[IMG][/IMG]

I am not overly satisfied with my NL10 results from August September 2008. Feedback would be very appreciated.

Regards,

Just one question, this graph is since I started with NL25, after NL20, why the non shodown winnings line is almost straight till hand 2K and then starts to drop so deeply ? Should I look for something ?
Could I be doing something rightin those first 2k, that i stopped doing after that ?

Also the All-in EV line is much higher than the actual winnings one.... Running bad ?

First Month at FR... how it looking?

Well, your showdown winnings were about break-even as well the first 2k hands. So my guess is you weren't folding often (thus taking many hands to showdown and not loosing much at non-showdown) but this hurt your showdown winnings. After 2k hands you fold more and go to showdown with better hands (showdown up, non-showdown down).

It's not bad to have non-sd below 0, many (including myself) have that. As long as the sum is positive your doing fine.

About the all-in EV... you seemed to have a 'bad beat' at hand 150 or so, after that it's pretty much as EV.

A 3.3ptbb/100 win rate is perfectly acceptable; don't beat yourself up. Also, your sample size is pretty small, so all conclusions based on it are somewhat suspect.

But I did notice three leaks:

1. You are completing and defending in the small blind way too much.

2. You are limping about half the hands you are playing from UTG, UTG+1 and MP1. I doubt that this is profitable for you. You should use PokerEV to filter by position "between 5 and 7 off the button" and preflop action is "call," to examine the profitability of this strategy. Most likely you will find that you are losing money on these hands and will want to switch to a preflop strategy of raising or folding the hands you are currently limping (depending on the strength of the hand and aggressiveness/passiveness of the people at the table yet to act).

3. Your button winrate is really low; this could be an artifact of your sample size, but it could mean that you are misplaying the button. I noticed that you had a very low WTSD and W$@SD for the button, which is quite unusual--you have not won nearly as often on the button as we would expect.

Plug these leaks (or plug leaks one and two and run a little hotter on the button ) and I expect you will see a substantially higher winrate.

<------------bbv is thataway

I'm not sure I can tell what happened here. I can think of at least two possibilities that explain the shape of your red line:

1. Variance. Although my red line trends generally downward at a similar angle to yours, it is common for me to have 2000 hand samples where I break even or win in non-showdown pots. It tends to happen when I am hitting junk two pair in the blinds more often than usual. I am always betting the bejesus out of them (because they are usually vulnerable). If, at the same time I am getting a run of sets and overpairs that I can shove (villains often fold), or maybe I run hot hitting straights and or flushes, then my redline will stay flat or go up.

So you could have just been running hot in the particular ways that tend to wind up increasing your non-showdown winnings. If that is the case, just enjoy it while it happens and realize that a bunch of those streaks over the long run are working together to reduce your non-showdown losses.

2. You could have gotten weak tight in response to a pretty ugly first 2000 hands. If you started folding your BB more to button raises, if you started folding to river bets more often than usual, if you started taking pot control lines that go to showdown rather than betting the turn (which generates folds), all of these things would tend to increase the downward slope of your red line.

Just looking at the graph, I can't tell whether either of these conclusions is correct or if there is some other possible explanation.

And, yeah, you ran pretty bad in this sample. As dagrim1 pointed out, you fell about 2 buy ins under expectation in the first couple hundred hands and have run at expectation for the rest of the sample.

Hey mpethy,

ofc this is a broad question, but what would you say an acceptable flop Cbet% would be? I run about 12/10 and am at 75%, but I think it's a little high.

Thanks

Meh, I am not sure about this. I haven't seen enough data. A game theory expert might be able to tell us what is optimal in terms of being unexploitable.

I have seen people who were winning TAgs with c-bets as high as 75% more than once.

TBH, at 53% or so, mine is the lowest I know of for a winning player, and I have been trying to get it up to around 65% for the reasons below.

My own off-the-cuff thinking (meaning I haven't done any math) is that if you are c-betting about 65% of the time, you are going to be really tough. You are c-betting about twice as often as most villains are going to expect you to have hit the flop. So they are looking at roughly a 50/50 chance that any c-bet represents a hand. This is few enough that it is hard for them to profitably raise your c-bet light. Roughly half the time they float you you are going to have something, and yet you are still checking 1/3 of flops (and some of these you will c/r), so they can't automatically fire when you check, either. 65% seems like it would be really tough to play against.

