Wandering too much in to strat. There's a tidge of winrate in the on-the-edge posts, so I'm not going to delete them, but just a reminder that this thread is not for strategy discussions per se.

+1

FWIW, while I appreciate all the discussion / kudos / etc., the post wasn't really for barg purposes, but rather:

1) To show how "easy" it is to have quite different "long" stretches at quite vastly different winrates. I have a 1013 hour sample at 12.79 bb/hr (within a 2000 hour sample at 9.4 bb/hr). I have a 1307 hour sample at 3.97 bb/hr. And samples in between. All playing in the same game (which has admittedly had condition changes over the years) all using more-or-less the same method (which again has admittedly had some strategy tweaks over the years). All within what is more-or-less a fairly steady-as-she-goes overall 25 degree angle upwards line. Exciting rock star poker savant? Or boring super nit? I have samples that suggest I'm both. Is there that much difference?

2) To show that you can still win by having a different approach to preflop (which I constantly get hammered on here). Ok, fully admit my results aren't rock star. And I'm certainly not suggesting my approach is best / the only way to win (far from it). But the approach likely does better than most would give credit for (while at the same time putting myself in my wheelhouse). Although, I'm also still not completely convinced either way that my sample size is meaningful (i.e. I certainly don't expect to dig into / dig out of a massive downswing within every 1000 hour sample size, but I guess time will tell).

GcluelessconclusionsnoobG

I would argue average stack depth and player tendencies (“nurture”) has way more of an impact on variance than whether you identify as TAG or LAG (“nature”). You are a product of your environment.

Yeah, for sure agreed, but note that we have no control over those factors. And when it comes to stack depth, this will work like the factors mentioned above. The deeper the stacks, the more variance session to session, but the lower the standard error in our winrate.

I feel like at 1/3 if you're near the top which your results suggest you are, should definitely be doable. I've yet to hear of a strong winning reg at 1/3 with a 1000 hour break even stretch.

Just to clarify, what I meant is that within my 1000 hour stint at Super Nit I encountered a 200 hour stretch where I dug into / dug out of my tied-for-biggest downswing, which obviously had a huge affect on my winrate during that overall period. Course, I can't ignore that this method also produced that downswing either; I just hope (?!?!) this method doesn't lean to producing one of these every ~1000 hours and rather optimistically (foolishly?) think the long term using this method will start to smooth out and produce an even better overall result.

Whether a strong winning reg at 1/3 NL can have a 1000 hour breakeven stretch is another question. I haven't thought about it enough / attempted to search for data the suggests either way. My initial guess is that it's possible but that's purely an uneducated guess.

GfoolishdreamerG

Someone playing 40/30 is going to get owned by most regs in a 2/5 game. It doesnt need to be a 10/20 game for that to happen.

IMO 40/30 is not a LAG, its a maniac. I dont think anyone can play that way profitably unless they are at the weakest table ever.

Wanted to upload my graph now that I've crossed about 500 hours. I've moved to 2/5 exclusively since about hour 400 and hopefully won't need to drop down, but it's definitely a possibility. I've played since college, but this is the first time I've really kept detailed records. Thanks for the support and HH reviews!

Overall hourly rate is $15.79 and January's Hourly Rate is $27.



Marsh

Nice start Marshy!

Ggogogo!G

So if playing a shorter 66BB stack, do you just not play/set-mine say small pairs from late position if there is a raise? Play them and plan to bluff with them?

I guess if raises were 3BB, you'd be okay, but in games I play typical is 4-5BB raises.

The question seems out of place for the thread, but the answer is pretty much entirely tied up in the opponent: will they stack off light? are they fit-or-fold? what implied odds do they offer with big one pair hands?

I saw GG mentioning his style with his winrate.

As mentioned, too much a strat question for this thread.

Quick answer: I don't play 66- in EP at all now (and often not in MP either) and in MP/LP it all "depends" (size of raise relative to stacks, how multiway I expect it to go, whether I'm playing a field of morons vs people with half a clue, where I'm seated relative to the raiser and the world, etc.).

ETA: To bring it back more to a winratey sorta question, keep in mind that everyone else at your table is always playing 66-22, and most of them are losers. That's not to say you can't be a winning player and play them. But overall it's my guess that the weaker pairs only make up a very small percentage of a winning player's overall winrate, while for the losing players it's just another losing hand that contributes to their overall losing winrate. If you're somewhere between a rock star and a loser, it's likely fine to pass on them. IMO.

GcluelessNLnoobG

I keep track of a ton of stuff on a spreadsheet. I can tell you that my "set mining" profit is 11.1% of my total profit.

That includes all money made set mining minus all money lost calling raises with pps and then folding the flop.

Another 5% of my total profit comes from pps when I call a raise telling myself Im set mining but then have a reason to continue post flop without a set.

So folding these small to mid pps would cost me 16% of my total profit. That's no small amount. Not playing them is insane.

I agree with Mike here. The other factor that he isn’t even counting here is how many more calls he gets in general on all streets by including these hands in his preflop range.
Without them as part of your potential range I feel like your range becomes too narrow and predictable to be paid off in all kinds of situations.

Notice how I kept my post in relation to win rates...and not strategy?

But Mike, along the rock star vs loser sliding scale, where would you place yourself? For most non rock stars, they're likely losing with them if they're not playing extremely well postflop (especially OOP). ETA: I mean, decreasing their winrate, decreasing their winrate!

Would be super interesting to see your spreadsheets. I would think it would be very taxing to track every hand / record results / analyze results periodically (I actually attempted myself for a small subset of hands over just an 8 session stretch and found it draining), but kudus to you for doing it.

GcluelessstattrackingnoobG

Lots of people say that but I find it very easy and it helps a lot in figuring out which certain categories of hands Im being profitable with and which Im not.

Aha! Noted.
Very sly.
Apologies for slight derail.
Also very curious about these stats.
Do you track the position that you play them all in as well?

I would expect that more of that 16% profit comes from those hands in late position than from early position though, right? How much can folding 22 UTG really cost anyone, even a crusher, winrate-wise? How much do more marginal players lose with it UTG?

We are getting into strategy now so Im not going to go into that other than to say, I limp pps from EP all day every day at most 2/5 tables. 5/10 is different.

Would you be willing to present a more complete report on your statistics?

The lag was better than the mythical passive unicorn you encountered that limped tons of **** and never went above 3x?

It’s really close, but yes I think so. The mythical unicorn only used this strat at 2/5. He played much more standard tag (albeit still good) at 10/20, the few times we played together.

That is what always perplexed me about him. His weird passivity was clearly an adaptation, not a trait. If that makes sense. I would guess our winrates were similar at 10/20, I’d possibly even have an edge on him. At 2/5 however, I would believe an $80 hourly from him....which is far more impressive than mine and $20ish more than what I think is possible

The lag, he still played extremely crazy at 5/10. (I’ve never played higher with him). If anything, the depth of 5/10 made him more insane. Sounds really corny, but I swear his style reminded me of durrrr on HSP. Just would take really weird lines that made total sense in hindsight, and always seems like he knew what villain had exactly.

Interesting side note I remember way back in the day pre black Friday...mpethy had told me that although theoretically a lag could achieve a higher win rate than a tag nobody was pulling it off...this was online obv....would be interesting if we could see the everyone's live stats to see if it is much more possible vs the weaker competition which I'm sure it is especially in loose passive games..... definitely some nuggets to be gleened there tho.