** Official Beginners NL Holdem Stats Thread **

[DasCoupe]

How common is it to see a graph with a blue & redline positive? Is it nearly impossible?

I've seen graphs with the redline going up & the blueline going down, and the most popular is obviously the redline going down & the blueline up..

I see it as:
Redline up = hyper agressive putting pressure everytime there is opportunity = LAG

Blueline up = make sure you're ahead & extract maximum value from good holdings = TAG

Both up would consist of a combination of the two, stealing pots whenever opportunity presents itself, fold to resistance, yet extract maximum from made hands...

Anyone here able to have both red & blue lines on an upward trend?

[ulrichw]

Originally Posted by DasCoupe

How common is it to see a graph with a blue & redline positive? Is it nearly impossible?

I've seen graphs with the redline going up & the blueline going down, and the most popular is obviously the redline going down & the blueline up..

I see it as:
Redline up = hyper agressive putting pressure everytime there is opportunity = LAG

Blueline up = make sure you're ahead & extract maximum value from good holdings = TAG

Both up would consist of a combination of the two, stealing pots whenever opportunity presents itself, fold to resistance, yet extract maximum from made hands...

Anyone here able to have both red & blue lines on an upward trend?

A positive red line also requires that you're playing against players who know how to fold, so it tends to be seen more at higher levels.

I think your description of TAG is a little oversimplified - a good TAG should also be using their tight image to take down pots with weaker hands in position.

I see it more as a function of the type of opponent you're up against: The more the opponent tends toward calling station, the more you emphasize blue-line play (i.e., extracting value with made hands) over red-line play (i.e., targeted aggression).

In the micros, a positive red line is probably not something to strive for - you're getting too many players who're thinking at Level 1 for there to be value in this strategy. Once you start moving up, it's more worthwhile (but it may still depend on your play style - I've seen some very impressive graphs from higher stakes players with downward sloping red lines).

[ArtySmokes]

Originally Posted by Toocoolforschool

Could someone please tell me what HM2 calls a (A probe bet) ?
A probe bet is a bet out of position after the player who could have made a continuation bet on the prior street did not make that continuation bet.

In HM2 there are two: "Turn Bet vs Missed Flop Cbet OOP" and "River Bet vs Missed Turn Cbet OOP". You can find them in the "Bet vs missed Cbet" menu in the list of HUD stats.

[ArtySmokes]

Originally Posted by DasCoupe

How common is it to see a graph with a blue & redline positive? Is it nearly impossible?

At 2NL it would be exceedingly rare, but I imagine it becomes more common at higher stakes, particularly among winning LAGs. (Very few lags win at nanostakes, and if they do, they nearly always have horrible blue lines). I doubt Phil Ivey even uses a tracker, but if he did, I'm sure he'd have positive red and blue lines.

[DasCoupe]

Got some positional stats & details after 5.5k hands:





Thoughts?

[Carr1ck]

Originally Posted by DasCoupe

How common is it to see a graph with a blue & redline positive? Is it nearly impossible?

I've seen graphs with the redline going up & the blueline going down, and the most popular is obviously the redline going down & the blueline up..

I see it as:
Redline up = hyper agressive putting pressure everytime there is opportunity = LAG

Blueline up = make sure you're ahead & extract maximum value from good holdings = TAG

Both up would consist of a combination of the two, stealing pots whenever opportunity presents itself, fold to resistance, yet extract maximum from made hands...

Anyone here able to have both red & blue lines on an upward trend?

I am on the tighter side of TAG (10/7) and have a positive or flat red line. I don't think you necessarily need to be LAG. Just pick your villains wisely and play accordingly to there stats. Don't waste a cent. Taking small to medium sized pots away from regs post flop is a great way to increase your red line .

[ArtySmokes]

Originally Posted by DasCoupe

Got some positional stats & details after 5.5k hands:
Thoughts?

Fine, but a sample of 10k hands or more is much more useful. All sorts of weirdness can happen in just a few thousand hands.

[DasCoupe]

Looks like I've managed to get a positive red & blue line.. we'll see how long it lasts !

[greg123]

Hey guys, I would really appreciate your comments!

