If you're doing requests I would love to see A 8 5 with the 8 and 5 suited.

This is the same as the second set of results posted by Spadebidder I've just ordered by pot size from High to Low. I found it easier to read and compare.

[ Two-suited ] 55.05882% 2d-8s-4s 28.0
[ Monotone ] 5.17647% Kh-9h-6h 26.9
[ Rainbow ] 39.76471% Kc-8d-Qh 26.4
[---check suit types---] 100.00000%

[ Unpaired flop ] 82.82353% 2d-8s-4s 27.6
[ Triplet flop ] 0.23529% Kc-Kd-Ks 25.8
[ Paired flop ] 16.94118% 3h-3c-Kd 25.7
[---check suit types---] 100.00000%

[ 3-Straight ] 3.47511% 3c-5d-4c 30.7
[ Connector & 1gap ] 6.95023% Qd-Ts-Kh 29.6
[ Double gutshot ] 3.18552% 6s-8s-4c 28.6
[ Connector & 2+gap ] 26.93213% Kc-8d-Qh 27.6
[ Other 1gaps ] 21.42986% 2d-8s-4s 27.4
[ No cnct no 1gap no pr] 20.56109% Kh-9h-6h 26.7
[ Pair & connector ] 2.82353% 6s-6d-7c 26.5
[ Pair & 1gap ] 2.60633% 3s-Ad-3d 26.3
[ Triplets ] 0.23529% Kc-Kd-Ks 25.8
[ Pair & 2+gap ] 11.51131% 3h-3c-Kd 25.4
[ KA2 double connector ] 0.28959% Kh-2d-Ad 22.9
[---check suit types---] 100.00000%

[ Flop Combinations ]
[ 3-Straight 2-suited] 1.95475% 3c-5d-4c 31.5
[ Cnctr & 1gap 2-suited] 3.90950% 5d-3c-6c 30.2
[ 3-Straight-Flush ] 0.21719% 4s-6s-5s 29.3
[ Dbl gutshot 2-suited] 1.79186% 6s-8s-4c 29.2
[ Cnctr & 1gap rainbow] 2.60633% Qd-Ts-Kh 28.8
[ Cnctr & 1gap monotone] 0.43439% Tc-8c-Jc 28.6
[ Cnctr & 2+gp 2-suited] 15.14932% 6d-Jh-Td 28.2
[ Other 1-gaps 2-suited] 12.05430% 2d-8s-4s 28.1
[ Dbl gutshot monotone] 0.19910% 6d-2d-4d 27.9
[ Dbl gutshot rainbow] 1.19457% 3d-7c-5s 27.8
[ Pair & cnctr 2-suited] 1.41176% 4h-4c-3h 27.3
[ No cnt/gp/pr 2-suited] 11.56561% Jh-6h-As 27.3
[ Pair & 1gap 2-suited] 1.30317% 3s-Ad-3d 27.2
[ Cnctr & 2+gp monotone] 1.68326% Ac-Jc-2c 27.0
[ Cnctr & 2+gap rainbow] 10.09955% Kc-8d-Qh 26.8
[ Other 1-gaps monotone] 1.33937% Td-Qd-6d 26.5
[ Other 1-gaps rainbow] 8.03620% 5s-7h-Ad 26.5
[ Pair & 2+gap 2-suited] 5.75566% 7s-7d-4d 26.3
[ No cnt/gp/pr monotone] 1.28507% Kh-9h-6h 26.3
[ Triplets ] 0.23529% Kc-Kd-Ks 25.8
[ No cnt/gp/pr rainbow] 7.71041% 2d-Tc-6h 25.8
[ Pair & cnctr rainbow] 1.41176% 6s-6d-7c 25.6
[ Pair & 1gap rainbow] 1.30317% Qs-Ad-Ah 25.5
[ Pair & 2+gap rainbow] 5.75566% 3h-3c-Kd 24.5
[ KA2 dbl-cnct monotone] 0.01810% Ks-As-2s 24.0
[ KA2 dbl-cnct 2-suited] 0.16290% Kh-2d-Ad 23.9
[ KA2 dbl-cnct rainbow] 0.10860% 2d-Kh-As 21.2
[---check suit types---] 100.00000%

