The new free, unlimited (for now) Sharkscope!

Thanks to biondino for linking to this in another post. Not quite as much functionality as Sharkscope but still pretty good for identifying the donks/sharks.

No doubt it will become a paid site soon but for now, enjoy!

http://arcatum.net/startracker/

It's funny Tai - the first thing I did after gloating about my stats was go and have a look at yours

Thanks for the catch guys. I'm going to try it and see.

Awesome link Tai. Registered and love it. I especially love the breakdown so you can see if someone has just moved up/down, if they do better at certain games, etc.

Pretty cool site.

very cool thanks guys

wow thanks.

Only ROI and BANK stats for youself right?

'MyTable' looks pretty interesting. Anyone tried it yet? You plug in your username and it will automatically look up stats for opponents at your current table.

The other interesting stat that it has is the "Statistics" tab where they track (amongst other things) ROI and ITM stats for games by number of players.

The following stats are for 9 player turbo games for players with >200 games:

- 90th percentile ROI is 11.8%
- 90th percentile ITM is 40%

- 75th percentile ROI is 6.1%
- 75th percentile ITM is 38%

Unfortunately it is not split by buyin so it's pretty general, but it's interesting for those who think that a 25% ROI at the turbos is sustainable.

I can only imagine I had this bookmarked in my browser because someone else on FTR recommended it, so props are really due to them. But it's pretty interesting.

I'm just fed up with all these tracking sites and all the idiots who berate fish by busting out their ROI from Sharkscope and OPR. I used to only see this every once in awhile in the chat, but now I can't even play a damn session without seeing it two or three times.

Originally Posted by mcatdog

I'm just fed up with all these tracking sites and all the idiots who berate fish by busting out their ROI from Sharkscope and OPR. I used to only see this every once in awhile in the chat, but now I can't even play a damn session without seeing it two or three times.

Yeah that is annoying. I can't lie I've berated a few when we get heads up and their feeling frisky and decide to tell me how bad i am and how i suck etc , so i sharkscope them and usually say something , but this rarely happens. I like to sharkscope the guys outing the fish on the table and laugh because most of them are breakeven players.

I generally scope the guys doing the berating and they rarely have the stats to justify abusing anyone else.

Whats the saying? Dont tap on the glass, you'll scare the fish away!

Has anybody worked out how to use the "My table" feature? I tried downloading the program but it doesn't work when I run it, also when I try searching for tourneys on the screen nothing shows up.

Yeah MyTable doesnt work for me either. Would have been really useful

Thanks Tai and bio, looks nice

The old Sharkscope seems to not be working for me. Same for anyone else?

Worked for me just now. Some guy kept berating me for pushing too often (all <10BB and most from SB) and basically told me I got what I deserved when my AK was called by JJ and I didnt improve to bubble out. Didnt say anything, but scoped him out and he's managed to be a losing player for 3000 games now.

Which is about what I expected .


I didnt download the mytable software, I'm a bit paranoid. If enough other people give it the thumbs up I might though.

Originally Posted by kmind

very cool thanks guys

lol

Yeah I got the MyTable thing working, you just need to install this program before running: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

Pretty handy feature, although it only shows the ITM % and number of games played for your opponents, no ROI

lol [brag] guess I better strive for that additional 1 percentile! [/brag]
excellent find!

thanks Tai!

edit

Heh, I finally got around to clicking my registration email, so had a play around learning what the terms are.

STR - Star Tracker Rating, between 0-100% compared to all other players at that level.

$6.50 - 74% .
$11 - 100% .
$4.40 (180) - 100%
$11 (18) - 100%
$22 - 92%


I deliberatly avoided posting sample sizes .

Yeah posting sample sizes sucks

Anyways . .

$3.25 45 mans 65%
$4.40 180 mans 52%
$6.50 45 mans 64%
$6.50 18 man 95%
$6.50 9 man 95%
$5.50 9 man 100%
$5.50 18 man 100%
$5.50 45 man 100%

Guess I should stick to the $5.50s and do away with the crapshoots.

oh awesome thanks Tai. Sharkscope hasn't been working for me lately.