I don't know if this is solid thinking, but it is what I look for in villains. I have my HUD set to color code as green (make a light play on his c-bet) player's whose c-bet% is >70%, and I have it color code red (don't make a light play on his c-bet) people whose c-bet is between 55 and 69%

All we really care about though is that we are making money with our c-bets. So run the preprogrammed HEM filter. It counts a c-bet as any bet you make on the flop when you were the preflop raiser. You should be positive money in this filter.

Then run a custom one that filters for hand strength for when you miss the flop. Anything negative/hand that is less of a loss than your standard preflop raise is saving you money over check/fold on the flops you miss and is pretty good. Obviously, the closer to break even the better, and if you are plus money in this filter you are doing great.

PT3 has a similar filter, but in PT3 you will also have to write a custom filter for c-bets where you miss the flop)

hi this is my first post and this is my graphs for more 100000 hands, im worried about my play. thats all, ty for your time.

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs231&d=08401&f=grahps149.png

To be honest I did not look at graph, but.....

If you are worried about your play, I would suggest a few things.

1. Sign up for next months sweat session.

2. Start reading the posts on different hands.

3. Read all the sticky posts, and Poobah posts.

4. Reread them

5. Reread them again.

6. Get a poker buddy, or a tutor and keep working on your game.


Good luck.

Unless you play vs me, than I hope you lose.

You are playing far too weak and probably tight, but I really need to see your stats--summary page and by position.

I figured instead of inundating everyone with a bunch of hand histories and line checks I would just post a basic block of stats and see if anything glaring can be found.



In addition I figured I might as well post my overall stats since I started playing again in late April.....doesn't the fact that I have paid more rake than my total winnings mean that there is something wrong with my play? Or is that unfortunately natural at these limits........................



Thanks so much for your help along the way everyone! I am now confident that I am a winning player, it's now just going to be a matter of increasing my winrate so that I can afford to build a bankroll quick and move up to 100NL, as I imagine it's no tougher than 50NL (if it is I'm in trouble!), and therefor make more money hopefully and pay less rake.

Your sample size on the top is way too low.
What I can say is that your VPIP/PFR looks good and your total aggression looks good. All other statistics are more or less useless.

Your total stats look fine to me.

However, I am surprised about the amount of rake you pay. With 4-5BB/100 one should be much more ahead of the rake. Which site is that?

As a comparsion (because our results are quite equal wrt BB/100):

Me (NL10 Party): Amount won 75$, 3.5BB/100, Rake 61$
You (NL25): Amount won 589$, 3.85BB/100, Rake 815$

Regards,

A (not so) thinly veiled brag? There is a sticky just for stats reviews and also a recurring thread for BBV.

I feel like I've been massively leveled in your HH threads...

I see nothing wrong with your stats. BBV or stats thread as Capt said.

Really sorry! I have never posted any stats before, I didn't know they needed to go in a seperate thread, and I will be sure to do that from now on! Please feel free to lock this one up.

A 2100 hand session is too small a sample size? how long are you guys' session? 0_o

Also, I play on Pokerstars 100% since FT is ridic and won't let me get rakeback, ever.

And that's a shame if this is a brag, but I guess I shouldn't have expected to win more than this playing these low limits, even though it seems like alot of time to put in for this much money. Im sure it will pay off in the long run though

and lol JH1 I just post the most ridiculous hands from my sessions, usually the ones responsible for those big red holes in the first set of stats....just trying to get the kinks worked out, as I spend all this time grinding up only to stack off like a donkey with QQ on a 9 high board.

Thanks again!

2100 is not a small session imho, but it is a too small sample for SERIOUS and SCIENTIFIC analysis. All we can say is vage stuff like: seems to look good, this one could be better...

But it all could be variance, you know? So if you expect clear statements on a 2100 hands sample, you should ask a witch, the Pope, your representative in Congress or your dentist. Seriously. A strategy in a game as complex as Poker cannot be rated based on 2100 hands, especially with all the luck and randomness that is involved.

All in all it looks like a good session and i can't find anything wrong with your stats. Except for the high rake, which is strange. I am far ahead of the rake on any level i play.
Did you have an abnormally high amount of all-in split pots? That's the only thing that comes to my mind.

mpethy... my c-bet % is also in the low 50%'s. I think we're onto something here.

I think it all really depends on how far towards the middle of your range you are willing to cbet. The main purpose of our cbets is to: a) get a weaker hand to call, b) get a stronger hand to fold.

