GaF Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 A great start :ok If this carries on (and if Player03 can put "variance" behind him) then we wont have a 5c/10c benchmarking level for long...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffy Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary I am interested to know what a good VP$IP is and what a good PFR is and what a good BB/100 is. Clearly player 1 is doing loads better than player 10. Is that because player 1 is far better and if so what is he/she doing that player 10 isnt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary Clearly player 1 is doing loads better than player 10. That's far from proven with the sample size so small. I am interested to know what a good VP$IP is and what a good PFR is I think that's prbably one of the main things this benchmarking hopes to establish. Of course, it's down to far more than VPIP and PFR, but if we see, for example that in general looser players are doing better than tighter players, then we can probably deduce that the tighter players should try and loosen up. I wonder too whether, at this level, there's an argument for playing loose passive (usually not the best way to play!!) - again - when we have some more data, we'll hopefully be able to see whether passive or aggressive is "better" in general. I believe for 6max the ideal stats are considered to be about 21% VPIP and about 16% PFR (I'm far from certain and could be wrong) - for 5 seat, you would imagine it should be slightly looser and slightly more aggressive - though the microstakes element could change that.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Player004 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary Personally I think a VP$IP of about 25 would be fine because we are playing so short. Just one observation. Player01 is currently performing the best (over a very small sample) but he isn't involved in any of the 5 least/most profitable hands even though his VP$IP and PFR are similar to mine (and I'm involved in 4 of them!). This suggests to me that over this small sample Player01 is playing much better post flop than I am. Its maybe to early to do any real analysis but would it be worth looking at actions post flop? I have been c-betting a lot but sometimes OOP and against multiple players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary Player01 is currently performing the best (over a very small sample) but he isn't involved in any of the 5 least/most profitable hands even though his VP$IP and PFR are similar to mine (and I'm involved in 4 of them!). This suggests to me that over this small sample Player01 is playing much better post flop than I am. My read on that (and I say this just from your comment - I havent looked any deeper into the stats) is that it suggests Player01 is playing a more "small ball" approach (which yes, means good post flop play) while Player04 is perhaps playing more "big stack" (pre flop) poker. Its maybe to early to do any real analysis but would it be worth looking at actions post flop? I have been c-betting a lot but sometimes OOP and against multiple players. I'll see what I can extract (and put it in a new thread rather than here) - I'm more than happy for people to say what they want to see stats wise :ok Just be careful of the sample sizes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goater14 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary I would of said player 03 has good stats for this level(apart from bb/100:unsure) I would expect after a few more thousand more hands to see a steady profit:ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nade Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary IMO player 3 has the best VPIP/PFR as it shows they're playing a good tight solid game, where as player 8 is playing far too loose passive. The results really highlight for me how such small samples really can't be taken to heart just now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary The results really highlight for me how such small samples really can't be taken to heart just now. Agree totally (and have tried to stress the point at every opportunity:ok) - however we had to get started somewhere - and todays publication of stats seems to have given us a real boost in numbers too :ok This week there were 6 players involved - next week it should be into double figures :ok And I can see it growing :) As we get more and more data, the value of this project will increase significantly :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nade Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary These are stats i have from my HEM where i have 12000 players in the DB. The biggest winner apart from me plays VPIP - 21, PFR - 18.(I play 22/16 most hands tracked on myself ;)) The next 10 biggest winners with 3k+ hands go : 21/17 21/17 21/16 18/14 21/17 20/16 19/15 27/13 25/21 18/16 This is 6max so the games should differ a bit at 5max but i don't think the change should be too drastic. So it really shows that TAGs make the most money at short handed NL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary I guess they're not microstakes either Nade? I think that there is a really strong theoretical argument at the microstakes tables to play loose passive :unsure Players wont fold to your raises, and will call your overbets - so keep it cheap, leverage your impled odds, and then overbet when you hit.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nade Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary I'm going to get involved and find out for myself :tongue2 I'm pretty certain that playing loose passive at any level is a losing strategy though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanfaz Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary loose passive is certainly a losing strategy. Basically that means playing a lot of cards badly. Loose aggressive is a good strategy though, and for 6 max cash games i think you have to strike a balance between loose and tight aggressive poker - for me that is playing very loose aggressive on the button and cut-off, and tight aggressive in early positions and the blinds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary loose passive is certainly a losing strategy. Even at 5c/10c tables? I certainly wouldnt give Loose Passive much time at higher levels against better opponents, but I dont feel ready to dismiss it as a possibility at this level Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Player004 Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary My most profitable sessions so far have come when I have been playing what PT would define as TAG. I think if you have a good post flop game loose passive might work but I don't really fancy giving it a go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanfaz Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Re: 200902W1 Benchmarking Summary Good point - yeah maybe loose passive could work at this level but i think a very tight aggressive game is a much better strategy at this level - ABC poker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.