Dear All,

Goodday.

To measure villain's aggression, we can use aggression factor and aggression frequency etc.

What about the opposite? What's the term used in poker for the opposite of aggression? is it passiveness? but passiveness does not necessarily mean villain is always folding, it may just mean villain not taking the initiative to bet.

What stat should i use to measure villain's folding?

Is there a stat something like "fold to any aggression"?

For example, on the flop, villain lead bet and i raise, then villain fold. So the "fold to any aggression" stat is 1/1. The "fold to F bet" stat does not capture this right?

On the next hand, on the flop, i lead bet and villain fold, so the "fold to any aggression" stat is 2/2. Now the "fold to F bet" is just 1/1.

So basically i just need some general/overall stat on him folding, whether i donk bet , c bet, or check raise or 5 bet him or whatever. Is this necessary?

Thank you

There is a specific HUD stat for just about every possible action.
e.g. ... the relevant stat would be "fold to flop raise after c-betting" (unless villain donked into the pre-flop aggressor, in which case it would be "fold to flop raise after donkbet"). It's not a particularly useful stat without a large sample, but it might be included in the pop-up for villain's c-betting strategy - or how he reacts to c-bets - by default.

The "fold to c-bet" numbers (for flop, turn and river) are used very commonly, but you can also use WTSD, WWSF and AF (or Agg%) to get an idea of how aggressive/passive someone is. e.g. If someone has a high AF, high WWSF (won when saw flop) and low WTSD (went to showdown), they are generally aggressive and do more betting and raising than other players. People with low AF/Agg% numbers and high WTSD figures tend to do more calling.

At one point, when I was using Notecaddy badges, I dispensed with c-bet numbers on my HUD and just used generic stats for "bet flop, bet turn, bet river" and "fold flop, fold turn, fold river", in order to spot where someone was over or underaggressive, or folded a particular street at an exploitable frequency, but the stats weren't hugely useful. I also used to have "Raise flop %" on screen, but it basically just created clutter.

If you're playing microstakes with large player pools (and hence small sample sizes), the main use of a HUD is to identify the fish and the nits. It shouldn't take you many hands to identify the stations and the aggrotards, because they will often have ludicrous pre-flop numbers. The esoteric post-flop stats have very little use if you don't have a massive sample size.

x 1 million

Plus, if you are playing zoom (fast poker) you will never have converged postflop stats on all the recfish and all the decent regs are playing the same way off almost identical ranges anyway, so who cares what their stats are - bet sizing is way more important now reg versus reg.

Don't get me wrong, huds are great at snap identifying XPLO spots - I love em, but unless you understand stat convergence, the information you get out of a hud can do more harm than good.

thanks Arty. Always appreciate your input.

i am using this generic stats too "bet flop, bet turn, bet river" and "fold flop, fold turn, fold river". I wonder why do you find it not too much useful? May i know what stats do you use now?

Spot on Arty, i have only small sample size on villains usually, because i am not a reg. I play 1/2cents full ring and after an hour of play i will have about 40-50 hands of HUD reading. I wonder with this little number of hands, would using equilab/flopzilla be useful/accurate? In particular how villain's range hit the board.

40 hands is fairly useless for getting decent reads on a villain, unless he/she is an outlier playing 98/76 or 0/0. The numbers are even less useful for trying to make a range for someone with Equilab, because you need to know raising ranges and calling ranges. A VPIP of 12 (for example) doesn't tell you much/anything, without knowing the positions and action sequence.

FWIW, a couple of days ago, after 100 hands of 6-max in a really card dead session, I was on a ridiculously nitty 10/7/0, so if anyone had been on my table for every hand they'd think I was an ubernit. Today I had exceptional card distribution (loads of great squeezing spots) and was on 28/24/12 after 200 hands, so I would have looked like a LAG. My long-term stats are more like 21/16/5. It can take hundreds of hands even for VPIP/PFR numbers to reach their long-term averages. For 3-bets and post-flop stats, it takes thousands.

If you want to do some range-building with Equilab/Flopzilla, consider what the average player does in your pool. (HEM can show you what the player pool tendencies are, on the 'Opponents' tab in the tracker). With HUD stats from a small sample (i.e. untrustworthy data), you should only deviate a small amount from whatever your "standard" line is. e.g. If I have AK in a spot where I'll either 4-bet or flat, a quick glance at villain's HUD can make me swing one way or the other. (e.g. "Villain seems to be nitty so far, so I'll just flat").
Sometimes I pay no attention to my HUD pre-flop and only find out villain is playing something stupid like 6/6 after I've made a light 3-bet. And while I'm regretting my "mistake", villain will unexpectedly fold. The numbers just can't be trusted if the sample size is small.

Flop cbet and fold to flop cbet are useful. On later streets you're going to need a pretty big sample for stats to converge. I mean consider how long it takes before you get in a river spot against a specific player, and then having enough of those instances to draw any conclusions. Also while these stats can be useful, they could also be deceptive in a sense that villain adjusts to you and his overall stats aren't what he plays against you.