Quote:
Originally Posted by durrrr
creed, was leatherass fullstacked in those hands (is there a way to tell) also does it show his vpip etc? If leatherass or some other person w/ similar vpip/winrate had that big of a difference itd be very damning, yet if the stats vs la are twice as often for getting to showdown, but la is playing fullstacked- then 3b shoving 20bb over him more often makes sense (as does him calling wider). Also maybe the shortstacks just dont call vs reshoves enough? That evidence u posted is scary, but not damning, there could still be explanations (not saying there are- i want to know like everyone else obv).
edit: btw timestamps are super crazy obv
Hey durrrr. The hand data is just from PTR, and it's not sorted in any way for stack size.
I've got kinetica at 14/13 in full ring, 40putts at 17/13. I won't post LA's stats but let's just say that it's not obvious to me why a shortstack would preferentially shove over him more often or call him more often than these two. Kinetica and 40putts (and LA as well) play a ton of CAP and I think they've all got 20-30BB reshoving strategy in general down pat.
In fact, all of the opponents in the 40putts "field" group are predominantly CAP players, which as you know means they're shortstacking experts themselves. Their stats are different from kinetica's but I can't imagine making strategy adjustments vs one strong player that would involve seeing half as many flops vs him as against other strong players.
You can also look at a tableratings comparison of 40putts vs gamblegambel, who is a shortstacker/CAP player and thus seems directly comparable to these guys.
40putts/gamblegambel: 15% see flop, 6.6% see showdown
40putts/kinetica:______6.8% see flop, 1.6% see showdown
In my own db, which is almost all CAP, I just took a look on the Vs. Players tab of Holdem Manager, which reflects hands with money won or lost against various players. This stat examines where money changes hands, which generally means blinds being won/lost. I filtered for an effective stack size of >20 BBs.
40putts vs kinetica, 0.9% of hands involved >20 BBs being won or lost. 40putts vs the field*, 3.0% of hands involved >20 BBs won or lost.
*in this case, his 12 most frequent other opponents.
If anyone has access to a biggish db, I'd be somewhat interested in their results when they're both at the table vs when only one is at the table. In my DB, they're at +14.5k when both at the table, and -$80 when only one is at the table, but my sample is too small to do anything other than be a little concerned.
Getting tableratings to see if they can match session times that these guys played before 3/09 (when the initial thread hit) would also be useful.