these guys are pretty obvious though. This is all for $25NL by the way. If I were playing higher levels, I fully agree with you - 1000 probably isn't even enough. I think that's where the datamining comes in extremely handy - at the higher levels. I think it's fairly pointless to datamine at my level as there are simply FAR too many players. There are some players at $25NL that are hard to get reliable info on without a LOT of hands on them. THOSE are the ones that I pay a ton of attention to and not just rely on the numbers to guide me.

[Talking Poker]

Are you guys insane?

If a guy's VPIP is 85% at 1000 hands, I promise you he's a maniac. Let him play another 1000 hands and maybe he VPIP will swing all the way to 80% or 90%, but what's the difference? At 100 hands, you knew he was well over 60%, and that's all you needed to know. At 25 hands, I'm certain he wasn't under 30%. It was enough for a read, way back then.

Of course the more data you have, the more meaning the numbers have, but don't be afraid to use them much, much sooner - at least as far as identifying extreme players goes.

[Aequitas58]

Ty.

[Aequitas58]

Silly me.

[Talking Poker]

You get what I'm saying though, right?

I mean, if one guy is 9/0 through 50 hands and another guy is 85/45 through those same 50 hands, surely that's enough data for you to classify them (and PLAY against them) differently, rather than ignoring the numbers until you play 950 (or however many) more hands with them...

[melioris]

I think I may rely too heavily on the numbers at the level I play (≤100NL). I use them to influence decisions, but not make them.

Preflop I use the standard numbers to influence decisions (mostly to help me figure out implied odds or when to help to convince myself to reraise to isolate), VP$IP, %PFR and sometimes I look at cold call

On the flop I have three numbers displayed that I rely on. %fold to CB and %player CBs and AF. I really use these numbers to tailor my actions to the correct style of opponent. At my levels you run into a real problem of making a move against a player that is incapable of being influence by the move, so I use this numbers to help me make the correct decision on the flop.

On the turn and river I look at total won and % won at showdown to help me figure out what to do.

I have it set so that it doesn’t display info on anyone with less that 25 hands (I think this is the default setting). I think 25 hands should be enough to establish trends on a player. After a 100 hands, statistically the trends shouldn’t vary too much to change your view of the player (for our purposes folding to a CB 85% is the same as folding to a CB 75%). If you are looking for more specific info than trends, I think you are relying too much on the numbers and not enough on the situation.

[Aequitas58]

I understand what you're saying, but we're also talking about extremes. The guy is a maniac after 50, it's pretty clear he'll stay that way. Dealing with the maniacs or tight-passives is easy.

For what it's worth, I'm not comfortable with 30 hands on someone, and I'm pretty sure that not many people would be. Then again, I'm not saying I NEED MORE than 1000, I'm saying I don't know. I'm asking what other people are comfortable with.

[Talking Poker]

Gotcha.

And maybe it's because I ONLY use it to identify the extreme players that I don't care about all the guys in the middle. I simply don't use the software to make decisions for anyone with remotely "normal" looking numbers. I think doing so may be relying on it too much. And really, all those numbers are showing you is how he has played in the past. A guy who is 28/18 is just as likely to have raised you with AA on this hand as he is with 78s. Well, if he's me, anyway.

Like I said, I use the numbers to quickly identify the extreme players, and that's it. For everyone else, it's a non factor.

[PShabi]

1) Different stats take longer to converge than others. For instance, if you've got 30 hands on someone and they've got a VP$IP of 85%, it's pretty safe to say they aren't the tightest players. However, after 30 hands, the WTSD% stat is pretty much meaningless.

2) It's hard for me to give a defnitive answer here. The stats are pretty much "the face" of the player for me. Players come in and out so frequently and I change tables a lot. If I didn't have these stat overlays, I'd never be able to keep reads on the player. I just look for overall trends in the stats, but they don't help me to make borderline decisions at all.

Lately, I've gotten much more involved taking notes. I section the notes by preflop/postflop. If I get 3-bet by a TAG with 66, I make a note of it. If a player peels a dry flop, and then check/raises me on the turn when he picks up a flush draw, I note it. Anything out of the ordinary goes in the notes.

The notes with the stats paints a decent picture of how the player plays. In LHE, I would never want to play w/o it.

[PShabi]

Lou,

Are you on the rag?

[Aequitas58]

Dear Phil,

What does that mean?

Stay sexy,
Lou