Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
***** Official SSSHLHE Stats Thread ***** ***** Official SSSHLHE Stats Thread *****

10-31-2010 , 04:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 175503
u can crop images in paint

edit i thought this was the lc thred now i feel bad for uz trollin

sorry all
yeah I know you can crop in paint but it would be one step less if people used some better software :P Though I guess it's more steps than cropping in paint
10-31-2010 , 09:49 PM
For anyone taking screenshots regularly: http://code.google.com/p/zscreen/
11-09-2010 , 02:42 AM
I'm mainly a six max player but have recently been playing more full ring games when they look good. My 6 max stats are about a VPP 31 PR 22 and 3b 13 w an AFQ of 59... What do you think good corresponding stats would be for FR? thanks
11-09-2010 , 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Bet the Min
I'm mainly a six max player but have recently been playing more full ring games when they look good. My 6 max stats are about a VPP 31 PR 22 and 3b 13 w an AFQ of 59... What do you think good corresponding stats would be for FR? thanks
This is the shorthanded forum so maybe not the best place to post your question but something like 20/14 for FR seems about right.
11-09-2010 , 08:36 AM
@Anadonk

Why are you playing so many different levels? Gameplay changes from 1/2 to 5/T maybe you should stick to one level first until you beat the limit and feel comfortable playing it, then you can move up. I don't think it is advisable to jump to the level you have a proper BR for...
11-10-2010 , 01:16 PM
Can someone post their C-Bet number for the flop, turn and river? I think mine may be out of line. I am 98/88/62.
11-10-2010 , 02:14 PM
This is not really a stats question per say, but I figured it would be easily answered here, so here goes.

My recent numbers suggest that 3/6 is a rake trap. Here they are, broke into 4 categories:

3/6 7+ Handed = 19089 hands, $2221 in rake = 1.94 BB/100

2/4 7+ Handed = 22042 hands, $1519 in rake = 1.72 BB/100

3/6 5-6 Handed = 26580 hands, $4726 in rake = 2.96 BB/100

2/4 5-6 Handed = 37493 hands, $3707 in rake = 2.47 BB/100

Here are my specific questions (there are only two). First of all, how is the "$ Rake" statistic in HEM calculated? I rounded the numbers here, but it's showing up with cents in the total, which if it's strictly calculating the rake paid by me would be impossible since only whole dollars are raked. Second of all, does anyone else have numbers that match these, or are my findings skewed because I won at 2/4 and lost at 3/6 over this time frame (which relates to the first question).

Obviously the interesting implication here is the assumption (at least by me and probably others) that the effect of the rake on your win rate unilaterally decreases as you move up in stakes. This appears not to be true as you jump from 2/4 to 3/6, making the transition even harder.
11-10-2010 , 03:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verno
Can someone post their C-Bet number for the flop, turn and river? I think mine may be out of line. I am 98/88/62.

88 is out of line in the 3/6 and 5/10 games. Don't know about lower stakes though. The biggest aggressive winners are around 78% and the biggest aggressive/inducing winners are around 70%.
11-10-2010 , 04:53 PM
98 is out of line for sure
11-10-2010 , 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verno
Can someone post their C-Bet number for the flop, turn and river? I think mine may be out of line. I am 98/88/62.
95.8/81.2/59.2

I think my flop and turn cbets are too high, and my river cbet not high enough. So yeah your flop and turn are out of line. Would like to hear how bad mine are also.
11-10-2010 , 05:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by La Peste
95.8/81.2/59.2

I think my flop and turn cbets are too high, and my river cbet not high enough. So yeah your flop and turn are out of line. Would like to hear how bad mine are also.
My flop and turn numbers are almost identical to yours (96.5/81.4/65) but I also think they may be slightly too high. I have been working to get them lower in the past couple months but flop spots especially are hard to find for me.
11-10-2010 , 06:48 PM
um...96.4/67.4/68.4 for 3-6 handed

Is it awful that my turn cbet is significantly lower than what everybody seems to have posted? I also think my flop cbet is too high.

Last edited by ICanHold9Donuts; 11-10-2010 at 06:54 PM.
11-10-2010 , 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jesse8888
This is not really a stats question per say, but I figured it would be easily answered here, so here goes.

My recent numbers suggest that 3/6 is a rake trap. Here they are, broke into 4 categories:

3/6 7+ Handed = 19089 hands, $2221 in rake = 1.94 BB/100

2/4 7+ Handed = 22042 hands, $1519 in rake = 1.72 BB/100

3/6 5-6 Handed = 26580 hands, $4726 in rake = 2.96 BB/100

2/4 5-6 Handed = 37493 hands, $3707 in rake = 2.47 BB/100

Here are my specific questions (there are only two). First of all, how is the "$ Rake" statistic in HEM calculated? I rounded the numbers here, but it's showing up with cents in the total, which if it's strictly calculating the rake paid by me would be impossible since only whole dollars are raked. Second of all, does anyone else have numbers that match these, or are my findings skewed because I won at 2/4 and lost at 3/6 over this time frame (which relates to the first question).

