|
Hermann the Lombard
|
09-13-2007, 01:43 AM
Post subject: First PT Peek
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 270
|
|
I realize that 1000 hands is a ridiculously small sample size so I'm not going to pay much attention to specific hands and positions for a while, but I am taking a look at the summary numbers and asking for feedback.
VP$IP: 18.76 VP$SB: 28.57
Folded to Steal: SB 0.00 BB 66.67
Att to Steal: 3.57
Won $ WSF 29.23
BB/100 4.16
Went to SD: 30.00 Won at SD: 55.13
PF Raise: 6.02
AF: Flop 2.00 Turn 2.68 River 1.92 Total 2.16
My own analysis? Not too tight since I'm wet behind the ears. Maybe calling too much from the SB. Not trying to steal but it's never folded to me anyway. Way too passive post-flop, way too passive for Fnord pre-flop (but he doesn't have to have more surgery). I have to learn to bite. PokerTracker rates me Tight-Aggressive but obviously not TAA.
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,333
|
|
In a typical pot, how many players are seeing a flop?
|
|
|
|
daven
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soaking up ethanol, moving on up
Posts: 5,805
|
|
Enter marginally fewer pots and raise more often when you do so.
Try to steal more often.
Post-flop AF of 2 isn't too passive.
and you're winning and learning while playing. Don't beat up on yourself!!! nice one.
|
|
|
|
BennyLaRue
|
|
09-13-2007, 02:20 AM
Post subject: Re: First PT Peek
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 646
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hermann the Lombard
VP$IP: 18.76 VP$SB: 28.57
Folded to Steal: SB 0.00 BB 66.67
Att to Steal: 3.57
Won $ WSF 29.23
BB/100 4.16
Went to SD: 30.00 Won at SD: 55.13
PF Raise: 6.02
AF: Flop 2.00 Turn 2.68 River 1.92 Total 2.16
|
I don't see anything wrong here. You might be leaving some money on the table by not raising more pre-flop but your post flop aggression is just fine. If you can sustain that win-rate, you're doing great.
From the few posts I've read, nobody is as aggressive as Fnord.  Don't compare yourself.
Speaking of Fnord, is that Ernie from Ernie's House of Whoop Ass in your pic or is that you?
|
|
|
|
Hermann the Lombard
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 270
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fnord
In a typical pot, how many players are seeing a flop?
|
About four. Even "penny-ante" isn't as loose as it was when SSH and WLLHE were written. I find myself using SSH's tight game guidelines.
I see that PT only flags someone as TAA if the AF is at least 3.0. I guess those same SSH guidelines leave me raising PF about 6% of the time. I guess I could loosen that up a tiny bit.
I'm glad to get the feedback. I'm not beating myself up, just trying to get better.
|
|
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,333
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daven
Enter marginally fewer pots
|
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
|
|
|
|
DrivingDog
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 923
|
|
is your folded SB to steal really 0% or is that a typo? Should be in the higher end of 75-85%. You only want to be playing strong hands from the SB vs. a steal and then 3betting them to knock out the BB.
Other than that, yeah maybe start adding some hands to your starting repertoire.
Aggression is fine. >2 is aggressive enough.
Other than that, looks good. Keep it up!
|
|
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on." (George Bush).
|
|
BennyLaRue
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 646
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hermann the Lombard
I see that PT only flags someone as TAA if the AF is at least 3.0. I guess those same SSH guidelines leave me raising PF about 6% of the time. I guess I could loosen that up a tiny bit. |
Try it, see if it works, but just because someone is rated as TAA doesn't mean s/he's destined to make money. Money can be made off of many different styles and your win rate is good, so don't adjust your style for Poker Tracker's sake.
|
|
|
|
Hermann the Lombard
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 270
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DrivingDog
is your folded SB to steal really 0% or is that a typo? Should be in the higher end of 75-85%.