So, when we are attempting to get the weaker hand to call, we are cbetting the top of our range. When we're trying to get a fold, we are betting the bottom of our range.

It's fairly obvious that we don't want to play big pots with medium strength hands, so a lot of the time we won't be c-betting these hands in order to exercise some kind of pot control and not get ourselves into bad spots.

I'm not sure if this makes any sense, but I'll try to outline it w/ a figure below.

Lets assume this is our PFR range [-----------------], and x's are where we cbet.

50% cbet means our flop play looks something like this [xxxxx----------xxxxx]
66% cbet means our flop play looks something like this [xxxxxxx-------xxxxxxx]
75% cbet means our flop play looks something like this [xxxxxxx-----xxxxxxx]

Obviously there are times when we will be c-betting the middle of our range, but for the most part, we cbet the extremes.

Lower cbet% will be playing more of a small ball game, and turn and river decisions will be generally easier.

Higher cbet% will be playing more actual poker, having to double barrel often, and generally making more tough decisions.

My 2 cents on the subject.

Thanks for your suggestion to use PokerEV, great analysis tool!

I have -0.1bb/hand by open-limping and +0.2BB/hand by open-raising so you are right.



By the way, I noticed a possible other leak: I checked for the following draws (Statistics->Filters->Draws on the flop) on the flop with PokerEV and found out the following:

OESD: -2BB/hand, 58 total
Nut Flush draw: +10BB/h, 15 total
Weak flush draw: -3BB/h, 39 hands
Gutshot: +0.3BB/h, 160 hands

Maybe the sample size is too small, but would be interesting what other players have in this stats. Maybe I overplay OESD.

Regards,

The stats



http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs231&d=08401&f=stats830.png

Cool thanks for the insights mpethy and notontilt.

I figured it was a very abstract question to answer. But I really do like the concepts of 2/3 cbet% being unexploitable. Will have to start factoring this into my cbetting.

Seishu:

I hope this doesn't come across as unnecessarily harsh, but you need to retool your preflop game completely. I know you have 100k hands, but it is 100k hands of repeating the same mistake over and over. Your vpip/pfr seemed to be about 30/5. Around here we like to see a VPIP lower than 22 or so, and we like to see a player raising at least 2/3 of the hands he comes into.

You are still making the very fundamental beginner mistakes of playing too many hands and playing the vast majority of them far too passivley--open limping, limping behind, calling raises.

This impacts the rest of your statistics--everything from having too low a W$@SD stat to, ultimately, your winrate.

The good news is that you seem to have some strong potential for playing well post-flop. I would have said it was basically impossible to play a 30/5 style profitably, but you managed it. This suggests to me that your hand reading skills are far superior to those of your competition.

What this means is that you have progressed further in the hard part of poker than you have in the easy part. Postflop play s hard, but preflop is easy to develop a basic winning style. It is about three bullet points:

-Play about 4-6% of the hands you are dealt in early position--66+ AQ+. Raise 100%

-Roughly double the number of hands you open raise in MP--KJs+ 22+, SCs. Raise first in, call only in strong implied odds situations.

-Roughly double the number of hands you open raise in MP when you are in late position. Axs+ K9s+ 22+, SCs, random a2c when there are only nits behind you. Call with SCs, one gappers, small pockets only in favorable implied odds situations.

Bonus bullet point: when there is a limper in front of you, raise a bit lighter than you normally would, seeking to isolate the limper and play a pot against him IP with initiative.

This is a basic, easy to implement and profitable preflop style for somebody who plays pretty well postflop.

Really, though, I think you should spend a lot of time studying. Read and apply the stickies at the top of this forum, some poker books, and stuff like that.

Your winrate will thank you. This is the secret to increasing your winrate to something more than slightly above break even.

Successful implementation of the style I outlined above, coupled with ever increasing post flop skills will take you all the way through NL $100, at least.

I want to say this is a Fantastic thread mpethybridge. CMAR linked me to it in the beginner's forum and I've already found SEVERAL areas of improvement. I am taking tomorrow/Thursday off, but I plan on implementing a more tighter, more aggressive strategy come this weekend.

Thanks!

hey guys, Just hoping I can get some insight on my nl10 graph because i can't seem to beat it. this is after 4 days. it seems like the longer my sessions, the worse i start doing. just looking to improve my game.





Thanks, appreciate it.

ninja edit - don't mean to answer my own question, but i'm going raise more preflop and be positionally aware?