Obviously the interesting implication here is the assumption (at least by me and probably others) that the effect of the rake on your win rate unilaterally decreases as you move up in stakes. This appears not to be true as you jump from 2/4 to 3/6, making the transition even harder.
I play on 8 networks. Full Tilt is the only site where this phenomena exists so I guess you are playing there.All other sites have a significant lower rake at 3/6 than 2/4 except for Stars which seems to have the samerake at 2/4 and 3/6 in BB/100 terms.
The sad thing is that FT and Stars have by the far lowest rake.Some of the other networks are above 4 BB/100 in rake and no networks except for FT and Stars are anywhere near 3 BB/100 in rake in the 2/4 and 3/6 games.
11-10-2010 , 08:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apanage
I play on 8 networks. Full Tilt is the only site where this phenomena exists so I guess you are playing there.All other sites have a significant lower rake at 3/6 than 2/4 except for Stars which seems to have the samerake at 2/4 and 3/6 in BB/100 terms.
The sad thing is that FT and Stars have by the far lowest rake.Some of the other networks are above 4 BB/100 in rake and no networks except for FT and Stars are anywhere near 3 BB/100 in rake in the 2/4 and 3/6 games.
Thanks for the info, glad I'm not losing my mind.

Do you know how HEM calculates the "$ Rake" statistic? It must be doing something dumb if it's not coming up with even amounts amirite?
11-10-2010 , 08:40 PM
On and my cbet numbers look a lot like La Peste's but blind monkeys with typewriters etc....
11-10-2010 , 11:42 PM
Thanks guys for posting on the c bet question. I need to tone it down a little.
11-11-2010 , 12:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jesse8888
Thanks for the info, glad I'm not losing my mind.

Do you know how HEM calculates the "$ Rake" statistic? It must be doing something dumb if it's not coming up with even amounts amirite?
The rake taken from the pot is divided between players in the pot according to what rakeback method the site uses.
11-11-2010 , 12:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jesse8888
Thanks for the info, glad I'm not losing my mind.

Do you know how HEM calculates the "$ Rake" statistic? It must be doing something dumb if it's not coming up with even amounts amirite?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apanage
The rake taken from the pot is divided between players in the pot according to what rakeback method the site uses.
Have you updated HEM to FTP's new RB method? They recently switched to Contributed. Also sample size.
11-11-2010 , 01:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All Apologies
Have you updated HEM to FTP's new RB method? They recently switched to Contributed. Also sample size.
Do I just need to download the latest release to get this or will I also have to switch my RB option to contributed somewhere? Also when was the date of the switch and will I need to reimport the HHs from that point onward? Thanks.
11-11-2010 , 01:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICanHold9Donuts
Do I just need to download the latest release to get this or will I also have to switch my RB option to contributed somewhere? Also when was the date of the switch and will I need to reimport the HHs from that point onward? Thanks.
Not 100% sure, but I think its the only option for calculating FTP's rake, so as soon as you dl it it will be set. Oct 1st is when they switched and again not 100% but I think it should be fine (HEM will recognize all HH's from Oct 1st on) but you might just want to reimport anyway.

morny from the HEM Forum:

Yes it will differentiate the rake method based on the date but obviously and hands imported before the fix will need to be purged and reimported so it can recalculate, were still working on the rake that shows the old method at the moment but hopefully should have it soon
11-11-2010 , 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All Apologies
Have you updated HEM to FTP's new RB method? They recently switched to Contributed. Also sample size.
Does that matter in the uneven amount case?
11-11-2010 , 04:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apanage
Does that matter in the uneven amount case?
I don't understand what you're asking Apandage, sorry?
11-11-2010 , 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All Apologies
I don't understand what you're asking Apandage, sorry?
I think Jesses question was about him having rake in uneven numbers in HEM.
He thought that there was something wrong but he will get uneven numbers regardless of the rake method.
11-11-2010 , 05:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apanage
I think Jesses question was about him having rake in uneven numbers in HEM.
He thought that there was something wrong but he will get uneven numbers regardless of the rake method.
Well I thought the statistic was simply calculating the rake that I personally paid, which for a level like 3/6 where the rake is always whole dollar amounts (or I think .50 cents if the hand goes off headsup) that number shouldn't ever be something like $2423.89.

If the statistic is actually calculating my mgr total then more power to it then obviously the odd cents make sense.
11-11-2010 , 07:32 PM
i am using AF%, how can it be that over 1400hands a player AF flop 56%=1.7, turn 45%=1.3, river 43%=2.0 ? i have it a few more times on big (?) sample.
what is the way these both stats calculated that makes that difference?

      
m