|
If it's a typo it's PT's and not mine. I was wondering about that number myself, but I suspect that the main reason is that at this level very few people try to steal the blinds in the first place. I think that anything PokerTracker is reporting as a blind steal was just a normal bet and not a steal. It seems that the PF is never folded around to the CO or later, somebody always calls. That's good for me, of course...give or take the schooling effect.
|
|
|
|
DrivingDog
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 923
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hermann the Lombard
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DrivingDog
is your folded SB to steal really 0% or is that a typo? Should be in the higher end of 75-85%.
|
If it's a typo it's PT's and not mine. I was wondering about that number myself, but I suspect that the main reason is that at this level very few people try to steal the blinds in the first place. I think that anything PokerTracker is reporting as a blind steal was just a normal bet and not a steal. It seems that the PF is never folded around to the CO or later, somebody always calls. That's good for me, of course...give or take the schooling effect. |
You're prolly right, the situatoin just hasn't arisen yet and PT sets the value to 0% by default.
|
|
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on." (George Bush).
|
|
daven
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soaking up ethanol, moving on up
Posts: 5,805
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fnord
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daven
Enter marginally fewer pots
|
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS |
fair enough. Depends a little on how many tables you are playing I think.
And how arrogant you are postflop (me=arrogant, but not any good - horrible combo)
And I like the idea of pre-flop-raising more than half of the pots entered... And it stops people playing K9s out of position
Hypocrisy from me though - my last 1k hands of fullring limit I'm running 21-10-4.7 and running just under 5BB/100
|
|
|
|
Hermann the Lombard
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 270
|
|
Just now I'm still playing one at a time, trying to take some notes on the other players and focus on the action...with varying success.
|
|
|
|
DrivingDog
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 923
|
|
I'm sure it's been said before, but 1000 hands doesn't give you a very accurate estimation of your win rate. A typical standard deviation is 15-20 BB/100 so if you are a +1BB/100 player it will take about 75k hands to show a statistically significant result (i.e., to be reasonably confident you are winning). If you are +2BB/100 it's about 25k and for +3BB/100 about 15k.
|
|
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on." (George Bush).
|
|
Hermann the Lombard
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 270
|
|
D.D. - Understood, it's just the sample size that I have at the moment. How does it go? "Past performance is no guarantee of future results"? Perhaps even more importantly, my BB/100 rate at .02/.04 may not have much to do with my rate at higher levels!!!
|
|
|
|
arborman
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 300
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DrivingDog
I'm sure it's been said before, but 1000 hands doesn't give you a very accurate estimation of your win rate. A typical standard deviation is 15-20 BB/100 so if you are a +1BB/100 player it will take about 75k hands to show a statistically significant result (i.e., to be reasonably confident you are winning). If you are +2BB/100 it's about 25k and for +3BB/100 about 15k.
|
Glad to hear it, as I've done ~28K hands at .05-.10 LHE and am currently beating it by ~6.5BB/100. I've always assumed that I was on a significant upswing. Sadly, I have lost much of my winnings on trips uplimit.
|
|
|
|
DrivingDog
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 923
|
|
PT gives you your standard deviation (SD)/100 hands in the session folder under 'more detail'. Take this number and divide it by the square root of how many 100s of hands you have and you get the standard error (SE). Take your win rate and divide it by the SE to get a z-score. If z >= 1.65 you can be 95% confident of being a winning player over this sample.
E.g., if you are +3 BB over 10k hands and your SD is 15, your SE =15/sqrt(100) = 1.5.
3BB/1.5 = 2, which is greater than 1.65, so you are better than 95% likely to be winning as opposed to just being a huge suckass.
This site shows a Z-score table http://www.admin.northpark.edu/jmcco...re%20Table.htm The numbers along the left are the z-score to one decimal point and the numbers along the top are the second decimal. So to look at 1.65 go down to where the 1.6 row crosses the 0.05 column. The number is .9505 or 95% likelihood that the results do not occur by chance alone.
|
|
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on." (George Bush).
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