All right, vanity points - I found myself in the 'stars' section =p I'm only a 90 STR thanks to my low # of games, but there are only 3 players with a better AFP than me. You have no idea the boost my self-esteem is feeling just now =p
Interestingly though, among the stars I have one of the lower ITM percentages. I may be bubbling out too often.
Also interestingly, the stars with 100 STR have relatively low AFP and ITM.
I wish the 'stars' section showed ROI, then we could easily compare winning players' ROIs at particular levels.

Originally Posted by taipan168

The other interesting stat that it has is the "Statistics" tab where they track (amongst other things) ROI and ITM stats for games by number of players.

The following stats are for 9 player turbo games for players with >200 games:

- 90th percentile ROI is 11.8%
- 90th percentile ITM is 40%

- 75th percentile ROI is 6.1%
- 75th percentile ITM is 38%

Unfortunately it is not split by buyin so it's pretty general, but it's interesting for those who think that a 25% ROI at the turbos is sustainable.

This is VERY interesting: At the 18-player turbos, 90th percentile ROI is 21.0%, nearly double the 9-player ROI!! Considering 18-player games don't take much longer than 9's, I'd say we've found where the real money is to be made. I wonder why this statistic exists? Do the good players all flock to the single-tables?

21% is definitely less than 25%, but not by much, so I'd wager that at the lower levels a 25% ROI IS sustainable at 2-table turbos. I'm sitting between 25-30% so far, and I'll keep you guys up to date as my sample size grows.

How do you find your ROI? I've signed up etc but it doesn't seem to display it anywhere. Maybe i'm being thick.

edit

I play on all a few sites, but play a lot of the 9 handed SNGs at absolute, Sharkscope doesn't seem to work with AP. Is there a similar program/site that works with AP?

and where do you get that Bankroll graphic from? marmot....

Originally Posted by Jonny_MEMPHIS

and where do you get that Bankroll graphic from? marmot....

Try here - http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...er-t57676.html

5.50 9man = 100 STR with a 50% ITM
4.40 180 =90 STR with 8% ITM
11 9 man = 84 STR with a 100% ITM lol 1 for 1.

But the 5.50 9 man is very nice to see.

Got signed up and checked myself out. Not sure what all the stuff means but I definitely suck at the $10 180 player sitngos. Been playing the $1.10 45 sitngos which aren't tracked after i got off tilt when i finally won a 6.50 45 player sitngo.
Well if anyones got some suggestions for me after seeing my stats lemme know.

Is there anything like this for party? The 'scope only tracks MTTs and steps.

Wow pretty interesting. Far less players with over 200games on record at both 6seater and 18seater yet both offer higher ROIs than 9seater. In order of ROI over 200games at 75%quartile
for ALL SNGs
1st: 180man 41.7%
2nd: 45man 25.6%
3rd: 18man 19.9%
4th: 27man 18.4%
5th: 6man 11.6%
6th: 9man 9.4%

for -10%ITM but +10%ROI 18mans look tasty now dont they? Would love for them to do like an average ROI/hour --what would a 180man regulars $/hr look like compared a 9man regular, assuming both multitable same number of tables in continuous play?

180 man takes about 3 1/2 hrs to play. 9 man about 1.5.

I run the StarTracker website and I found this thread from February. This is the first discussion I have found where people actually understood what the stats meant on the site.

The site has gradually gotten slower and slower as more data is captured. I have optimized the database as much as I can but my server just can't query fast enough.

I was thinking of only keeping the last 6 months of detailed results in the database, and then archiving the data in summary form for the older months. I was thinking of keeping: n played, average buyin, average number of players, itm, afp, aroi, and roi for each month. Breaking it down further by size of tournament and buyin seemed like overkill.

Any thoughts?

Originally Posted by StarTracker

I run the StarTracker website and I found this thread from February. This is the first discussion I have found where people actually understood what the stats meant on the site.