[More Interesting flops]
[ 3 to a Wheel no pr ] 2.89593% 3c-5d-4c 28.5
[ 2 to a Wheel no pr ] 23.16742% 2d-8s-4s 27.5
[ Double-BWay unpaired ] 23.16742% Kc-8d-Qh 25.2
[ Triple-BWay unpaired ] 2.89593% Jc-Tc-Qc 24.9
[ Any A or K or both ] 40.07240% Kc-8d-Qh 24.7
[ Double-BWay paired ] 4.34389% Qh-4c-Qc 24.1
[ Triple-BWay paired ] 2.26244% Kh-Ks-Td 22.5
[---check suit types---] 100.00000%

Use the [code tag for preformatted text and end it with /code] both with brackets on both sides, to preserve the columns. You can still edit it.

There's actually a way to do tables. Quote this post to see how:

column 1	column 2	column 3
1,1	1,2	1,3
2,1	2,2	2,3
3,1	3,2	3,3

Easy on the scale of maybe 15 minutes work to set up the filter for it and then run the scan. Is that something that would be useful information? Why?

I don't have any NL hands with less than $0.25 big blind. About 3/4 of what I have is in the range of the stuff I posted, up to $4 BB, and the rest is higher stakes or other Holdem formats (and some Omaha). I'll be getting some more hands soon but probably not micros.

I don't get why they would be interested in it. Is that a serious question? I'm not going to be writing a formal paper suitable for any kind of academic journal, and I'm not a PhD anyway. I'm just going to publish my findings on a web site where people can discuss it. And I'm a curious guy. The flop distribution stuff is only one of the areas I'm working on. I'm also doing turns and rivers, all-ins preflop, correlating things to stack size, and so forth. Some of the ideas grew out of the rigtard debates, where before now no one had any real data. I do. Another purpose is to recognize and quantify unknown card removal effects.

Ok, but do you think av. pot size per board will be dramatically different at the micros. At first, I though it might be similar to the results you posted, because if someone is spewing their money @ the micros, it will be done on random boards. But then some boards occur more frequently than others e.g. more 2 3 4 than K K K board. So does this mean that at the micros, the frequency of the type of board is more relevant, because of the spew going on?
Note that lately at the micros, there is much less spewing- in the extreme sense of the word- than there used to be. You hardly see maniacs, but occasionally do, moreso than higher stakes (although in higher stakes you get a lot of LAGs). Ok, clearly I'm rabling. help

I looked at the 0.25 BB hands I have (about 8 million NL) and everything is about the same. In fact, the average pot sizes were a little more tightly grouped than the higher stakes, but essentially the same, and the flop distribution was the same.

I would expect the .05 and lower stakes to have a character all their own, but I have no data.

How do the results look if you filter for 6-max hi-stakes games, 10/20 NL and higher? I'm especially curious as to how QT7 and QT8 rank up relative to JT9 and 543, all with flush draws. Don't imagine 543 generating more actn than QT7, but happy to be proven wrong..

such a great post

Any reason this was done in for the micros? (existing db?) I would love to see if there was any difference in say nl 200-400 where the play is much better.

What do you mean by this? The pot sizes for a given board texture form a distribution. You computed its mean (actually the sample mean). You can also compute the sample variance.

Yes it can be done, I said I didn't think it would be useful. I'd have to code it as it takes two passes through the data to do this, one to get the mean and another to get every individual offset from the mean, so you can square and sum them. I would guess the pot sizes for a particular flop texture look a lot like a normal distribution with truncated tails.

Sticky thread already plz

Well yes, it's sort of a selfish request but my intuition/playing experience tells me that board makes big NL pots. Your analysis could help distinguish if that's just my selective memory at work or if there's maybe something to it.

Yeah, I'm very serious. Your doing original work and contributing to the poker literature. Having a "credential" isn't always relevant. It's impressive work - big data sets are hard to deal with and hard to come by.

Someone asked about higher stakes so I did a run counting only BB of $20 and up, which is mostly under $100 and a few higher. I only have about 3 million hands at these stakes. But the interesting thing was that average pot sizes are a lot higher. For hands with flops seen, final pots range from ~30 to about ~41 BB with about the same flop type distribution as the other stakes.

I'll have time after while to post that chart.