Here's stats from my first 10 000 hands (Stars / 10NL holdem) after about 3 years hiatus from online poker.

I decided to play 10 000 hands without any deep analysis in between so I would get nice sample size of my game, both good and bad habits.

I've been trying to play basicly TAG game and I'm somewhat surprised my red line shows profit and blue line is negative, result being a wash. I know that during my hiatus game has changed and that for example a single continuation bet doesn't get much appreciation. So I've tried to pay attention to double barrelling. Possibly I'm being overaggressive on later streets? I mean my aggression factor rises towards later streets, I suppose it isn't normal or is it?

I think I may

[ArtySmokes]

You've had 4 straight flushes in 10,000 hands? I've only had one in over 100k!

Pre-flop positional stats look OK, although you can open up wider in LP. Your VPIP on the button should really be over 35%. Stealing blinds is very important in 6max.
Your double-barrelling is probably folding out better hands sometimes, which is good, but it means you're not getting to showdown very often, and when you do it's often with the worst hand. I think that at these stakes youre better off playing a bit more weak tight. Make a c-bet by all means, but don't barrel with air unless you pick up a draw. Lots of villains play fit-or-fold, so if they call on the flop they usually have something. You'll save money by checking the turn more often. When you flop big though, then you want to get calls from worse, so don't scare off the villain by potting every street unless he's a total station.
I think you know what you need to change. Just back off on the aggression a little. At higher stakes, barrelling will be more useful, but for now you want to make most of your bets for value.

Another minor point I noticed in the stats:
Fold to more river raises. They are often the (near) nuts. You'll probably only be good when you call a river raise about 10% of the time, but you're only folding 70%.

[greg123]

It seems I didn't have that last statistic filtered out right I have not had 4 straight flushes, Poker Tracker includes hands which I folded but would've made it. Well that was quite irrelevant table anyway.

I'm aware about my strict starting hand criteria. I feel it's easier to get my act together by playing tight after a long pause. I'm planning to loosen up later.

Thanks for the tip about calling river raises. I'm sure your right about backing off and not being overly aggressive.

My cbet numbers are:

flop: 74.80 %
turn: 58.70 %
river: 61.76 %

I suppose I should get all those down a bit, especially on later streets.

Thanks for your comments, they're helpful

[Ifa]

Only up 3 buy ins in 40k hands at Zoom NL 5. What am I doing wrong?







Any obvious leaks?

[ArtySmokes]

Originally Posted by Ifa

Any obvious leaks?

Pre-flop positional stats are actually pretty good. You're calling a little too often in the big blind, as the gap between VPIP and PFR is quite large, but your losses in that seat aren't terrible.
WTSD is on the high side, though not dangerously so. If your WTSD was above 30 and W$SD was less than 50% then you'd definitely have a problem, but your showdown winnings are above the midway point, so you're not stationing it up with the worst hand too often.
I was about to say I'm mystified by the bad results when your stats are all within the ranges expected for winning players... but then I looked at the graph.
What's happened to you is that you've played pretty well, but had a lot of bad luck in called all in situations until recently. You were about $55 below EV after 32,000 hands, but now you're back on expectation. Judging from what's happened to your redline and blueline, your style has undergone a transformation. I suspect you were playing too loose when you started, and that can lead to the crazy swings in your stacksize/bankroll. I'd imagine you now play tighter and more carefully, and would expect the lower variance route of valuebetting and not making too many bluffs will lead to better results in the near future.

[greg123]

I found a chapter about stats from Harrington On Online Cash Games. He says that average value for "bet river" is 15-25 % and for "call river" 30-40 %. My "bet river" is 38 % and "call river" 10 %, so I have these numbers upside down.

Harrington states that w$wsf is usually around 45 % whereas mine is 52 %. Explanation has to be I win more pots by bluffing.

He also writes that for most players "flop aggression will be higher than turn aggression, which in turn will be higher than river aggression." My aggression factor is:

flop: 3.68
turn: 3.79
river: 4.38

I think all this implies to one direction: I bluff too much on later streets and that's why my red line goes up and blue line goes down.

[GrindingLife]

Following this thread

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...eeded-1239170/

how do my stats look from 25NL:



Thanks!