The site has gradually gotten slower and slower as more data is captured. I have optimized the database as much as I can but my server just can't query fast enough.

I was thinking of only keeping the last 6 months of detailed results in the database, and then archiving the data in summary form for the older months. I was thinking of keeping: n played, average buyin, average number of players, itm, afp, aroi, and roi for each month. Breaking it down further by size of tournament and buyin seemed like overkill.

Any thoughts?

First I love star tracker. I find that hud stats are worth much less in sngs and small tourneys than profitability stats. When I am at a tough decision early in a game I will often consult tracker stats.

Archiving can be a monstrous task but is economical in terms of not needing hardware upgrades. I would see if there's a way to get a survey out to your user base and propose what the summary would look like, then determine whether it is something that will piss people off or whether people will appreciate it. If you ask the right questions you could also get design feedback this way and potentially make the UI better.

I for one think summary data is a good way to go if you have the manpower to take it on. I trust newer data obviously over older data.

One thing about the current UI is the "last 20 played" seems way too small and I pretty much ignore it because of the huge variance involved in the games. Yet it is displayed so prominently. I would say something more along last 100 or 200. Still a small sample size but it gets to the spirit of what I think you are intending that display for (how have things been going for them "recently"). I still pretty much discount that stat anyway.

By the way, I hardly ever look down the long list of tourns. The summary list on the top, broken out by buy-in and game type is really the only data I am concerned with.

Originally Posted by StarTracker

I was thinking of only keeping the last 6 months of detailed results in the database, and then archiving the data in summary form for the older months. I was thinking of keeping: n played, average buyin, average number of players, itm, afp, aroi, and roi for each month. Breaking it down further by size of tournament and buyin seemed like overkill.

Adding the additional data you mentioned would be great. The STR percentiles are a useful measure but there's nothing like good ol' ROI

If there is some way to show the performance of the player in a graphical form like Sharkscope does that would be even better.

Good feedback FlyingSaucy! Thanks.

Originally Posted by taipan168

Adding the additional data you mentioned would be great. The STR percentiles are a useful measure but there's nothing like good ol' ROI

If there is some way to show the performance of the player in a graphical form like Sharkscope does that would be even better.

The ROI and Bankroll info was removed at the request of PokerStars. This put my site on the acceptable list http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/room/prohibited/ at PokerStars. I was planning on keeping that info in the summary only to be used to calculate the STR number. I would not show ROI info for the archived months.

As for the graph. If you are used to Sharkscope, then a graph can be very helpful. Personally I wanted quantifiable info so I could see where people stand. I mainly want to know who are most likely going to be in the money or on the bubble with me. It is hard to derive that info from a graph. Even harder to actually rank the players around my table, especially during a game. Sharkscope's lack of quantifyable info was the main reason I started my own database. That is my opinion, you have yours. Anyone else think a graph is better than an STR?

I don't think a graph is really necessary. The main reason I use StarTracker is because I can actually see the amount of volume each player has at what limit...which is where Sharkscope is lacking

Sorry, I probably responded too quickly (probably whilst I was playing). As you know, I think the site is great, I use it almost every day when playing - and it can be a useful additional data point when you have a tough marginal decision to make.

I was probably unfair about the STR - on reflection it gives you all the information you need about a player's performance - it's probably just that I'm used to assessing performance based on ROI but it isn't that hard to adapt. Thanks for explaining why you had to remove ROI, that makes sense.

I agree with FlyingSaucy, the detailed list of tourneys probably isn't necessary and may add to the page load time. However, I agree with fjuanl that the information on a player's volume and performance at different levels is valuable because it can affect your decisions when a player who has mostly been playing low buyins suddenly jumps up to mid-high buyins.

I also agree that the last 20 stat really isn't sufficient given the high variance of the game, you'd want to know how they've gone on at least the last 100 and probably more.

"You have exceeded the maximum number hits on this site for one day. "

There is a limit... I did use it a lot today though.