PokerTracker statistics analysis (1 Viewer)

[GIANTDustySquid]

Hey guys, I'm looking for a little insight on some online stats.

i'll post a couple of graphs and my basic HUD stats that i have so far.

I have almost 10k hands of each tournament and cash game.

I feel like I have seriously run as bad as I possibly could in the last few months. Maybe these stats prove there is more to my poor results than just my luck, and i'm sure there are some holes in my game that need some work.

id appreciate any constructive criticism from anyone familiar with interpreting this information. honestly getting pretty let down on my results the last few months; maybe due to my bad luck, or a combination of that and just poor play overall.

over 9150 cash hands:
VPIP 24.59
PFR 17.41
Total AFq 50.95
WTSD% 27.63
WSD 51.04


Tournaments - 162
tournament hands - 7292
VPIP 20.63
PFR 14.25
Total AFq 47.37
WTSD% 53.33
WSD 51.01

edit to add:
most cash game hands were played at zoom 0.25/0.50, the rest at zoom 0.50/1.00
i've managed to break even+ due to winning in my 25% zoom NL100, but ive been a slight loser at zoom NL50

my tournaments have been a very wide range from 2.50 buyin 180 player to $33-$50 buy in progressive KO's and regular tournaments. probably should expect some poor results based on my selection of tournaments and bankroll management.

thanks

 

[Pesto628]

In online poker 9000 hands isn’t even considered a reasonable sample size. It seems like your WTSD is pretty high. I was made to understand it should be like 24%. I also think you should be raising pre a higher frequency. Just my 2c as I only play up to .05/.10

 

[glom]

I'm a nit, and I only play live, but 25% vpip in current online cash games seems a little loose to me.

 

[CraigT78]

VPIP should be closer to 100% can’t win if you’re folding :

 

[Highli99]

This is cool. Can someone help me with the abbreviations?

 

[Pesto628]

VPIP: voluntarily put money in the pot, % of time you put money in the pot pre flop

PFR: pre flop raiser, percent of time you raise pre

AFq: aggression frequency

WTSD%: went to showdown percentage

WSD: won at showdown percentage

 

[DrStrange]

Table size is fundamental to interpretation of the statistics. 25% VPIP at a full ring is, perhaps, a bit loose. 25% VPIP very short handed is too tight.

"Small" sample sizes are not so questionable when looking at no limit cash results. This is a issue that plagues limit poker results because the variance is large relative to the win rate. No limit win/loss rates are an order of magnitude larger in NL/PL games vs limit games while the variance is "only" ~50% higher in big bet poker games. 9,000 hands in a no limit cash game setting mean quite a lot.

Sample size is a huge issue for evaluating tournament results. You can't blend tournament results in poker tracker to evaluate your play. There is a major difference between a 180 player event vs. a standard single/double table SNG vs. a double or nothing tournament.

hand-by-hand HUD statistics are very hard to interpret for smaller tournament event because the table evolves into short handed tables so quickly. Your nine handed play can not be blended with your short handed play when the results are merged.

I think we can safely say Hero is a breakeven player cash games. Hero is showing a +1bb/100 or +2 bb/100 win rate. Plausibly that means his true win rate is something like -4bb/100 to +6bb/100. Not a big loser nor a big winner. Let's be clear - Hero's results are so close to breakeven that a single NL$100 hand out of the sample likely dominates the overall results.

yes hero looks unlucky in tournament play. Perhaps a loser even after normalizing for luck. Hard to say though, hero can lose a lot of chips and still win money - even second place commonly loses all of the chips at the end. I don't know how "net expected chips won/lost" is calculated.

There isn't any substitute for hand analysis. HUD statistics are quite difficult to parse when looking for leaks. Post interesting hands and get feedback.

It isn't ever easy to figure out how to improve your game -=- DrStrange

 

[trever]

Take a good look at your decisions on the river. Are you getting full value when you're ahead and are you making hard folds when you're behind?

 

[jemfernandez]

Echoing what the good doctor said, It’s important to know if you’re playing 6-max or full ring games and I believe even more important to be positionally aware when evaluating your VPIP/PFR - what is your VPIP from every position. Are you opening too much UTG or too little in the CO vs what a balanced range would be.

Another thing to consider would be your results graph that shows your non-showdown win amount that can help you determine if you’re bluffing (or not bluffing) enough.

 

[timinater]

-10 buy-ins over roughly 1000 hands between 5800 and 6800... what happened there? That's probably a good place to start looking. Can you post your rates by position? Play out of the blinds can be massive leaks. In general, we spend more time playing and less time studying than we should. (I'm guilty of this too).

Do people review tournament chips won graphs? That seems like a waste of time - you go busto far more often than do you win tournaments, so wouldn't you expect that line to be negative, not to mention a lot of noise in the data if you play various formats and sizes of tournaments? Am I missing something there?

Some of this is dated, but most of the hand/play review content is evergreen: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/...l-archives-memorable-strategy-threads-430489/

 

[Mojo1312]

Do people review tournament chips won graphs? That seems like a waste of time - you go busto far more often than do you win tournaments, so wouldn't you expect that line to be negative, not to mention a lot of noise in the data if you play various formats and sizes of tournaments? Am I missing something there?

Popular misconception. Agree that tournaments should be separated from cash. They are two different formats, like Formula 1 and NASCAR.

 

[Lemonzest]

Not related to the data you provided but here are some leaks that I have worked on.

I think people play way too many hands out of the small blind. If you use your tracking software you can look this up for yourself and see how your stats look. Small blind is the absolute worst position since you are out of position to all other players.

The combo of being out of position and justifying playing weak hands is costly. Hands like Q 10, 9 10, or K9 are good examples of where you can get into trouble. I will almost always fold to a raise when I am SB.

///

Another concept is 3 betting pre flop. When you are facing a single raise and are debating whether to call or fold sometimes it is best to 3 bet. Let's say you are calling a raise from small blind with K 10 suited. The only way you can continue is if you hit the flop hard. If you choose to play the hand I would rather raise K 10 suited before the flop as a bluff than flat call and hope to hit. Most players even if they call you will then fold to a C bet on the flop as you are repping a big hand. You don't want to over do it but this can be a useful strategy to add value to middling hands that you don't really want to play but also don't want to fold.

 

[Nex]

My suggestion is, leave Zoom/Snap and whatever they call it elsewhere alone.

I get why so many people play it -- you immediately get a seat, immediately get a hand, have no waiting time between hands. But your potential advantage is massively crippled because you barely have any chance to abuse tendencies of your opponents since you're seated with different ones in each new hand.

Yes, I know there is this quota oriented play approach (see Ed Miller's "Poker's 1%") that claims to not be reliant on individual opponents' leaks, which could probably survive here. But this is a very high level strategy and hard to implement and master. Judging by your stats, you are not employing such a strategy but instead stick to the classic approach of analyzing and reacting to opponents' play. Therefore you are playing in a game where you cannot use your strategy, and are bound to lose to players that can there, in the long run. My bet is that in Zoom, you are actually a losing player and the graph is distorted by a luck streak. 9k hands is not much.

Before trying to improve your current strategy, I'd very much recommend first of all moving from Zoom/Snap to regular cash tables. Go shorthanded and open a second table if you get bored so fast.